Islamic Tolerance: Myth and Reality


[By Michael CurtisThe world today is confronted by the continuing violence by and threats from Islamists seeking to overturn existing political systems and rule on the basis of Sharia law. Some Islamists have made no secret of their ultimate objectives. Osama bin Laden called for the reestablishing the rule of Islam, beginning with the reconquest of Andalusia (Spain and Portugal). Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood issued a similar proclamation. For him “Andalusia, Sicily, the Balkans, the Italian coast, are all of them Muslim Mediterranean colonies and they must return to the Islamic fold.”

Most contemporary commentators are not prepared to dispute this view as an authentic objective of Islam, nor are they willing to criticize the religion of Islam itself. Ibn Warraq, like Robert Spencer, who shares similar views, is not one of them. He is already well known for his intellectual and political courage and his strong principles and opinions, which include a critical assessment of the history and the nature of Islam. He was obliged for security reasons to adopt the pseudonym of “Ibn Warraq” when his book, Why I Am Not a Muslim, was published. He took a public stand when violent protests occurred after the publication in Denmark of cartoons satirizing Muhammad, by signing a manifesto supporting the right of free press and publication.

In earlier works, Warraq, with meticulous and challenging scholarship has been critical of Islam and of the Koranic view of government, especially because of its attitude towards women and non-Muslims. In many of his writings Warraq successfully demolished the intellectual structure created by Edward Said, which holds that all Western concepts of Islam and “the East” are predicated on colonialism, that has had a pernicious influence on the academic world. He has elucidated the misrepresentations, misunderstandings, and imaginary fiction on which Said’s works are based. In all his writing, Warraq has been and is an unqualified defender of the democratic ideals and concepts of Western civilization.

WarraqIn his new book, Sir Walter Scott’s Crusades and Other Fantasies, largely composed of articles already published in Internet journals, Warraq analyses some classic British novels, particularly the writings of Sir Walter Scott and George Eliot, to establish some particular and general points. He criticizes Said for his sneering comment on Scott and his cursory and jaundiced reading of (and total misunderstanding of) Scott’s works. He points out Said’s absurd complaint concerning the total absence of any thought by Eliot about the actual inhabitants of the East, Palestine in particular. Said himself refused to acknowledge that Jews were Easterners or Orientals at all.

More generally, Warraq uses the British literary works to shatter the myth of the superiority of Islamic civilization and the myth of Islamic tolerance, and negates the romantic view of the Muslim warrior, Saladin. He also comments on the sympathetic portraits of Jews in English literature, particularly in the work of Scott and Eliot, and on the latter’s explicit affirmation of the right of Israel to be the Jewish homeland.

Warraq discusses two of Scott’s books, Ivanhoe and The Talisman, in relation to his attitude towards Jews and Islamic conduct. In his careful reading of Ivanhoe, Warraq argues that Scott’s portrayal of the character Rebecca was in essence based on sympathy for Jews. Scott was aware of the history of the persecution of Jews and their plight during the 12th century, the era in which the book is set. He was also implicitly critical of religious fanaticism.

Warraq himself argues, against the politically-correct view, that Muslim hatred of Jews goes back to the origins of Islam. The persecution of Jews, and also Christians, stems from the precepts and principles in Islamic texts: the Koran, the Sira (the biographies of Muhammad), the Hadith, the Tradition (records of the deeds and sayings of Muhammad), and classical Koranic commentaries.

Equally significant is Warraq’s answer to the fashionable argument that the West in the past and Israel in the present are responsible for the troubles of the Muslim world. He refers to the events of the Crusades in 1095, dealt with in The Talisman and in three other of Scott’s novels, to provide a corrective interpretation. Undoubtedly, the Crusaders of the 11th century were cruel, rapacious, and fanatical, and exhibited irrational religious bigotry. Not all of them were chivalrous, contrary to romantic literature. But Warraq’s argument is that Islamic intolerance was and is much greater than Christian intolerance, now a thing of the past and no longer a threat to civilization.

The Crusades were violent but they were a reaction to over 300 years of jihad by Muslims against non-Muslims. The Crusaders were reacting to the desecration of Christian shrines in the Holy Land, the destruction of hundreds, perhaps thousands,of churches, including the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, and general persecution of Christians in the area. Moreover, the Crusaders were not colonialists nor were they people seeking economic benefits; in fact the Crusades were a financial burden.

In this reasoning Warraq argues against the present-day politically-correct view that there was a Golden Age in Muslim Spain. Rather this was a Golden Age of Intolerance, with seven centuries of Islamic rule in Spain characterized by the persecution and periodic massacres of non-Muslims, now understood as dhimmis (tolerated second class citizens persons who are members of inferior religions). Jews were massacred in Cordoba and in other parts of Spain, 1010-1013 and in Fez (Morocco) in 1033. The first great wave of hatred of which Jews were victims in the 11th century took place in 1066 in Grenada, in Muslim Spain. This outbreak of anti-Semitism occurred 30 years before Jews were massacred by the Crusaders in the Rhineland.

George Eliot’s novel Daniel Deronda has long been regarded as exhibiting empathy for Jews, an aspect of her ideal of compassion for others. Warraq points out that she was the first distinguished novelist to have discussed Zionism and the Zionist concept of Palestine as a homeland for Jews. Her positive attitude towards the reestablishment of a Jewish state was representative of the views of British public figures at the time, such as Lord Shaftesbury, who supported this idea. They appreciated that Jews had lived in Palestine for millennia before being expelled or fleeing to escape intolerable conditions. Eliot makes clear the passion of Jews for the land of Israel.

Warraq ends his book with a stinging criticism of those in the world today who are intolerant of criticism of Islamic behavior. He castigates those writers who do not uphold free expression in words and in art, and who condemn such manifestations as the famous Danish cartoons in 2005, He accuses various writers, institutions, and publishers, singling out Yale University Press as one of the more prominent, of cowardly self-censorship. One of the worst examples of Western appeasement of Muslim intolerance was evident in the indifference of many European and American public figures to the fatwa issued by Ayotallah Khomenini in 1989 against Salman Rushdie. Among those who refused to criticize Khomenini were Jimmy Carter, Roald Dahl, and John le Carré.

Warraq is also critical of those officials of the U.S. government, particularly members of the Obama Administration, whom he suggests try to eliminate from American policy statements concerning Islam certain words and phrases such as “radical Islam,” “Islamic extremists,” and “Islamic terrorists.” In fighting words Warraq argues that unless we show greater solidarity and show that we care for our freedoms we risk losing all to Islamist “thuggery.”

Warraq has been accused in the past of being polemical, and no doubt Islamists will continue their accusations. Not everyone will agree with his characterization of political Islam as a totalitarian ideology or his assertion that Islam today persecutes and demonizes non-Muslims. But all should consider his arguments seriously, though he may express himself passionately. In and of itself, his courage in undertaking the critique of the myths and falsehoods of Islamists when others demur warrants attention.

 

82 thoughts on “Islamic Tolerance: Myth and Reality

  1. Are there DIAMONDS in the sky?

    Do ye remember the twinkle twinkle nursery rhyme where it says “like a Diamond in the sky”??? Well there ARE diamonds in the sky!!!!!!!!

    Scientists have found that the atmospheres of Jupiter and Saturn are awash in diamonds.

    The new data available has confirmed that at depth, diamonds may be floating around inside of Saturn, some growing so large that they could perhaps be called “diamondbergs.” (ndtv)

    Since Goddess Lakshmi has decided to leave India, for the fear the Indians now worship her greedily for only money’s sake, for Jupiter and Saturn -where she can now leave peacefully with her diamonds which will make the Stars sparkle even more. All those people who worship money and money Gods should migrate to Jupiter and Saturn!

    Look at the sky above like …never before and see the wonders of Allah!!!!!!!!!

    Quran 25:61 Blessed is He who has placed in the sky great stars and placed therein a lamp and luminous moon.

    Quran 45:13 And He has subjected to you, as from Him, all that is in the heavens and on earth: Behold, in that are Signs indeed for those who reflect.

    Please, REFLECT on Allah’s Signs!!!

    • Mumbai dude does a ‘Mike Tyson’, bites off friend’s ears!!! hahaa!!!

      Two friends, Ketan Pujari and Rakesh Chaudhuri, were sitting when Rakesh jumped onto the third friend-Jadhav, and started beating him.”

      He then got hold of Jadhav’s head and and like a dog bit him on his nose, face, ears and various other parts of the body(trying to eat his friend alive!!). He was bitten more than 25 times.

      Jadhav was left bleeding profusely and his ears were dangling from his head!!

      What was jadhav doing all that time when his ears and nose were being chomped off?

      Where the Indian dudes making a spectacle as they always do when our sisters get raped??

      Try that in Kenya and you would wish for your Idols to take you to hell immediately!!

    • Dear MM, can you explain verse 2:230 why should a woman who has been divorced 3 times by her husband marry another man then get a divorce from that second husband to be able to marry the first husband?

      How would you explain the Sura : 114:4 Around her neck is a rope of [twisted] fiber?

    • Dear MM, kindly read this verse very slowly, over and over and you will notice that it does NOT refer to women in general but maybe only to specific mothers of orphans. You being a Muslim I would like to learn from you and kindly reserve all your energy towards explaining this….okay?

      Quran : 4:3
      Pickthall: And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice then one or that your right hands possess. Thus it is more likely that ye will not do injustice.

      Before talking about 4:3 let us go one verse backwards 4:2 Pickthall:

      Give unto orphans their wealth. Exchange not the good for the bad nor absorb their wealth into your own wealth. Lo! that would be a great sin.

      Points to note : (in Arab tradition orphan is a person without a father)

      1: Orphans under your care could be your martyred brother’s children and their wives. Otherwise what other orphans? please explain!

      2. Give unto the orphans their wealth. What wealth? Could be the martyred brother’s/s’ wealth left behind on which you have been feeding those orphans and their mothers who are your sisters in law.

      3. Exchange not good for bad means do not take the property left by the martyred to exchange with yours which may be inferior.

      4. Now the main verse 4:3 : “If you fear”(think) …you will “not deal fairly”(unjustly)
      … by the orphans(with their property) or what?… please explain!

      5. “marry of the women”(mothers of those orphans) or which other women? Just a sudden allowance. How could marrying other women besides what you have help you in being just to the orphans??? Kindly explain!!

      6. “who seem good to you”(good in what?…which women?…plse explain)

      7. “two or three or four”(how does marrying two, three or four other women besides already being married to the first wife help in solving the problem that you are facing of not being just to the orphans? Wouldn’t the total go higher than four of your wives if you were to marry other four?)

      8. ” ye fear that ye cannot do justice”(remain unjust to women whom you have NOT married yet??? please explain)

      9. ” then one or that your right hands possess”…marry one only?…how does that help in making you just? ….or your slave to marry her to make me just???? Please explain!!

      How does marrying a war captive make you deal justly with orphans???????????

      • Dear MM, though boring it may be for repetitions, this verse 4:3 is the most contentious for the distorters of Islam and needs the final touch :

        Quran : 4:2-3, 127

        Deal justly with the female orphans by giving them their wealth and do Not trick them in absorbing their wealth even if you desire to marry them (off to other men).
        Do NOT marry them(off to others) so that you gain their wealth (being a guardian) or by manipulation in exchanging their good(more assets) for (yours) bad(less) ..thus “Give unto orphans their wealth” (when you marry them off).

        Next 4:127 speaks of :
        The weak and oppressed children (The oppressor could be a Guardian, leader, husband, king of the occupied state or anyone who oppresses others in any circumstance :

        this is solved by 4:75 :
        How should ye not fight for the cause of Allah and of the feeble among men and of the women and the children who are crying:…
        Q4:6 : Refer to this verse which clears all the misconceptions forwarded by Islamic haters!!

        Now, Having understood about the orphan girls we come to the marriage issue :

        They consult thee concerning women. Say: Allah giveth you decree concerning them :

        ..marry of the women, who seem good to you (2:221, 4:25, 24:32, 30:21, 5:5 28:27) , two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice then(marry) one or (marry) that your right hands possess(war captive).

        Marrying other women helps in strengthening the guardianship…more orphans…more guardians required… but you have to be just to these women otherwise marry only one or incase of lack of resources marry the war captive to establish her as a guardian. These are options, clauses…not that Muslims do that!!!

        33:52 Shakir: It is not allowed to you to take women(marrying them) afterwards, nor that you should change them for other wives, though their beauty be pleasing to you, except what your right hand possesses and Allah is Watchful over all things.

        Refer to this interesting site : http://www.quran-islam.org/main_topics/quran/false_accusations/abrogation_claims_(P1216).html

          • Dear MM, Though you may not believe but see how Sunnis fell into an abyss of ignorance. Look at this Hadith :

            Volume 1, Book 3, Number 98 :
            Narrated by Abu Huraira
            I said: “O Allah’s Apostle! Who will be the luckiest person, who will gain your intercession on the Day of Resurrection?” Allah’s Apostle said: O Abu Huraira! “I have thought that none will ask me about it before you as I know your longing for the (learning of) Hadiths. The luckiest person who will have my intercession on the Day of Resurrection will be the one who said sincerely from the bottom of his heart “None has
            the right to be worshipped but Allah.” And ‘Umar bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz wrote to Abu Bakr bin Hazm, “Look for the knowledge of Hadith and get it written, as I am afraid that religious knowledge will vanish and the religious learned men will pass away (die). Do not accept anything save the Hadiths of the Prophet. Circulate knowledge and teach the ignorant, for knowledge does not vanish except when it is kept secretly (to oneself).”

            Points to NOTE :

            1. Prophet cannot intercede. Quran 6:51 – for them besides Him(ALLAH) will be NO protector and no intercessor.

            2. Huraira who has narrated almost five thousand hadiths for being in contact with the Prophet for less than two years, “would be the first one to ask” since he, himself, narrates this hadith!!!!

            3. How could the Prophet say, “I know your longing for the Hadiths” when the Prophet was alive???? Hadiths could NEVER have been written during the time of the Prophet!

            4. “The luckiest person who will have my intercession” is clearly going against the Quran 6:51, 2:48, 2:123, 2:254, correct?

            5. One who says “None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.” (But ALL the Muslims do that!!)! It is NOT a unique statement!!

            6. SEE how Huraira sneaks in his Hadiths with fake narrators : ‘Umar bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz wrote to Abu Bakr bin Hazm.

            7. “Look for the knowledge of Hadith and get it written” : With one stroke he legitimizes
            his collection of hadiths!!

            8. Umar bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz(?)…says : “as I am afraid that religious knowledge will vanish and the religious learned men will pass away”. Who was this dude to predict???

            9. “Do not accept anything save the Hadiths of the Prophet”(even the Quran?)

            10. Huraira says, “teach the ignorant” hadiths and circulate them”!!.

            Allah has used “except if He wills” / “except if He gives permission” / “unless He wills otherwise” in various verses (19:87, 34:23) but that is the unique style Allah issues orders not necessarily pertaining only to intercession verses – ref : (87:6-7, 6:128)

            I think, many Sunnis have fallen head over heels for Huraira without reading his absurd narrations…..of which islamic haters love to pounce on to discredit Islam..

    • MM, look at this hadith :

      The wives of the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqi` at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. `Umar used to say to the Prophet “Let your wives be veiled,” but Allah’s Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam`a
      the wife of the Prophet () went out at `Isha’ time and she was a tall lady. `Umar addressed her and said, “I have recognized you, O Sauda.” He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of “Al-Hijab” (A complete body cover excluding the eyes). Sahih al-Bukhari 146 : Book 4, Hadith 1 : (Vol. 1, Book 4, Hadith 148)

      Did you notice something awkward with that hadith?

      Notice the words : “(He(umar) said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of “Al-Hijab”)”!!!

      According to the above hadith Umar wanted the veil verse to be revealed and it WAS revealed!!

      Can this Hadith be trusted? But believe me that most Sunnis believe in that story!!!

      • Plum, I’m a Shia Muslim. 😀 We Shia Muslims are already against these fake merits of the Companions. Would Caliph Umar allow his followers to make up such horrible merits for him, degrading the Prophet? Both Shia and Sunni Muslims cross the limits at a certain point.

        Check out this one:

        ‘The Messenger of God went out for one of his expeditions then, when he came back, a black slave girl came to him and said, ‘O Messenger of God, I took an oath that if God returned you safely, I would beat the tambourine before you and sing.’ So the Messenger of God said to her, ‘if you have taken an oath then beat it and if you have not then do not.’ So she started to beat the tambourine and Abu Bakr entered while she was beating it. Then Ali entered while she was beating it. Then Usman entered while she was beating it. Then Umar entered so she put the tambourine under her and sat upon it. So the Messenger of God said, ‘indeed Satan is afraid of you, O Umar. I was sitting while she beat it and then Abu Bakr entered while she was beating it and then Ali entered while she was beating it and then Usman entered while she was beating it and then, when you entered, O Umar, she put away the tambourine’.’ Al Tirmidhi says that the hadith is hasan sahih gharib. The hadith has been graded as hasan.

        http://nasibibeliefs.blogspot.com/

    • Dear MM, you have not replied to my request :

      I asked you to browse carefully over 4:3 and you will notice that it does NOT refer to women in general but maybe to specific mothers of the orphans. You being a Muslim I would like to learn from you and kindly reserve all your energy towards explaining this….okay?

      Quran : 4:3
      Pickthall: And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice then one or that your right hands possess. Thus it is more likely that ye will not do injustice.

      Before talking about 4:3 let us go one verse backwards 4:2 Pickthall:

      Give unto orphans their wealth. Exchange not the good for the bad nor absorb their wealth into your own wealth. Lo! that would be a great sin.

      Points to note : (in Arab tradition orphan is a person without a father)

      1: Orphans under your care could be your martyred brother’s children and their wives. Otherwise what other orphans? please explain!

      2. Give unto the orphans their wealth. What wealth? Could be the martyred brother’s/s’ wealth left behind on which you have been feeding those orphans and their mothers who are your sisters in law.

      3. Exchange not good for bad means do not take the property left by the martyred to exchange with yours which may be inferior.

      4. Now the main verse 4:3 : “If you fear”(think) …you will “not deal fairly”(unjustly)
      … by the orphans(with their property) or what?… please explain!

      5. “marry of the women”(mothers of those orphans) or which other women? Just a sudden allowance. How could marrying other women besides what you have help you in being just to the orphans??? Kindly explain!!

      6. “who seem good to you”(good in what?…which women?…plse explain)

      7. “two or three or four”(how does marrying two, three or four other women besides already being married to the first wife help in solving the problem that you are facing of not being just to the orphans? Wouldn’t the total go higher than four of your wives if you were to marry other four?)

      8. ” ye fear that ye cannot do justice”(remain unjust to women whom you have NOT married yet??? please explain)
      9. ” then one or that your right hands possess”…marry one only?…how does that help in making you just? ….or your slave to marry her to make me just???? Please explain!!

      How does marrying a war captive make you deal justly with orphans???????????

        • Dear MM, I appreciate your answer. Now that is what I mean when I say that one ought to be grateful to people who attack Islam because that would be a blessing and may help in prodding even deeper the Quran to be able to resolve their misconceptions.

          For the verse that I asked it does NOT matter that you answer.

          Quran 4:3 “two or three or four”(how does marrying two, three or four other women besides already being married to the first wife help in solving the problem that you are facing of not being just to the orphans? Wouldn’t the total go higher than four of your wives if you were to marry other four?)

          The solution-in my opinion- would be to marry the orphans’ mothers either two, three or four immediately so that now the orphans become your children and they would remain NO more orphans, and also the widows get the status of married women. Also, then it would be correct to inherit their property and use it on the former widows and orphans. That makes some sense, doesn’t it?

          In my view- the verse 4:3 is specifically revealed to make the orphans legitimate children and their mothers to get the status of being wives once more. Very good!

          But the problem comes with ..(marry also).. that your right hands possess (war captive). … …how does marrying a slave-girl help in doing justice to the orphans?

          Again my view comes tumbling down…unless somebody helps me out!

          Based on this unclear instruction many Muslims have assumed that the Quran does allow to marry up to 4 women!!

          Or does it???

          • Plum, your last statement is refutable. Qur’an allows a man to marry four wives but if he can’t deal his wives justly and can’t treat them equally then it’s haram for him to marry more than one wife.

  2. Lucky, if you’re here to annoy us then you’ve succeeded because we wanna refute your idiotic allegations but we’re afraid of your lengthy comments; we’re not as leisured as you. But if you’re here to guide us then you’re a fool. A poor can’t enrich someone because he himself needs to be enriched.

    • MM, can a person (of any age) be called a pedophile if he has sex with his LEGALLY wedded wife (of any age)…????

      What is wrong with this stupid dumbass Lucky??

      • THE QURAN’S CONFUSED STANCE ON SEXUAL ETHICS

        ON TASAWWUF Imam Nawawi (d. 676)
        One of the great Sufi scholars, strictest latter-time hadith masters, and most meticulous of jurists, Shaykh al-Islam Imam Muhyiddin Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi is with al-Rafi`i the principal reference of the late Shafi`i school. His books remain authoritative in the methodology of the law, in Qur’an commentary, and in hadith. His commentary of Sahih Muslim is second only to Ibn Hajar’s commentary of Sahih Bukhari. Allah gave his famous compilation of Forty Hadiths more circulation and fame than possibly any other book of hadith, large or small, and has allowed Nawawi to be of immense benefit to the Community of Islam.
        Nawawi was considered a Sufi and a saint, as is evident from the titles of some of his works and that of Sakhawi’s biography entitled Tarjamat shaykh al-islam, qutb al-awliya’ al-kiram, faqih al-anam, muhyi al-sunna wa mumit al-bid`a Abi Zakariyya Muhyi al-Din al-Nawawi (The biography of the Shaykh of Islam, the Pole of Noble Saints, the Jurist of Mankind, the Reviver of the Sunna and the Slayer of Innovation… al-Nawawi). (Source; underline emphasis ours)
        And:
        Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277)
        Imam Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi was born in the village of Nawa in Southern Syria, Nawawi spent most of his life in Damascus where he lived in a simple manner, devoted to Allah, engaging single-mindedly in worship, study, writing and teaching various Islamic sciences. The life of this world seems scarcely to have impinged upon him. He was a versatile and extremely dedicated scholar whose breadth of learning was matched by its depth.
        Imam Nawawi died at the young age of 44 years, leaving behind him numerous works of great importance, the most famous of these being:
        • al-Arba’un Nabawi (An-Nawawis Forty Hadith)
        • Riyadhus saleheen
        • al-Maqasid (Al-Nawawi’s Manual of Islam).
        • Kitab al-Adhkar,
        • Minhaj al-Talibin (a main reference for Shafi’i fiqh)
        • Shar’ Sahih Muslim (he was the first to arrange the sahih of Muslim in the now familiar categories)
        Although best known for his works in hadith, Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277) was also the Imam of the later Shafi’i school of Jurisprudence, and widely acknowledged as the intellectual heir to Imam Shafi’i. He was a renowned scholar and jurist who dedicated his life to the pursuit of Islamic learning. (Source)
        Both the hadith and Al-Nawawi’s explanation are taken from the Al-Azhar Islamic web site (*). This is the official web site of Cairo’s Al-Azhar university and mosque, and is considered trustworthy.
        What you are about to read is very graphic and quite shocking. Our translator, Dimitrius, made sure to carefully translate the text, and even double-checked the meaning of one specific word (Hash-fa) to insure proper translation and correctness.
        We now proceed to the text of the Hadith and the commentary of Al-Nawawi.
        Sahih Muslim
        Book of Menstruation
        Hadith number 525
        Chapter of Hadith: Abrogating a fluid with water and the necessity of washing.
        Narrated by Zuhair Ibn Harb, narrated by Ghasan Al-Masma’i, narrated by Muhammad Ibn Al-Mathny, narrated by Ibn Bashar, who said that it was narrated by Muath Ibn Hisham, narrated by Abu Qatada, narrated by Mattar, narrated by Al-Hassan, narrated by Abu Rab’i, narrated by Abu Huraira who said,
        “The prophet – peace be upon him – said, ‘If one sits between a woman’s fours (shu’biha Al-arba’) and then fatigues her, then it necessitates that he wash.’
        In the hadith of Mattar it is added ‘even if he does not excrete (yunzil).’ Zuhair narrated among them using the phrase ‘Ashba’iha Al-arba’. It was also narrated by Muhammad Ibn Umar Ibn Ibad Ibn Jablah, narrated Muhammad Ibn Abi Uday, narrated by Muhammad Ibn Al-Mathny, narrated by Wahb Ibn Jarir who both related from Shu’bah who narrated from Qatada who gave this same chain of transmission, except that in the hadith of Shu’bah it has the phrase ‘then he labored’ but did not have the phrase ‘even if he does not excrete.’
        NOTE-
        Here is a similar hadith from the on-line English version of Sahih Muslim:
        Book 003, Number 0684:
        Abu Musa reported: There cropped up a difference of opinion between a group of Muhajirs (Emigrants) and a group of Ansar (Helpers) (and the point of dispute was) that the Ansar said: The bath (because of sexual intercourse) becomes obligatory only when the semen spurts out or ejaculates. But the Muhajirs said: When a man has sexual intercourse (with the woman), a bath becomes obligatory (no matter whether or not there is seminal emission or ejaculation). Abu Musa said: Well, I satisfy you on this (issue). He (Abu Musa, the narrator) said: I got up (and went) to ‘A’isha and sought her permission and it was granted, and I said to her: O Mother, or Mother of the Faithful, I want to ask you about a matter on which I feel shy. She said: Don’t feel shy of asking me about a thing which you can ask your mother, who gave you birth, for I am too your mother. Upon this I said: What makes a bath obligatory for a person? She replied: You have come across one well informed! The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: When anyone sits amidst four parts (of the woman) and the circumcised parts touch each other a bath becomes obligatory. (Source)

        Commentary of Imam Al-Nawawi on the Hadith
        The saying of the prophet – peace be upon him- ‘If one sits between a woman’s fours (shu’biha Al-arba) and then fatigues her’
        In another narration the word ‘Ashu’biha’ is used. The scholars have disagreed about the intended meaning of ‘shu’biha Al-arba’ (the fours) for some said that it means the arms and the legs, while others have said that it refers to the legs and thighs, and other said it means the legs and the edge of the pubic area. Al-Qadi Ayad chose the meaning of the four areas surrounding the vagina. The word (Shu’b) means areas, its singular form being (Shu’bah). As for those who say (Ashba’iha) that is the plural of the word (Shu’b).
        The word Aj-hada-ha (fatigue her) means to plow her, which was also stated by Al-Khatabi. Others have said it means to make her reach exhaustion as in the phrase ‘she made him toil and labor till he was exhausted’. Al-Qadi Ayad – may Allah rest his soul- said ‘Primarily, the word (Jahada’ha) means that the man exerted his effort working in a woman, where the word (Juh’d) means energy and refers to motion by describing the type of work. This is similar to his (the prophet) saying ‘he who plowed her’ meaning he who penetrated her by his motion. Otherwise, what other fatigue could a man experience because of her, and Allah knows best.
        The meaning of the hadith is that the necessity to wash is not limited to when semen is ejaculated, rater it is when the penile head (Hash-fa, lit. “the head of the male member,” i.e. head of the penis) penetrates the vagina, then it is necessary for the man and the woman to wash. There is no disagreement on this today, even though there was disagreement on this by some of the early companions and others later. However, an agreement was later reached and this is what we have shown and presented previously.
        Our companions have said that if the penile head has penetrated A WOMAN’S ANUS, or A MAN’S ANUS, or AN ANIMAL’S VAGINA or ITS ANUS then it is necessary to wash whether the one being penetrated is alive OR DEAD, YOUNG OR OLD, whether it was done intentionally or absentmindedly, whether it was done willfully or forcefully. This also applies if the woman places the male member inside her while the man is asleep, whether the penis is erect or not, whether the penis is circumcised or uncircumcised. All these situations require that the person committing the act and the one the act is committed on must wash themselves, unless the person committing the act or the person the act is committed on is a young male or female. In that case it cannot be said that the person must wash, for they do not have the responsibility, rather it is said that this person is in a state of impurity. If that person can discern (the sexual act) then his guardian can command him to wash just as he commands him to perform the ablution washing for prayers. For if he prays without washing, his prayer has not been performed correctly; likewise if he doesn’t wash after he reaches puberty he must be forced to wash. If he washed as a youth and then reaches puberty, then he does not have to repeat the washing.
        Our companions have said that intercourse occurs when a healthy male’s penile head completely penetrates (an orifice), as has been unanimously agreed. Thus, when the penile head has completely disappeared (inside the orifice), then all the regulations concerning washing apply. It is unanimously agreed that it is not necessary that the entire penile shaft penetrate to apply the regulations of washing. If part of the penile head penetrates, then the regulations of washing are not imposed as is agreed, except by an odd few of our companions who said that even in this case all the regulations of washing apply. However, this opinion is wrong, rejected and abandoned.
        If the male member was severed and what remained was less than the length of the penile head, then none of the washing regulations apply. If the part remaining was equal in length to the penile head length then that part must completely penetrate for the regulation of washing to apply. If the part remaining was greater in length to the penile head length then there are two famous opinions for our companions. The most correct is that if the portion that penetrates is equal to the length of the penile head, then the regulations for washing apply. The other opinion is that none of the regulations for washing apply until the entire remaining length of the penile shaft completely penetrates and Allah knows best.
        If a man wraps a sheath around his male member and then ejaculates inside a woman’s vagina, then there are three opinions from our companions. The most famous is that the man must wash. The second is that he does not have to wash because he ejaculated inside the sheath. The third is that if the sheath is thick and prevents climax and wetness (in the vagina) then washing is not necessary, otherwise it is necessary and Allah knows best.
        If a woman inserts (in her vagina) AN ANIMAL’S PENIS she must wash, and if she inserts A DETACHED PENIS (thakaran maktu-an, lit. “a severed male member”; a marital aid perhaps!?) there are two opinions; the most correct is that she must wash.

        In order to help our readers better appreciate what has been said we would like to break down the material and highlight certain points.
        The hadith states that Muhammad made bathing necessary for the person sitting between a woman’s fours.
        The expression “a woman’s fours” required an explanation, which the Muslim scholars such as Imam Al-Nawawi sought to provide.
        Imam Nawawi was a renowned Muslim scholar whose works such as the Forty Hadith Qudsi and his commentary on Sahih Muslim are considered to be some of the greatest.
        One Muslim source which we cited even states that Imam Al-Nawawi’s commentary on Sahih Muslim was second only to Imam Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani’s commentary of Sahih Bukhari.
        According Al-Nawawi, the Muslim scholars provided elaborate details on what sexual acts necessitated washing.
        The acts which Imam Al-Nawawi lists as necessitating washing presupposes that there were individuals engaging in these sexual acts, i.e. persons who were engaging in homosexuality, anal sex, bestiality, use of sexual props and/or dismembered sexual organs. Otherwise, what was the purpose of Al-Nawawi mentioning these acts if there hadn’t been individuals in the Muslim community engaging in them?
        In light of the preceding, we have some questions for the Muslims, and readers in general, to ponder on. Al-Nawawi stated that a person was required to wash in case the penile head made penetration with someone who was young:
        Our companions have said that if the penile head has penetrated a woman’s anus, or a man’s anus, or an animal’s vagina or its anus then it is necessary to wash whether the one being penetrated is alive or dead, YOUNG or old…
        The question is, YOUNG means exactly what in the above? Does this take pedophilic actions as a given? And washing is the only advice he gives in that case? What about punishment for the person who abuses children??? Just wash yourself and you are acceptable before God again? Note again:
        … unless the person committing the act or the person the act is committed on is a young male or female. In that case it cannot be said that the person must wash, for they do not have the responsibility, rather it is said that this person is in a state of impurity. If that person can discern (the sexual act) then his guardian can command him to wash just as he commands him to perform the ablution washing for prayers. For if he prays without washing, his prayer has not been performed correctly; likewise if he doesn’t wash after he reaches puberty he must be forced to wash. If he washed as a youth and then reaches puberty, then he does not have to repeat the washing.
        These are rules for what young boys or girls – before they have reached puberty! – have to do after they have been penetrated. It does not prohibit the sexual act with prepubescent children, it only regulates what they have to do in regard to washing. Even worse, the formulation “If that person can discern (the sexual act)” creates two cases, only one of which is then discussed explicitly, but by implication the other one is clear too, i.e. that in the case of a child who is not yet able to discern (the sexual act), it is not necessary that he/she has to wash. Again, such abominable abuse is not forbidden nor is a punishment specified, but it simply prescribes certain washings for such a case, or implies that they are not necessary for the very young.
        Again, pay careful attention to this paragraph:
        Our companions have said that if the penile head has penetrated a woman’s anus, or a man’s anus, or an animal’s vagina or its anus then it is necessary to wash whether the one being penetrated is alive or dead, young or old, whether it was done intentionally or absentmindedly, whether it was done willfully or forcefully.
        What does this mean? Willfully refers to the case that the act was committed by consent / agreement of the other person – woman or man or animal, dead or alive, or young boy or young girl. Forcefully refers to the case that the act was done to any of the above against their will. In plain words: If you raped a child, you need to wash and you have to command the victim to wash as well, as if the issue at hand is washing and not the disgusting crime itself.
        Do Muslims want us to believe that Islamic morality is the “best morality” and “best instruction for life” in light of the foregoing?
        ________________________________________
        Now someone may contest Al-Nawawi’s interpretation and choose to simply ignore it by claiming that it is not binding upon Muslims. It is simply his own fallible interpretation and opinion. The problem with this approach is that it fails to explain what exactly did Muhammad mean by sitting between “a woman’s fours”? Since the hadith doesn’t clarify what the phrase means exactly, what must a Sunni Muslim do or where does he/she turn to in order to know for certain? Well, the only thing one can do is to turn to the Muslim scholars such as Al-Nawawi for the interpretation and understanding of the expression in order to know how it applies to daily Muslim life.
        In fact, the Quran never expressly condemns either bestiality or lesbianism, and we will shortly provide several texts which seem to be supporting what this Muslim scholar said. We even found one Muslim who honestly admitted that neither the Quran nor the so-called authentic hadith collections prescribe any kind of punishment for this gross perverted act of bestiality. His comments will be presented in the next section.
        As we now turn our attention to the Quran we will see that it isn’t simply silent on these issues, but even contains passages which seem to allow them. For instance, there is a specific passage where its wording implies that Allah created spouses for mankind from among the cattle:
        The Originator of the heavens and the earth; He made mates (azwajan) for you from among yourselves, and mates (azwajan) of the cattle too, multiplying you thereby; nothing like a likeness of Him; and He is the Hearing, the Seeing. S. 42:11 Shakir
        Fatiru alssamawati waal-ardi jaAAala lakum MIN anfusikum azwajan WAMINa al-anAAami azwajan yathraokum feehi laysa kamithlihi shay-on wahuwa alssameeAAu albaseeru
        Notice the Arabic preposition min and the conjunction wa in the sentence. As a result of the wording of the text this is how it literally reads:
        The Creator of the heavens and the earth, he has made for you spouses FROM yourselves AND FROM the cattle spouses, whereby He multiplies you…
        Several immediate problems arise from this verse.
        What exactly does it mean that Allah has created mates or spouses from themselves (i.e., “you,” “yourselves”)? Who are the “yourselves” of the sentence?
        Are they both men and women, and if so does this mean that marriage can take place only between members of the opposites sex?
        Or does this mean that marriage can occur between all sexes, i.e. heterosexual, homosexual, lesbian marriages are all permitted and sanctioned by this text?
        Since the text addresses the same group, i.e. “you,” when it mentions that Allah also created mates from the cattle does this therefore mean that humans can engage in sexual intercourse with animals?
        Why even mention mates from the cattle in a context dealing with human sexual relations?
        If the text does imply that persons can engage in sexual acts with cattle then in light of the statement that Allah ordained this for the multiplying of mankind, does this therefore mean that the author of the Quran thought that man could cause an animal to get pregnant thereby conceiving human species? Or perhaps the author assumed that the union between these two species would result in a third type of species thereby propagating two kinds of creatures simultaneously?
        Or maybe the author wasn’t saying that Allah multiplies humans via intercourse with cattle. The text may actually be saying that Allah has made spouses for humanity from among themselves and the cattle for enjoyment, and yet he multiplies humans only through sexual union amongst themselves. To put it another way, Allah maybe saying that human intercourse is for both pleasure and multiplication, whereas intercourse with cattle is strictly for pleasure!
        If a Muslim claims that homosexual and bestial relations are condemned in Islam can that person provide explicit Quranic references where these acts are prohibited? In other words, by using the Quran alone can a Muslim show that Allah abhors homosexual and lesbian relations, as well as bestial acts?
        The straightforward reading of the text seems to support bestiality. To highlight this point, imagine if you will that this text was found in any other source besides the Quran, for instance in a document circulating in a society which practices sodomy and bestiality. Would there be any doubt that the wording of the text implies that such acts are permitted by the deity or deities of that particular group? The answer is rather obvious.
        There are two more passages that also provide indirect support for the permissibility of bestiality. They are:
        Successful indeed are the believers, Who are humble in their prayers, And who keep aloof from what is vain, And who are givers of poor-rate, And who guard their private parts, Except before their mates (azwajihim) or those whom their right hands possess, for they surely are not blameable, But whoever seeks to go beyond that, these are they that exceed the limits; And those who are keepers of their trusts and their covenant, And those who keep a guard on their prayers; These are they who are the heirs, Who shall inherit the Paradise; they shall abide therein. S. 23:1-11 Shakir
        for, behold, of their Sustainer’s chastisement none may ever feel [wholly] secure; and who are mindful of their chastity, [not giving way to their desires] with any but their spouses (azwajihim) – that is, those whom they rightfully possess [through wedlock] – : for then, behold, they are free of all blame, whereas such as seek to go beyond that [limit] are truly transgressors; and who are faithful to their trusts and to their pledges: and who stand firm whenever they bear witness; and who guard their prayers [from all worldly intent]. These it is who in the gardens [of paradise] shall be honoured! S. 70:28-35 Asad
        What makes these texts quite interesting is that some Muslims have used these to prove that Islam does not permit bestiality. They claim that the references limit lawful relations to a man’s spouses or slave girls, and anything beyond this is clearly exceeding the limits which Allah has ordained (source).
        The problem with this attempt is that the Arabic words for spouses/mates and “those whom your right hands possess” are not limited to wives or female slaves, at least not in these specific texts. The context of these verses refer to all the believers, whether male or females, and implies that the words refer to either spouse, i.e. to husbands or wives, and to whatever a person owns or possesses such as animals, property etc. There is even one place in the Quran that presents a list of persons and things that a man possesses:
        Fair in the eyes of men is the love of THINGS they covet: women and sons, heaped-up hoards of gold and silver, horses branded for blood and excellence, and wealth of cattle and well-tilled land. Such are the POSSESSIONS of this world’s life, but in nearness to Allah is the best of the goals to return to.” S. 3:14
        Even though the above text doesn’t use the same Arabic expression found in Suras 23 and 70, the meaning is the same since “those whom your right hands possess” obviously encompass all the above persons and items. That is unless, of course, Muslims want to argue that a person’s possessions are different from what his right hand owns!
        Furthermore, there are places in the Quran where the phrase “those whom your right hands possess” includes more than just the female captives (cf. Suras 4:36; 16:71; 30:28).
        In fact, one Muslim admitted that the expression “right hands possess” does include everything which a person may own such as animals etc., even though he tries to refute the notion that Islam allows bestiality. Near the end of his audio presentation, Osama Abdallah says by way of response to a paltalk(*) debater named Christian Prince(*):
        Also Allah almighty allowed only sex to be done with the female right hand possessions from out of all of the right hand possessions which include male, males, females, and animals; and other objects like furniture, for instance, or weapons, or, or objects that could be used, for instance, for sex, you know I don’t want to get graphic but you get the picture, where small objects could be used for sexual pleasures. These are all, ah, right hand possessions. But God almighty in the noble Quran made it clear that out of the right hand possessions, only females are allowed to be, to have, for the Muslims to have sex with them. And only the male Muslims, not the female, ohm, Muslim masters. And not, and certainly the female Muslim masters are not allowed to have sex with the, with the male slaves.
        Even the late Muhammad Asad provides indirect attestation for our exegesis when he writes regarding Sura 23:6:
        Lit., “or those whom their right hands possess” (aw ma malakat aymanuhum). Many of the commentators assume unquestioningly that this relates to female slaves, and that the particle aw (“or”) denotes a permissible alternative. This interpretation is, in my opinion, inadmissible inasmuch as it is based on the assumption that sexual intercourse with ones female slave is permitted without marriage: an assumption, which is contradicted by the Quran itself (see 4: 3, 24, 25 and 24: 32, with the corresponding notes). Nor is this the only objection to the above-mentioned interpretation. Since the Quran applies the term ‘‘believers” to men and women alike, and since the term azwaj (“spouses”), too, denotes both the male and the female partners in marriage, there is no reason for attributing to the phrase ma malakat aymanuhum the meaning of “their female slaves”; and since, on the other hand, it is out of the question that female and male slaves could have been referred to here it is obvious that this phrase does not relate to slaves at all, but has the same meaning as in 4: 24 – namely, “those whom they rightfully possess through wedlock (see note on 4: 24) – with the significant difference that in the present context this expression relates to both husbands and wives, who “rightfully possess” one another by virtue of marriage. On the basis of this interpretation, the particle aw which precedes this clause does not denote an alternative (“or”) but is, rather, in the nature of an explanatory amplification, more or less analogous to the phrase “in other words” or “that is”, thus giving to the whole sentence the meaning, “save with their spouses – that is, those whom they rightfully possess [through wedlock]“, etc. (Cf. a similar construction 25: 62 – “for him who has the will to take thought -that is [lit., “or”], has the will to be grateful”.) (Asad, fn. 3; online source; bold emphasis ours)
        Asad’s candid admission destroys any attempt of using Sura 23:5-6 to refute the permissibility of bestiality, since he admits that neither the term azwaj (spouse) nor ma malakat aymanuhum (right hands possess) are necessarily limited to wives or female slaves. His admission implies that these terms are inclusive, that they encompass anyone or anything which necessarily falls under these specific groups, i.e. all lawful spouses and everything that a person owns or possesses. Since animals also fall under the category of “what” or “whom their right hands possess” one can therefore make a case that these specific passages are actually condoning sexual relations with one’s animals, as well as with one’s male and female slaves (i.e., men with men and women with women relations)! After all, the Quran nowhere explicitly condemns homosexuality or lesbianism.
        In fact, had the Quran wanted to limit this group to wives and to the women slaves it could have qualified it in the same way it does elsewhere:
        If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women (al-nisa) of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. S. 4:3
        And all married women (al-nisa) except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah’s ordinance to you, and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise. And whoever among you has not within his power ampleness of means to marry free believing women, then (he may marry) of those whom your right hands possess from among your believing maidens; and Allah knows best your faith: you are (sprung) the one from the other; so marry them with the permission of their masters, and give them their dowries justly, they being chaste, not fornicating, nor receiving paramours; and when they are taken in marriage, then if they are guilty of indecency, they shall suffer half the punishment which is (inflicted) upon free women. This is for him among you who fears falling into evil; and that you abstain is better for you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 4:24-25 Shakir
        Note the qualifiers here, “women,” “married women,” “from among your believing maidens,” none of which appear in either Suras 23 or 70.
        One Muslim author candidly admits that neither the Quran nor the sound Islamic narrations prescribe any specific punishment for bestiality, or even homosexuality, which provides indirect and implicit support for its permissibility. After all, if there is no punishment for such an act then that means a person can commit it and nothing will happen to him or her! Dr. Ahmad Shafaat writes:
        Death Penalty for Bestiality
        There is nothing about the punishment for bestiality in Muwatta, Bukhari or Muslim. We find some ahadith on the subject in books of Abu Da`ud, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, and Ahmad and, of these muhaddithun those who do express opinions on the authenticity of ahadith they record, do not have a favorable opinion of these particular ahadith.
        There is essentially one hadith prescribing death penalty for bestiality:
        ‘Abd Allah bin Muhammad al-Nufayli related to us: ‘Abd al-‘Aziz bin Muhammad related to us: ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr related to me from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas that the Messenger of God said: “If anyone has sexual intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill it along with him.” (‘Ikrimah) said: “I asked him (Ibn ‘Abbas): ‘Why the animal?’ He replied: ‘I think (the Prophet) disapproved of its flesh being eaten when such a thing had been done to it’.” Abu Da`ud said, This is not strong. (Abu Da`ud 3871)
        Narrations of this hadith with variations are also found in Tirmidhi (1374), Ibn Majah (2554), and Musnad Ahmad (2294, 2591). They all are narrated from ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas. One narration in Ahmad comes from ‘Abbad bin Mansur instead of ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr but in that narration the Prophet is not mentioned and the words quoted are understood to be the words Ibn ‘Abbas:
        ‘Abd al-Wahhab related to us: ‘Abbad bin Mansur informed us from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas that concerning the one who has sex with an animal he said: “kill the fa`il and maf`ul bihi”. (Ahmad 2597)
        But in al-Hakim a narration from the same ‘Abbad bin Mansur from ‘Ikrimah in which the saying of Ibn ‘Abbas becomes a hadith of the Prophet:
        From ‘Abbad bin Mansur from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas that he mentioned (dhakara) the Prophet that concerning the one who has sex with an animal he said: “kill the fa`il and maf`ul bihi” (Al-Hakim, quoted from ‘Awn al-Ma‘bud 3869).
        Note that this narration is the same as the one from Ahmad except for the words, “he mentioned the Prophet”. These words are awkward and vague, not clearly stating that the death penalty was prescribed by the Prophet. They are a timid attempt to turn a view attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas into a hadith.
        It is even doubtful that Ibn ‘Abbas held this view, since in the following narration, Ibn ‘Abbas in fact says something completely different:
        Ahmad bin Yunus related to us that Sharik, Abu al-Ahwas and Abu Bakr bin ‘Ayyash related to them from ‘Asim (bin Bahdalah Abi al-Najud) from Abu Razin from Ibn ‘Abbas who said: “There is no prescribed punishment for one who has sexual intercourse with an animal.” Abu Da`ud said: “‘Ata also said so.” Al-Hakam said: “I think he should be flogged, but the number should not reach the prescribed punishment (for zina`, that is, 100 lashes)”. Al-Hasan said: “He is like al-zan.” Adu Da`ud said: “This hadith of ‘Asim weakens the hadith of ‘Amr bin ‘Amr.” (Abu Da`ud 3872)
        The following facts about the above narrations, when taken together, leave little doubt that the hadith prescribing the death penalty for sex with animals is a fabrication resulting from some mistake or an outright lie:
        First, the hadith is narrated only on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas (d. 68) in the first generation, only on the authority of ‘Ikrimah (d. 104) in the second generation, and then mostly from ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr (d. 144) in the third generation and very rarely from ‘Abbad bin Mansur (d. 152). Imams Malik, Bukhari, Muslim either did not know about it or did not trust it.
        Second, narrators in the third generations, ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr and ‘Abbad bin Mansur, are not reliable. Abu Zur‘ah al-Razi considers ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr thiqah and Abu Hatim, Ibn ‘Adi and Ahmad say la bas bi hi. But al-Nasa`i considers him munkar and says he is not strong. Bukhari said that ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr is trustworthy but he has wrongly attributed to ‘Ikrimah several traditions. Yahya bin Ma‘in and al-‘Ajli also called him thiqah but rejected the ahadith he narrated from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas. The views of scholars about ‘Abbad bin Mansur are even more negative. Thus he is described as da‘if al-hadith by Abu Hatim, laysa bi shay` by Yahya bin Ma‘in, layyin by al-Razi and munkar al-hadith, qadri, mudallis by Ahmad.
        Third, in one narration in Musnad Ahmad, also from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas, the “hadith” is found as a saying of Ibn ‘Abbas and NOT a saying of the Holy Prophet. So there is a distinct possibility that an opinion of Ibn ‘Abbas was attributed to the Prophet by a later transmitter such as ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr.
        Fourth, it is doubtful that Ibn ‘Abbas believed in the death penalty for bestiality, since in another tradition Ibn ‘Abbas himself says clearly, “there is no prescribed punishment for sex with an animal”.
        Fifth, as noted in ‘Awn al-Ma‘bud, the four Sunni schools of fiqh are unanimous that death is not prescribed for one who commits sexual intercourse with an animal, but may be given some other punishment (yu‘azzar wa la yuqtal). Such an agreement among the fuqaha` would have been difficult to develop if they generally knew and accepted a hadith, in which the Prophet ordered to kill the one who has sex with an animal.
        Although, in view of the above considerations, there can be little doubt the hadith in question is a false hadith, yet some later scholars accept the hadith and then try to reconcile it with the opinion of the fuqaha`. Thus some say that killing is mentioned in the hadith only as a threat not meant to be carried out. Some say that the killing of the man is only a threat but killing of the animal is to be carried out in actuality. In contrast to such artificial explanations of later scholars, Abu Da`ud and Tirmidhi themselves show better sense. Abu Da`ud, facing the obvious, declares: the tradition of ‘Asim (in which it is denied that there is any prescribed punishment for sex with animals) weakens the tradition of ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr (in which the death penalty is prescribed). Tirmidhi also shows reservation about the hadith by noting: “We do not find this hadith except from ‘Amr bin ‘Amr and he from ‘Ikrimah and he from Ibn ‘Abbas and he from the Prophet.”
        It is necessary that when the weakness of a hadith reaches the level shown above we should have the courage to call it a false hadith, something that many scholars do not do. The authentic teaching of Islam, meant to guide humanity for all times to come, could not have been transmitted in this weak way. If we do not declare such ahadith as false then this means that we cannot free ourselves from the errors and lies of some Muslims in the past and therefore cannot faithfully interpret and implement what God and his Messenger have taught us. This in turn means that we cannot move forward as a civilization…
        Since the narration in Abu Da`ud 3870 does not attribute the death penalty for the homosexual act to the Prophet but only to Ibn ‘Abbas, it is quite possible that the tradition originally was not marfu‘ (attributed to the Prophet) but became so only at a later time. Earlier we noted a similar situation in case of a hadith from ‘Abbad bin Mansur about bestiality. In one narration (Ahmad 2597) the death penalty for this misdeed is attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas while in another narration, reported in al-Hakim, it becomes a hadith. This evidence strongly suggests that death penalties for sexual crimes were not originally based on the words of the Prophet but of some Companions. We can even go further: since the death penalty at least for the homosexual act was not known to al-Zuhri or Imam Malik as a hadith or even as an opinion of a Companion but as an opinion of some fuqaha` among the Successors, it is quite possible that even its attribution to a Companion such as Ibn ‘Abbas is not historical. Certainly, in case of bestiality we have seen evidence showing that Ibn ‘Abbas did not think that there was any prescribed penalty.
        It is also worth noting that all the ahadith about the death penalty for deviant sex, i.e. sex with animals, a mahram, or a member of one’s own gender come from the same very small group of transmitters in the first four generations: Ibn ‘Abbas, ‘Ikrimah, Da`ud bin al-Husayn, ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr, Ibrahim bin Isma‘il etc. If the Prophet prescribed the death penalty for all these crimes, it is strange that its knowledge in all three cases remained limited to a few Hadith students for about one and a half century. (Shafaat, Death Penalty For Homosexuality, Incest, And Bestiality: Source)
        Not only are there no sound narrations prescribing any specific punishments for bestiality, we actually find at least one scholarly reference that seems to support the permissibility of engaging in this perverted act.
        {Side note: One interesting thing about the author is that he consistently claims throughout his article that the prescribed punishments mentioned in these weak or forged narrations regarding bestiality, homosexuality etc. actually come from the Holy Bible!}
        To summarize our analysis of the Quran, we found one text worded in such a manner as to suggest that a person can take a mate, a partner from cattle. Other texts seem to support it by saying that individuals are to protect their private parts except from their spouses and what their right hands own. Since animals are part of what a person owns this seems to suggest that intercourse with beasts is permissible. Even if one wishes to argue that the author didn’t mean to imply that bestiality is permissible, at the very least this shows that the Quran is far from being as eloquent and as clear as Muslims believe. Specific texts are written in a very chaotic and confusing manner, leading into all kinds of ethical and theological problems.
        The Muslims are obviously left in a very difficult position.

        • Lucky,

          the Quran states that there is only one God 112: 1-4: Say: He is Allah, the One!
          Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not nor was begotten. And there is none like unto Him. (that is what the Muslims worship)

          Deuteronomy 4:35 (KJV)
          “know that the Lord he is God; there is none else beside him”.
          “Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me.” Isaiah 43:10
          “there is no God but one ” 1 Corinthians 8:4 “God is only one.” Galatians 3:20

          and so do the Vedas also clearly state that there is ONLY one God:

          “He is One only without a second.” [Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1]
          “Of Him there are neither parents nor lord.” [Svetasvatara Upanishad 6:9]
          “There is no likeness of Him.” [Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:19]
          “He is body-less and pure.” [Yajurveda 40:8]

          Where do the three distinct gods namely, Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu come from? Where did their female wives/consorts pop-up from?

          God neither begets nor is he begotten then why would there be a need for God to marry and beget children? God is seen as someone against evil and not the one who is helping it to spread by creating the devils then granting them their wishes for destruction.

          How come all Hindu gods know nothing else but India?? Why is the Nile NOT sacred?

          “They enter darkness, those who worship natural things.” “They sink deeper in darkness those who worship sambhuti i.e. created things”(Yajurveda 40 Verse 9)

          “O ye who believe! Fulfil (all) obligations. Lawful unto you (for food) are all four-footed animals with the exceptions named.”[Al-Qur’an 5:1]

          Manu Smriti 5 verse 30-31/30-40 “The eater who eats the flesh of those to be eaten does nothing bad! even if he does it day after day; for God himself created some to be eaten and some to be eater”” Eating meat is right for the sacrifice, this is traditionally known as a rule of the gods.” “God himself created sacrificial animals for sacrifice, …., therefore killing in a sacrifice is not killing.”

          “Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything. “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.” (Genesis9:3-4)

          In India, where cows are considered sacred, Its the Hindus who are mistreating and butchering them for leather!!!

          • Plum how many muslim kasai khanas have you seen? I have seen so many specially in kerela where you guys butcher cows for festivals? Really? I mean we all know how you guys celebrate your festivals , god bless the PETA people for ehtical treatment of animals

        • Larry, you repeatedly re-paste your past comments for yours odd belief that repetition finally makes it the truth. We need not comment further as that repetition alludes to your bankruptcy upstairs…and will be a further wastage of our precious time!!!

          • Plum, Lucky is nothing more than an ordinary anti-Muslim who doesn’t know much about Islam but has made a blunder by assuming that he knows enough to determine truth or falsehood of Islam. Someone said:

            ‘He’s an idiot who concludes great results by utilizing his limited experience.’

        • Lucky, look at these funny guys called Brahmins :

          1. Go between Gods and Indian humans!
          2. Writers and Masters of Hindu scriptures and its Law books.

          3. Professors in the schools of martial arts and the art of war.
          4. The Brahmin priest has to wake up at four in the morning and bathe in cold water!

          5. Is responsible for religious rituals in temples and homes of others!
          6. Has to sit in front of a sacred fire, with all the heat and smoke to make him holy.

          7. Fasts meaning chews all the food (prasad) brought by the worshippers.
          8. Very dedicated to god and other’s wives!

          9. May have his first meal at 1 or 2 pm.
          10. Born from Purusha’s face not their mother’s womb!

          11. Their positions ; ministers and advisers to kings
          12. Their main duty ; to put Indians behind through orthodox mytho beliefs.

          13. To own 60% of Indian media!
          14. They have retarded indians by producing “miraculous” Babas who cheat, rape, sodomise, loot, have sex in temples with other’s wives, mothers and daughters.

          15. Put Hindus under their bondage for ever and ever…ameen!

          Hail the Brahmins!!

          • 10 reasons why Muhammad was a false prophet and I have re-written them here:
            1. There were no prophecies before his birth – the bible goes to great length to spell out how the coming of Jesus was foretold but there were none for Muhammad.
            2. Islam did not exist when Muhammad was born so his birth took place in an idol worshipping family and that´s what he followed all his childhood and teenage years. That means Muhammad himself was born as a Qafir (Infidel) and he spent 70% of his life as a proud infidel until he invented Islam. We note that Jesus was born a Jew and lived as a Jew until he was around 30 – but as a child, according to the Bible, he did remark about “being about my father’s work” (Luke 2:49).
            3. His first marriage was with a Jewish woman and not with any muslimah. That shows how even Muhammad didn´t have any idea of the existence of Islam or his prophecy.
            4. If Muhammad was a great prophet sent by Allah then why didn´t he reveal the truth about Islam when he was a child or when he was young? Why did he waste time until he was 40 years of age? If his purpose to come in this world was only to reveal Islam and preach to people then why did he wait until more than half way through his life, living like a common man for many years?
            5. Almost all the rituals and rules of Islam mentioned in the Quran are copied from Judaism which shows how deeply Muhammad was inspired by Judaism and attracted towards the Torah. He discovered that the easiest way to invent a new religion was to copy and paste from the Torah.
            6. Muhammad spread Islam at the point of a sword and not with love and preaching. His goal was to rule at any price. Compare this to Jesus who didn´t initiate any wars, never killed any innocent people and didn´t abuse women like Muhammad did.
            7. Muhammad killed poor, innocent and helpless people. A holy prophet would not do this.
            8. Muhammad did not call himself a holy prophet (his followers did much later). Instead he sexually abused uncountable women. These included the shameful marriage to the minor Aisha and abuse of his own daughter in law. That proves that Muhammad was just another powerful dictator who was good at taking advantage of his power and abusing everyone, anywhere and in any way.
            9. Prophets are supposed to work miracles such as curing the sick but Muhammad never did. Instead he destroyed peaceful families, captured their lands and made slaves of the women and crying children.
            10. In his life, Muhammad wreaked havoc on humanity and passed on to his followers the message of Jihad to perpetuate the suffering after his death. A true prophet would never want to destroy lives but would sacrifice his own life for his people. This shows that Muhammad was not a prophet during his life nor after his death.

            Hail the pedo followers to be brainwashed till you are at the verge of defiance of your own truth!

          • Muslim rapists held in mumbai rape case of a young journalist google it anywhere

            2. google Syesh Gu;zar ahmed bhat and you will know what rape dens inside mosques and lust for others women means

        • Dear MM, Lucky is Raj, He is extremely a brilliant and good person at heart. I have studied little of practical psychology and I tell you that there are very few people as intelligent as he is. I admire his guts but the problem is that he has very little time to comment on anti-Islam. I hope he stops copy-pasting his past remarks and gives us more and more of fresh anti-Islam comments.

          I reply not as a Muslim but my opinion is based on fair claim and try to clear misconceptions against Islam. Whether I believe in islam or not is immaterial. He is very right in saying that Hadiths have hijacked the true Islam that is supposed to be based on the word of God and NOT word of man.

          He has at a few places declared that Islam is a beautiful religion but Hadiths have been the cause of rifts and sects in Islam. Many a times you see him attacking the Muslims, showing that they are diverting from the Quran but being Muslims everything is to be blamed.

          I truly thank him for giving us a chance to express our views though being anti his wishes!

          • Plum, if those are his actual personal views then kindly let me know why he criticizes Islam so harshly? If he believes that Islam’s a beautiful religion spoiled by fake hadiths then he must refrain from criticizing Islam on the whole.

            Moreover, don’t let these tactics fool you, bro. Dr. Ali Sina also acts like as if he loves Muslims and cares about’em from the depths of his heart but actually he hates them and it doesn’t matter to him if a Muslim dies. Refer to http://www.answering-christianity.com

        • I you guys had the firepower of Al queda militants you would blow up this blog right now ad is obvious from your reaction , truth hurts isnt it , what a superb article this guy has written

    • HEBREWS BUILT THE KAABA

      2: “127 And remember Abraham and Isma`il raised the foundations of the House (with this prayer): “Our Lord! accept (this service) from us for thou art the All-Hearing the All-Knowing.

      *** Abraham and Ishmael were HEBREWS after all, and NOT Arabs ***

      THEM JEWS ARE EVERYWHERE

  3. Pingback: La tolerancia islámica: Mito y Realidad | Ramrock's Blog

  4. Raj, Islam is the most tolerant religion in the world. If you don’t think so then quote Qur’an here and show us that our religion’s an intolerant religion.

    • WHAT IS REAL ISLAM?

      “What is the real Islam?” The answers from Muslims and Westerners are contradictory and make us confused.

      There is one way to gain clarity and surety about Islam—our best rational approach is the scientific method.

      Let us start with the fact that the complete doctrine of Islam is found in three texts: Koran, the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) and Hadith (stories and anecdotes about Mohammed)—the Islamic Trilogy.

      The Koran is confusing as it is arranged, but it can be made straightforward by scientific analysis.

      The first step is to put the verses in the right time order, collect and categorize all of the similar stories. It is at this point that the missing parts, or holes, in the document become apparent. The life of Mohammed fills in and explains all the gaps and all the confusion falls away. Mohammed is the key to the Koran and Islam.
      The doctrine breaks down in time into Mohammed in Mecca (the early part) and Mohammed in Medina (the later part). In essence, there are two Korans, one written in Mecca and the second Koran written in Medina.

      The two Korans are the first grand division of Islamic doctrine.

      What is intriguing is that the two Korans include contradictions. “You have your religion and I have mine” 109:1 is a far cry from “I shall cast terror in the hearts of the kafirs. Strike off their heads…” 8:12. The Koran gives a way to solve these contradictions—the later verse is “better” than the earlier verse. But the earlier verse is still true. All the verses from the Koran are true because they are the words of Allah.

      The Koran defines an Islamic logic that is dualistic. Two things which contradict each other can both be true. In a unitary, scientific logic, if two things contradict each other, then at least one of them is false. Not so in dualistic logic.
      All of the doctrine refers to two classes of people—Muslims and non-Muslims, kafirs. The doctrine that applies to kafirs is political in nature and is rarely neutral or positive. The part of the doctrine that applies to Muslims is cultural, legal, and religious.

      The second grand division of Islamic doctrine is into religious Islam and political Islam.

      It is surprising how much of the doctrine is political. Approximately 67% of the Meccan Koran and 51% of the Medinan Koran is political. About 75% of the Sira is about what was done to the kafir. Roughly 20% of the Hadith is about jihad, a political act.

      Even the concept of Hell is political, not religious. There are 146 parts of the Koran that refer to Hell. Only 4% of the people in Islamic Hell are there for moral reasons, such as murder, theft or greed. In 96% of the cases the person is in Hell because they did not agree with Mohammed. This is a political charge. In short, Islamic Hell is primarily a political prison.

      In summary, Islam is an extremely political doctrine. It has to be. Mohammed preached the religion of Islam for 13 years and garnered 150 followers. Then in Medina, he turned to politics and jihad and became the first ruler of all Arabia. When he died, he did not have a single enemy left to speak or act against him, a very political result.

      The Koran says in 14 verses that a Muslim is not and cannot be the friend of the kafir. This is pure dualism. The dualism of the Koran has no universal statements about humanity. The entire world is divided between Islam and the kafirs. The only statement about humanity as a whole is that all humanity must submit to Islam.
      Ethics are the membrane between religion and politics. Two sets of ethics are laid out in the Trilogy. One set is for Muslims and the other set is for the kafirs. Examples: a Muslim should not steal from another Muslim, a Muslim should not kill another Muslim, a Muslim should not cheat a Muslim.

      The kafir can be treated in one of two ways. They can be treated well or they can be robbed, killed, or cheated if it advances Islam. On more than one occasion Mohammed said to deceive the kafir. Jihad as a political method killed, robbed and enslaved the kafirs. This is a dualistic ethical system.

      Islamic dualism is hidden by religion. The “good” verses of the Meccan Koran cover the verses of jihad in the Medinan Koran. Thus religious Islam shields political Islam from examination.

      Scientific analysis shows us that there is a political Islam as well as a religious Islam. To argue about religion is fruitless, but we can talk about politics. We need to discuss political Islam, a system of ethical and political dualism.

      FEAR is what holds Mohammedans to their religion!

      Islam Exists Only Because People Fear Being Murdered if They Leave

      HEAD OF MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, YUSUF AL-QARADAWI STATED:

      If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment, Islam wouldn’t exist today. Islam would have ended since the death of the prophet, peace be upon him. Opposing apostasy is what kept Islam to this day.

      Surah 5:33 says: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle is that he should be murdered or crucified.” According to Abi Kulaba’s narration this verse means the apostates.

      And many hadiths, not only one or two, but many, narrated by a number of Muhammad’s companions, state that any apostate should be killed.

      Ibn ‘Abbas’s hadith: “Kill whomever changes his faith [from Islam].”

      Ibn Masud’s hadith: “Kill these three criminals: the adulterer, the murderer, and the apostate that leaves [our] community.”

      This in addition to a big number of other narrations, by other companions, about apostasy.

      The most striking thing about his statement, however, was that it was not an apology; it was a logical, proud justification for preserving the death penalty as a punishment for apostasy. Al-Qaradawi sounded matter-of-fact, indicating no moral conflict, nor even hesitation, about this policy in Islam. On the contrary, he asserted the legitimacy of Islamic laws in relying on vigilante street justice through fear, intimidation, torture & murder against any person who might dare to leave Islam.

      ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION

      Islam is not a religion. It is a political system that was invented by one man – Mohammed. Why did he claim it was a religion? Upon a careful reading of the Koran and Hadith, it becomes clear that Mohammed was like any other charlatan claiming an exclusive relationship with God. He was neither the first charlatan to claim this, nor the last. In the past few decades itself, we saw many “mini-Mohammeds”.
      David Koresh in Texas (USA) made similar claims. He too was having sexual relationships with many women. David Koresh lived in an age where he could not get away with it. The FBI attacked his compound where he was practicing Mohammed-like things, and he was killed. In Mohammed’s time, a few desperadoes could impose this new “religion” called Islam upon many unsuspecting Arabs, at the threat of death. That is the ONLY difference between these two charlatans.

      Would God – who has the entire universe to worry about – be bothered to send verse after verse covering for Mohammed’s sexual misdeeds? Would God send verses allowing Mohammed to bed any “believing woman who offers herself”, and at the same time threaten Mohammed’s wives with dire consequences if they indulged in adultery? What kind of “God” is this Allah, anyway? The answer is – Allah is not God. Allah is just the ventriloquist dummy of a charlatan named Mohammed.

      You see, this charlatan never had any spiritual experiences. He made up this whole act. It is absolutely clear that this is the case when you read the Quran and Hadith. The happy ending for Mohammed was that he had a LOT of sex (66 women in total, not bad for a bedouin camel driver), and a LOT of power. His henchmen murdered men and women who so much as uttered any doubt about Mohammed’s “prophethood.”

      RELIGION OF PEACE

      The spread of Islam outside of the Arabian Peninsula can be linked to the extensive trade routes connecting the Middle East to China. Arab Muslim traders exported their religion along with their goods. The conquest of non-Muslim lands by Muslim empires during the Golden Age of Islam was because they were technologically and militarily superior to many other Asian civilizations. The conquered was given a chance to either convert to Islam, become a slave or to be killed.

      Ishaq:587 reads

      “Our onslaught will not be a weak faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have mutilated every opponent. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them, for they must suffer disgrace.”

      There is not a SINGLE idea in the Quran that has not been plagiarized, pirated, plundered or perverted from the belief of others! The only new items in the Quran are the enormous amounts of hate, war, torture & Hellish verses that permeate through its pages.
      Mohammedanism is the Cult of Mohammed & both Quran & Hadithss instruct his followers to slavishly emulate his deeds, thoughts, manner & ideas. This is Cultism.

      Most Muslims are not terrorists. But if they were truly good people, then they wouldn’t be Muslims. The seeds of terrorism are planted deep within the theology & psyche of Islam. This theology, when free to grow & blossom, will show itself in the actions of Muslims who are faithful to the example of Muhammad. And as was demonstrated in “Not Without My Daughter”, who knows when a peaceful, liberal or moderate Muslim will turn to fundamentalism and embrace the violence of Islam?

      AISHA — 9 YEAR OLD BRIDE

      Sahih Bukhari

      Narrated Aisha:

      The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

      Sahih Bukhari
      Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234

      Narrated ‘Aisha:

      I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.)

      (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
      Sahih Muslim

      Chapter 10:

      IT IS PERMISSIBLE FOR THE FATHER TO GIVE THE HAND OF HIS DAUGHTER IN MARRIAGE EVEN WHEN SHE IS NOT FULLY GROWN UP.

      ‘A’isha: Allah’s Messenger married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine. She further said: We went to Medina and I had an attack of fever for a month, and my hair had come down to the earlobes. Umm Ruman (my mother) came to me and I was at that time on a swing along with my playmates. She called me loudly and I went to her and I did not know what she had wanted of me. She took hold of my hand and took me to the door, and I was saying: Ha, ha (as if I was gasping), until the agitation of my heart was over. She took me to a house, where had gathered the women of the Ansar. They all blessed me and wished me good luck and said: May you have share in good. She (my mother) entrusted me to them. They washed my head and embellished me and nothing frightened me. Allah’s Messenger (, may peace be upon him) came there in the morning, and I was entrusted to him.

      Sahih Muslim

      Book 8, Number 3309.

      ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah’s Apostle married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

      Book 8, Number 3310

      ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

      Book 8, Number 3311

      Sunan Dawud

      Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
      The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came. according to Bishr’s version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter.

      Book 41, Number 4915:

      Narrated AbuUsamah:
      The tradition mentioned above (No. 4915) has also been transmitted by AbuUsamah in a similar manner through a different chain of narrators. This version has: “With good fortune. ” She (Umm Ruman) entrusted me to them. They washed my head and redressed me. No one came to me suddenly except the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) in the forenoon. So they entrusted me to him.

      Book 41, Number 4916:
      Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
      When we came to Medina, the women came to me when I was playing on the swing, and my hair were up to my ears. They brought me, prepared me, and decorated me. Then they brought me to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) and he took up cohabitation with me, when I was nine.
      Book 41, Number 4917

      As an older man of fifty-plus years, Muhammad married a mere child of six years old and co-habited with her when she was 9 years old. As quoted above, the most trusted collections of hadiths establish the authenticity of this oral tradition. But still, Western Muslims are embarrassed by these hadiths. Sometimes they use a Weak hadith defense to excuse Muhammad’s child marriage. At other times, they use an Arabic culture defense by claiming that no one has the right to judge Oriental culture by Occidental norms. Now, this is a strange defense to make, since Muslims frequently criticized Western culture as being morally decadent. If another culture cannot be morally evaluated, then other cultures must not be judged as morally decadent. But, this conclusion is not acceptable to Muslims, since they argue that an Islamic culture is the better culture. So, we must conclude that cultures may be evaluated morally, or that, someone is hypocritically judging others while not permitting themselves to be judged by the same standard.

      However, if hypocrisy is not a good alternative, then it is concluded that cultures may be evaluated morally. In fact, it is permissible, and even desirable, to have moral discussions on cultural issues. Moral discussions on cultural issues occur in many different cultures. So, the problem of Muhammad marrying a child cannot be defended on Eastern cultural grounds. The issue remains as to whether or not Muhammad acted rightly in marrying a six year old. Certainly, it is wrong according to the natural order of Allah’s creation. In fact, many nations of the world list such behavior as a crime against nature. Thus, it is concluded that Muhammad committed a grave moral sin against the moral order of Allah’s creation. And, his behavior is no example for others to follow. It is tragic to read news reports of old men marrying children in some Islamic countries, because they believe they are following the example of Muhammad who married a child. Muhammad had an interest in fondling young girls, so he criticized the lawful marriage union of two grown adults.

      Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
      When I got married, Allah’s Apostle said to me, “What type of lady have you married?” I replied, “I have married a matron’ He said, “Why, don’t you have a liking for the virgins and for fondling them?” Jabir also said: Allah’s Apostle said, “Why didn’t you marry a young girl so that you might play with her and she with you?’

      Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 17.

      In the classic history of “The Life of Muhammad” (Sirat Rasul Allah) by Ibn Ishaq, there is an account in which Muhammad expressed a marital interest in a crawling baby. This event seems to have occurred around the time of the Battle of of Badr which would have made Muhammad approximately 55 years old. He had married Ayesha two years earlier, when he was 53 years of age.

      (Suhayli, ii. 79: In the riwaya of Yunus I
      I. recorded that the apostle saw her (Ummu’lFadl) when she was a baby crawling before him and said, ‘If she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.’ But he died before she grew up and Sufyan b. al-Aswad b. ‘Abdu’l-Asad al-Makhzumi married her and she bore him Rizq and Lubab…1

      So, Muhammad’s interest in young girls extended beyond Ai’sha (‘Ayesha). Why would anyone think that Muhammad’s sexual interest in babies be “the timeless expression of the Will of Allah?” How does such a prurient desire support Muhammad’s claim to be a prophet of Allah? Such a desire by an old man is contrary to nature, and it is a perversion against the moral order of Allah’s universe.

      ISLAMIC SANCTION OF BESTIALITY.

      That is if it can fit in or be grabbed, the Muslim can have sex with it, if not expressly forbidden. Restrictions apply:
      A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels & so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village; however, selling the meat to the next door village should be fine.

      Khomeini’s book, “Tahrirolvasyleh” fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990

      THE SWEET TASTE OF HALAL MEAT

      If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrement become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed and as quickly as possible and burned.
      The Little Green Book, Sayings of Ayatollah Khomeini, Political, Philosophical, Social and Religious, ISBN number 0-553-14032-9, page 47

      I presume Khomeini thought the word “marry” was just a euphemism.

        • MOHAMMED & MOHAMMEDANS ARE SEXUALLY DYSFUNCTIONAL, ACADEMICALLY ILLITERATE & SCRIPTURALLY IGNORANT!

          WHAT IS REAL ISLAM?

          “What is the real Islam?” The answers from Muslims and Westerners are contradictory and make us confused.

          There is one way to gain clarity and surety about Islam—our best rational approach is the scientific method.

          Let us start with the fact that the complete doctrine of Islam is found in three texts: Koran, the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) and Hadith (stories and anecdotes about Mohammed)—the Islamic Trilogy.

          The Koran is confusing as it is arranged, but it can be made straightforward by scientific analysis.

          The first step is to put the verses in the right time order, collect and categorize all of the similar stories. It is at this point that the missing parts, or holes, in the document become apparent. The life of Mohammed fills in and explains all the gaps and all the confusion falls away. Mohammed is the key to the Koran and Islam.

          The doctrine breaks down in time into Mohammed in Mecca (the early part) and Mohammed in Medina (the later part). In essence, there are two Korans, one written in Mecca and the second Koran written in Medina.

          The two Korans are the first grand division of Islamic doctrine.

          What is intriguing is that the two Korans include contradictions. “You have your religion and I have mine” 109:1 is a far cry from “I shall cast terror in the hearts of the kafirs. Strike off their heads…” 8:12. The Koran gives a way to solve these contradictions—the later verse is “better” than the earlier verse. But the earlier verse is still true. All the verses from the Koran are true because they are the words of Allah.

          The Koran defines an Islamic logic that is dualistic. Two things which contradict each other can both be true. In a unitary, scientific logic, if two things contradict each other, then at least one of them is false. Not so in dualistic logic.

          All of the doctrine refers to two classes of people—Muslims and non-Muslims, kafirs. The doctrine that applies to kafirs is political in nature and is rarely neutral or positive. The part of the doctrine that applies to Muslims is cultural, legal, and religious.

          The second grand division of Islamic doctrine is into religious Islam and political Islam.
          It is surprising how much of the doctrine is political. Approximately 67% of the Meccan Koran and 51% of the Medinan Koran is political. About 75% of the Sira is about what was done to the kafir. Roughly 20% of the Hadith is about jihad, a political act.

          Even the concept of Hell is political, not religious. There are 146 parts of the Koran that refer to Hell. Only 4% of the people in Islamic Hell are there for moral reasons, such as murder, theft or greed. In 96% of the cases the person is in Hell because they did not agree with Mohammed. This is a political charge. In short, Islamic Hell is primarily a political prison.

          In summary, Islam is an extremely political doctrine. It has to be. Mohammed preached the religion of Islam for 13 years and garnered 150 followers. Then in Medina, he turned to politics and jihad and became the first ruler of all Arabia. When he died, he did not have a single enemy left to speak or act against him, a very political result.

          The Koran says in 14 verses that a Muslim is not and cannot be the friend of the kafir. This is pure dualism. The dualism of the Koran has no universal statements about humanity. The entire world is divided between Islam and the kafirs. The only statement about humanity as a whole is that all humanity must submit to Islam.

          Ethics are the membrane between religion and politics. Two sets of ethics are laid out in the Trilogy. One set is for Muslims and the other set is for the kafirs. Examples: a Muslim should not steal from another Muslim, a Muslim should not kill another Muslim, a Muslim should not cheat a Muslim.

          The kafir can be treated in one of two ways. They can be treated well or they can be robbed, killed, or cheated if it advances Islam. On more than one occasion Mohammed said to deceive the kafir. Jihad as a political method killed, robbed and enslaved the kafirs. This is a dualistic ethical system.

          Islamic dualism is hidden by religion. The “good” verses of the Meccan Koran cover the verses of jihad in the Medinan Koran. Thus religious Islam shields political Islam from examination.

          Scientific analysis shows us that there is a political Islam as well as a religious Islam. To argue about religion is fruitless, but we can talk about politics. We need to discuss political Islam, a system of ethical and political dualism.

          FEAR is what holds Mohammedans to their religion!

          Islam Exists Only Because People Fear Being Murdered if They Leave:

          HEAD OF MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, YUSUF AL-QARADAWI STATED:

          If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment, Islam wouldn’t exist today. Islam would have ended since the death of the prophet, peace be upon him. Opposing apostasy is what kept Islam to this day.

          Surah 5:33 says: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle is that he should be murdered or crucified.” According to Abi Kulaba’s narration this verse means the apostates.

          And many hadiths, not only one or two, but many, narrated by a number of Muhammad’s companions, state that any apostate should be killed.

          Ibn ‘Abbas’s hadith: “Kill whomever changes his faith [from Islam].”

          Ibn Masud’s hadith: “Kill these three criminals: the adulterer, the murderer, and the apostate that leaves [our] community.”

          This in addition to a big number of other narrations, by other companions, about apostasy.

          The most striking thing about his statement, however, was that it was not an apology; it was a logical, proud justification for preserving the death penalty as a punishment for apostasy. Al-Qaradawi sounded matter-of-fact, indicating no moral conflict, nor even hesitation, about this policy in Islam. On the contrary, he asserted the legitimacy of Islamic laws in relying on vigilante street justice through fear, intimidation, torture & murder against any person who might dare to leave Islam.

          ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION

          Islam is not a religion. It is a political system that was invented by one man – Mohammed. Why did he claim it was a religion? Upon a careful reading of the Koran and Hadith, it becomes clear that Mohammed was like any other charlatan claiming an exclusive relationship with God. He was neither the first charlatan to claim this, nor the last. In the past few decades itself, we saw many “mini-Mohammeds”.

          David Koresh in Texas (USA) made similar claims. He too was having sexual relationships with many women. David Koresh lived in an age where he could not get away with it. The FBI attacked his compound where he was practicing Mohammed-like things, and he was killed. In Mohammed’s time, a few desperadoes could impose this new “religion” called Islam upon many unsuspecting Arabs, at the threat of death. That is the ONLY difference between these two charlatans.

          Would God – who has the entire universe to worry about – be bothered to send verse after verse covering for Mohammed’s sexual misdeeds? Would God send verses allowing Mohammed to bed any “believing woman who offers herself”, and at the same time threaten Mohammed’s wives with dire consequences if they indulged in adultery? What kind of “God” is this Allah, anyway? The answer is – Allah is not God. Allah is just the ventriloquist dummy of a charlatan named Mohammed.

          You see, this charlatan never had any spiritual experiences. He made up this whole act. It is absolutely clear that this is the case when you read the Quran and Hadith. The happy ending for Mohammed was that he had a LOT of sex (66 women in total, not bad for a bedouin camel driver), and a LOT of power. His henchmen murdered men and women who so much as uttered any doubt about Mohammed’s “prophethood.”

          RELIGION OF PEACE

          The spread of Islam outside of the Arabian Peninsula can be linked to the extensive trade routes connecting the Middle East to China. Arab Muslim traders exported their religion along with their goods. The conquest of non-Muslim lands by Muslim empires during the Golden Age of Islam was because they were technologically and militarily superior to many other Asian civilizations. The conquered was given a chance to either convert to Islam, become a slave or to be killed.

          Ishaq:587 reads

          “Our onslaught will not be a weak faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have mutilated every opponent. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them, for they must suffer disgrace.”

          There is not a SINGLE idea in the Quran that has not been plagiarized, pirated, plundered or perverted from the belief of others! The only new items in the Quran are the enormous amounts of hate, war, torture & Hellish verses that permeate through its pages.
          Mohammedanism is the Cult of Mohammed & both Quran & Hadithss instruct his followers to slavishly emulate his deeds, thoughts, manner & ideas. This is Cultism.

          Most Muslims are not terrorists. But if they were truly good people, then they wouldn’t be Muslims. The seeds of terrorism are planted deep within the theology & psyche of Islam. This theology, when free to grow & blossom, will show itself in the actions of Muslims who are faithful to the example of Muhammad. And as was demonstrated in “Not Without My Daughter”, who knows when a peaceful, liberal or moderate Muslim will turn to fundamentalism and embrace the violence of Islam?

          AISHA — 9 YEAR OLD BRIDE

          Sahih Bukhari

          Narrated Aisha:

          The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

          Sahih Bukhari
          Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234

          Narrated ‘Aisha:

          I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.)

          (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
          Sahih Muslim

          Chapter 10:

          IT IS PERMISSIBLE FOR THE FATHER TO GIVE THE HAND OF HIS DAUGHTER IN MARRIAGE EVEN WHEN SHE IS NOT FULLY GROWN UP.

          ‘A’isha: Allah’s Messenger married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine. She further said: We went to Medina and I had an attack of fever for a month, and my hair had come down to the earlobes. Umm Ruman (my mother) came to me and I was at that time on a swing along with my playmates. She called me loudly and I went to her and I did not know what she had wanted of me. She took hold of my hand and took me to the door, and I was saying: Ha, ha (as if I was gasping), until the agitation of my heart was over. She took me to a house, where had gathered the women of the Ansar. They all blessed me and wished me good luck and said: May you have share in good. She (my mother) entrusted me to them. They washed my head and embellished me and nothing frightened me. Allah’s Messenger (, may peace be upon him) came there in the morning, and I was entrusted to him.

          Sahih Muslim

          Book 8, Number 3309.

          ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah’s Apostle married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

          Book 8, Number 3310

          ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

          Book 8, Number 3311

          Sunan Dawud

          Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
          The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came. according to Bishr’s version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter.

          Book 41, Number 4915:

          Narrated AbuUsamah:
          The tradition mentioned above (No. 4915) has also been transmitted by AbuUsamah in a similar manner through a different chain of narrators. This version has: “With good fortune. ” She (Umm Ruman) entrusted me to them. They washed my head and redressed me. No one came to me suddenly except the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) in the forenoon. So they entrusted me to him.

          Book 41, Number 4916:
          Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
          When we came to Medina, the women came to me when I was playing on the swing, and my hair were up to my ears. They brought me, prepared me, and decorated me. Then they brought me to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) and he took up cohabitation with me, when I was nine.
          Book 41, Number 4917

          As an older man of fifty-plus years, Muhammad married a mere child of six years old and co-habited with her when she was 9 years old. As quoted above, the most trusted collections of hadiths establish the authenticity of this oral tradition. But still, Western Muslims are embarrassed by these hadiths. Sometimes they use a Weak hadith defense to excuse Muhammad’s child marriage. At other times, they use an Arabic culture defense by claiming that no one has the right to judge Oriental culture by Occidental norms. Now, this is a strange defense to make, since Muslims frequently criticized Western culture as being morally decadent. If another culture cannot be morally evaluated, then other cultures must not be judged as morally decadent. But, this conclusion is not acceptable to Muslims, since they argue that an Islamic culture is the better culture. So, we must conclude that cultures may be evaluated morally, or that, someone is hypocritically judging others while not permitting themselves to be judged by the same standard.

          However, if hypocrisy is not a good alternative, then it is concluded that cultures may be evaluated morally. In fact, it is permissible, and even desirable, to have moral discussions on cultural issues. Moral discussions on cultural issues occur in many different cultures. So, the problem of Muhammad marrying a child cannot be defended on Eastern cultural grounds. The issue remains as to whether or not Muhammad acted rightly in marrying a six year old. Certainly, it is wrong according to the natural order of Allah’s creation. In fact, many nations of the world list such behavior as a crime against nature. Thus, it is concluded that Muhammad committed a grave moral sin against the moral order of Allah’s creation. And, his behavior is no example for others to follow. It is tragic to read news reports of old men marrying children in some Islamic countries, because they believe they are following the example of Muhammad who married a child. Muhammad had an interest in fondling young girls, so he criticized the lawful marriage union of two grown adults.

          Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
          When I got married, Allah’s Apostle said to me, “What type of lady have you married?” I replied, “I have married a matron’ He said, “Why, don’t you have a liking for the virgins and for fondling them?” Jabir also said: Allah’s Apostle said, “Why didn’t you marry a young girl so that you might play with her and she with you?’

          Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 17.

          In the classic history of “The Life of Muhammad” (Sirat Rasul Allah) by Ibn Ishaq, there is an account in which Muhammad expressed a marital interest in a crawling baby. This event seems to have occurred around the time of the Battle of of Badr which would have made Muhammad approximately 55 years old. He had married Ayesha two years earlier, when he was 53 years of age.

          (Suhayli, ii. 79: In the riwaya of Yunus I
          I. recorded that the apostle saw her (Ummu’lFadl) when she was a baby crawling before him and said, ‘If she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.’ But he died before she grew up and Sufyan b. al-Aswad b. ‘Abdu’l-Asad al-Makhzumi married her and she bore him Rizq and Lubab…1

          So, Muhammad’s interest in young girls extended beyond Ai’sha (‘Ayesha). Why would anyone think that Muhammad’s sexual interest in babies be “the timeless expression of the Will of Allah?” How does such a prurient desire support Muhammad’s claim to be a prophet of Allah? Such a desire by an old man is contrary to nature, and it is a perversion against the moral order of Allah’s universe.
          THE SEALED NECTAR OF MOHAMMEDANISM.

          THE PERFECT MUSLIM

          And surely thou hast sublime morals
          (Surat Al-Qalam 68:4).

          Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar
          (Surat Al-Ahzab 33:21).

          Muslims believe that the Koran is the eternal word/laws of god to acts as a divine guidance for mankind about how to live a moral, righteous life. Prophet Muhammad, the highest perfection of human life and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct in Islamic belief, emulated the guidance of Allah perfectly.

          Muhammad fantasized about baby Aisha before soliciting her from her father

          Sahih Bukhari 9.140 Narrated ‘Aisha:

          Allah’s apostle said to me, “you were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, ‘uncover (her),’ and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), ‘if this is from Allah, then it must happen.

          Muhammad, 50, marries baby Aisha at age 6

          Sahih Bukhari volume 5, book 58, number 234

          Narrated Aisha: the prophet engaged (married) me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, um ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me.

          …….she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some ansari women who said, “best wishes and Allah’s blessing and a good luck.” then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

          Bukhari vol 8, bk 73, no 151

          Narrated ‘Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the prophet, & my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the prophet would call them to join & play with me. (the playing with the dolls & similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-bari page 143, vol.13)

          HOW TO THIGH

          Now let us see how thighing is practiced on a female child & who began this evil practice. According to an official Fatwa issued in Saudi Arabia, the prophet Muhammad began to practice thighing his child-bride, Aisha when she was 6 years old until she reached 9 years of age (Fatwa No. 31409). The hadith mentioned the prophet Muhammad started performing literal sex with Aisha ONLY when she reached the age of 9 (Sahih al-Bukhari, book 62, hadith No. 89).

          Muslim scholars collectively agree, a child becomes an adult, available for sexual intercourse as soon as she reaches the age of nine. Likewise, the Shari’a allows any of the faithful to marry a six-year-old child.
          According to the fatwa, the prophet Muhammad could not have sex with his fiancée, Aisha when she was six due to her small size & age. However, the fatwa said that at age six, he would put his penis between her thighs and massage it gently because he did not want to harm her.

          Imagine a man of 51 removing the clothes of a 6-year-old girl and slipping his erect penis between her thighs, rubbing her until he ejaculated and his semen ran down her thighs. To this day, this is considered a benevolent act on the part of the adult male “not wanting to harm her.” What harm could be inflicted upon a young girl mentally and emotionally if not a grown man showing her his penis and stripping her of her clothes and rubbing his male organ between her legs?

          Of course the twisted mind that does such an evil to a female child, would not hesitate to ejaculate on her body. And if this sexually perverted evil frame of mind committed such an act upon a child, the pedophile would not stop at ejaculating on her. His evil desire would go further and rape the child before she was a mature adult. This is exactly what Muhammad did to Aisha when she was yet a child of 9.

          Before she reached puberty, he began to have sex with her. Let us see what the fatwa said about the prophet of Islam and his child-bride, Aisha.“Praise be to Allah and peace be upon the one after whom there is no [further] prophet. After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwas (religious decrees) reviewed the question presented to the grand Mufti Abu Abdullah Muhammad Al-Shamari, with reference number 1809 issued on 3/8/1421(Islamic calendar).

          The inquirer asked the following:‘It has become wide spread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufakhathat of the children (mufakhathat literally translated means “placing between the thighs of children” which means placing the male erected penis between the thighs of a child). What is the opinion of scholars knowing full well that the prophet, the peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, also practiced the “thighing” of Aisha – the mother of believers ?’
          After the committee studied the issue, they gave the following reply: ‘It has not been the practice of the Muslims throughout the centuries to resort to this unlawful practice that has come to our countries from pornographic movies that the kofar (infidels) and enemies of Islam send. As for the Prophet, peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, thighing his fiancée Aisha. She was six years of age and he could not have intercourse with her due to her small age.

          That is why the prophet peace and prayers of Allah be upon him placed his penis between her thighs and massaged it lightly, as the apostle of Allah had control of his penis not like other believers’” (Fatwa No. 31409).

          Thighing of children is practiced in many Arab and Muslim countries, notably in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, and the Gulf countries. Also evil practices like altamatu’a bil almuka’aba (pleasure from sexual contact with her breasts), altamatu’a bil alsagirah (pleasure from sexual contact with a baby girl), altamatu’a bil alradi’ah, (pleasure from sexual contact with a suckling female infant), (Reported by Baharini Women’s Rights Activist, Ghada Jamshir)

          AISHA WASHING SEMEN FROM MUHAMMAD’S CLOTHES

          From the Hadith of Bukhari:

          Volume 1, Book 4, Number 229:

          Narrated ‘Aisha:

          I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).

          Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:

          Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar:

          I asked ‘Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. ”

          Volume 1, Book 4, Number 232:

          Narrated ‘Amr bin Maimun:

          I heard Sulaiman bin Yasar talking about the clothes soiled with semen. He said that ‘Aisha had said, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayers while water spots were still visible on them.

          Volume 1, Book 4, Number 233:

          Narrated ‘Aisha:

          I used to wash the semen off the clothes of the Prophet and even then I used to notice one or more spots on them.

          From the Hadith of Bukhari:

          Volume 1, Book 4, Number 229:

          Narrated ‘Aisha:

          I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).

          Volume 1, Book 4, Number 230:

          Narrated ‘Aisha:

          as above (229).

          Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:

          Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar:

          I asked ‘Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. ”

          Volume 1, Book 4, Number 232:

          Narrated ‘Amr bin Maimun:

          I heard Sulaiman bin Yasar talking about the clothes soiled with semen. He said that ‘Aisha had said, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayers while water spots were still visible on them.

          Volume 1, Book 4, Number 233:

          Narrated ‘Aisha:

          I used to wash the semen off the clothes of the Prophet and even then I used to notice one or more spots on them.

          Mohammed heard one of his wives was leaving him, so he rushed home where he found her on the carpet in front of the tent with her belongings; he sat down beside her & said, “I heard you were planning to leave me?”
          She replied, “Yes, I heard your other wives saying, you were a pedophile!”
          Mohammed thinks for a minute or so & then responds,
          “that’s a mighty big word for a 6 year old child.”

          THE QURAN & MARRYING LITTLE GIRLS

          Islam does allow you to marry pre-menstruating girls. The following verse is from At-Talaq (or Divorce). Islam’s main concern during a divorce is knowing who the father is (in case of a pregnancy). The waiting period is known as iddah.

          65.4 Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if you have any doubts, is three months, AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NO COURSES (it is the same): for those who are pregnant, their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make things easy for them.

          Tafsir al-Jalalayn (Commentary)
          And [as for] those of your women who (read allā’ī or allā’i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] those who have NOT YET MENSTRUATED, because of their YOUNG AGE, their period shall [also] be three months — both cases apply to other than those whose spouses have died; for these [latter] their period is prescribed in the verse: they shall wait by themselves for four months and ten [days] [Q. 2:234]. And those who are pregnant, their term, the conclusion of their prescribed [waiting] period if divorced or if their spouses be dead, shall be when they deliver. And whoever fears God, He will make matters ease for him, in this world and in the Hereafter.

          Tafsir Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahid
          (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) [65:4]. Said Muqatil: “When the verse (Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart…), Kallad ibn al-Nu‘man ibn Qays al-Ansari said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is the waiting period of the woman who does not menstruate and the woman who has not menstruated yet? And what is the waiting period of the pregnant woman?’ And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse”. Abu Ishaq al-Muqri’ informed us Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdun> Makki ibn ‘Abdan Abu’l-Azhar Asbat ibn Muhammad Mutarrif Abu ‘Uthman ‘Amr ibn Salim who said: “When the waiting period for divorced and widowed women was mentioned in Surah al-Baqarah, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, some women of Medina are saying: there are other women who have not been mentioned!’ He asked him: ‘And who are they?’ He said: ‘Those WHO ARE TOO YOUNG [such that they have not started menstruating yet], those who are too old [whose menstruation has stopped] and those who are pregnant’. And so this verse (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) was revealed”.

          Islamic Websitehttp://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/12667
          “And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise…”

          Tafsir ibn Kathir (Read at your own leisure)
          http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=65&tid=54223

          AIN’T GONNA FOLLOW NO CHILD MOLESTER

          They try to tell me my religion is wrong

          They try to tell me to follow Islam

          They said their prophet was a righteous dude

          But I found out none of their words were true

          I read the Quran and I read the hadith

          And the sickness of Muhammad was apparent to me

          He justified perversion in the name of Allah

          When he married a girl too young for a bra

          II

          She was playing with dolls when the prophet came

          Her childhood was stolen in Allah’s name

          Aisha was nine when he took her to bed

          Don’t tell me that fool’s not sick in the head

          Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.

          Ain’t gonna follow no child molester,

          Islam is not for me.

          Islam is not for me.

          III

          The sickness of the Islamic mind

          Has caused the Mullahs to be blind

          To justify their prophet they would justify sin

          So the sins of the prophet are repeated again

          All over the world in Islamic states

          9 year old girls suffer cruel fate

          Sold into marriage to twisted men

          And Aisha’s sad story is repeated again

          IV

          Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.

          Ain’t gonna follow no child molester,

          Islam is not for me.

          Islam is not for me.

          Do you care about women all over the world?

          Do you care about those little girls?

          Then stand up and fight for human rights

          Speak out against the laws of Islam

          V

          Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.

          Ain’t gonna follow no child molester,

          Islam is not for me.

          Islam is not for me.

          Islam is not for me.

          MUSLIM WOMEN ARE SPECIAL

          Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah’s Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o ‘Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle ?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you.

          A cautious sensible man could be led astray by you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” YES! He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence.
          Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” YES!.
          He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.” Bukhari (Book #6, Hadith #301)

          MUSLIM WOMEN ARE DOGS, PIGS,

          Allah hated women with a passion. He despised all female homo sapiens both Muslim and infidel women. With such a deep hatred and loathing I don’t even know why he bothered to create Eve. Being God, why didn’t he just create man with both a penis and vagina and reproductive organs. Following are the immoral, depraved, insane, despicable LAWS of an immoral, depraved, despicable insane GOD.
          No rational, normal person can believe in such a God of hate.
          Muhammad described women as “unclean” creatures. Muhammad says, “3 things corrupt prayer: Women, dogs, and donkeys.” There are several other sayings in which Muhammad reduced women to the level of an animal. “Woman is a vile beast,” and “I think that women were created for nothing but evil.”

          The right to be treated as a dog, a pig, a monkey, or an ass
          Sahih Bukhari – 1.9.490, 493, 498 Sahih Muslim – 4.1039;
          Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2155; Mishkat ul-Masabih – vol 2, p.114, Hadis no. 789
          The right of ordinary women to be treated as crows
          Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34

          BABY TILTHS:

          65.4 You can marry little girls who have not yet reached menstruation age.

          Muhammad married Ayesha at age 6 to comply with this aya. He had to restrict himself to thighing before age of 9.

          Thighing is defined by Islamic scholar Khomeini in “Tahrirolvasyleh” fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990 as follows:

          “Thighing is a means for an adult male to enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.”

          The following is from a committee of muslim ulema answering the question:
          “the Prophet, the peace of Allah be upon him, practiced “thighing” of Aisha – the mother of believers – may Allah be pleased with her.”

          SEX AFTER FLOGGING:

          Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 132:
          Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Zam’a:

          The Prophet said, “None of you should flog his wife as he flogs a slave and then have sexual intercourse with her in the last part of the day.”
          Ideally when you flog one of your wives, let her recuperate that day and sleep with your other wives or your slave girls

          HOW TO BEAT YOUR WIFE TO AVOID BREAKING HER BONES

          Islamic way of beating or flogging wives is striking at their padded areas to avoid breaking any bones. Here is an example how considerate our prophet was when he beat his wives on their padded parts.

          Muslim Book 004, Number 2127:
          Ayesha narrated. “He struck me on the chest which caused me pain.”
          (However if your wife is breast feeding, prefer to strike on her buttocks

          CIRCUMCISION OF WOMEN:

          It was customary to cut the external female genitalia completely when circumcising women. The Prophet instructed to do cutting in moderation. That showed his kindness and concern for women’s pleasure in love making.

          Sunan Abu Dawud B 41, N5251:

          Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah:

          A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.

          ONE NIGHT SEX PERKS FOR PROPHET:

          33.50 Mohammed, any woman who offered herself to you is halal for you.
          Obligation to practice this aya made logistics a big problem for Muhammad who already had nine wives, his concubines, and a regular supply of captured women from jihadi raids. But Allah’s wishes had to be carried out.
          Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 62, Number 24:
          A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I have come to give you myself.

          Bukhari,V 7, B 62, N 48:
          Narrated Hisham’s father:
          Khaula bint Hakim was one of those ladies who presented themselves to the Prophet. ‘Aisha said, “Doesn’t a lady feel ashamed for presenting herself to a man?”

          Bukhari,V 7, B 62, N 53:
          Narrated Thabit Al-Banani:
          “A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and presented herself to him, saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle, have you any need for me?’ “Thereupon Anas’s daughter said, “What a shameless lady she was! Shame! Shame!” Anas said, “She was better than you; she had a liking for the Prophet.

          ISLAM & THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN

          These are called in Islam the “golden rights and provisions for all Muslim women:”
          The right to be treated as diseased and as sex toys
          The Qur’an – 2:222; Sahahi Bukhari -3.31.172
          The right to be used as a sowing field
          The Qur’an – 2:223
          The right to enjoy another husband after the third divorce from the previous husband (hilla marriage)
          The Qur’an – 2:230; Sahih Bukhari – 8.73.107; Sahih Bukhari – 7.63.187
          The right to engage in Islamic prostitution through Mut’a marriage
          The Qur’an – 4:24;Sahih Bukhari – 8.3246, 3247, 3248;
          Sahih Muslim – 8:3252, 8:3253, 8:3258
          The right to be treated as impure or as a drunkard
          The Qur’an – 4:32; The Qur’an – 16:92
          To uphold the inalienable superiority of men over women and the right to be beaten by husbands—no questions asked
          The Qur’an – 16:92; Sunaan Abu Dawad – 11.2142; Abdur Rahman – 1 DOI, the recognized authority on Sharia in his book, Women in Society”
          To uphold the right of the husband to have four wives at any time and any number sex-slaves for all times; in case of objection by any wife, the husband can beat her
          The Qur’an – 4:3; Sunan Abu Dawad – 30.2.13; The Qur’an – 23:5-6, 70:29-30
          The right to be treated as a dog, a pig, a monkey, or an ass
          Sahih Bukhari – 1.9.490, 493, 498 Sahih Muslim – 4.1039;
          Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2155; Mishkat ul-Masabih – vol 2, p.114, Hadis no. 789
          The right of a Muslimah to be stupid and to become a servant
          Sahih Bukhari – 1.6.301; Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34
          Muslim women forfeit their right to travel alone
          Sahih Bukhari – 2.20.192, 193; Sahih Bukhari – 3.29.85, 4.52.250

          Women must keep their sexual organs ready at all times for the husband to enjoy them unhindered at any time—night or day
          Sahih Bukhari – 4.54.460, 7.62.81; Sahih Muslim – 8.3367, 3368;
          Ghazali – vol 2, p. 43
          Women have the right to breast-feed an unrelated bearded man to make him haram (forbidden to her in marriage)
          Sahih Muslim – 8.3424, 3425, 3426, 3427, 3428
          Women are slaves (prisoners) and men are their masters (owners)
          Ghazali – vol 2, p. 33; Hedaya – p. 47
          Islamic marriage is about sex for money (prostitution)
          Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2105, 2.11,2106; Milik’s Muwatta – 28.4.12;
          Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2126; Hedaya – p. 44
          If a woman wishes to get rid of her tyrannical husband she must refund the ‘sex money’ (Mahr) she received from him during marriage
          Sahih Muslim – 7.63.197, 198, 199; Sunaan Abu Dawud – 12,2220;
          Malik’s Muwatta – 29.10.32
          Women have the right to undergo female circumcision (FGM)
          Sunaan Abu Dawud – 41.5251
          Women are slaves and infidels—they are not fit to join the moral police force
          Ghazali – vol 2, p.186
          A husband has the right to have sex with his wife by force (the right to rape)
          Hedaya – p. 141
          Women are cheap—you can have sex with a woman by simply teaching her how to recite a few verses from the Qur’an
          Sahih Buhkari – 6.61.547, 548; Ghazali – vol 2, 31
          Barren women should be confined at home—they are fit only to be in the house-prison
          Ghazali – vol 2, p. 24; Sunaan Abu Dawud – 3.29.3911
          A woman has no say when her husband decides to add more wives in his harem; she can’t even ask her husband to divorce her
          Sahih Bukhari – p. 141
          A wife has the right to decorate her husband when he goes out to have sex with his other wives
          Sahih Bukhari – 1.5.270
          A woman should never be selected or elected as a ruler
          Sahih Bukhari – 5.59.709; Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34
          Muslim women uphold the right of Islamic Jihadists to rape captive women right in front of their vanquished husbands
          The Qur’an – 4:24; Sahih Muslim – 8.3371, 3373, 3374, 3377;
          Sunaan Abu Dawud – 2.11.2150, 8.77.598
          Women are devils; they are as dirty and filthy as private parts are
          Sahih Muslim – 8.3240, 3242; Ghazali – vol 2, p. 26, vol 2, p. 43
          Fear the company of women—they bring bad luck
          Sahih Bukhari – 7.62.30, 31; Bukhari – 4.52.110, 111;
          Malik’s Muwatta – 54.821, 22; Sahih Muslim – 36.6603. 6604;
          Ghazali – vol 3, p. 86, 87
          Women have very little intelligence—their own testimony is inadmissible in rape cases; in other matters their testimony is half to that of a man
          The Qur’an – 4:14, 2:282; Sunaan Abu Dawud – 3.40.4662
          Women are less human—they get one-third of blood money, no booty (for Jihad) for them
          Malik’s Muwatta – 43.64b; Sahih Muslim – 19.4458
          Women are worse than dead persons—they cannot follow a bier
          Sahih Muslim – 4.2039
          Men should always oppose women
          Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34
          Women are easily expendable—a divorced woman gets no maintenance or alimony from her ex-husband
          Sahih Muslim – 9.3519, 3522
          A woman has the right to stay at home solely to provide sex to her husband
          Hedaya – p. 54
          A woman becomes a harlot when she wears perfume
          Mishkat al-Masabih – vol 2, p. 255

          YOU TUBE

          Pedophilia in Islam , thighing children , fondling underage girls pedophilia – whole film

          What is “thighing”?

          **Thighing**Mufakhathat

          Thighing of Female Children In Islam
          by Thomas Ahmed•
          Child Bride in Islam.

          Sure 65:4 Mufa’ Khathat – thighing ISLAM

          by Merauder2000•
          wwwislamqacom wwwislamqacom wwwaltafsircom schnellmannorg

          Muhammad Aisha Pedophile Child Rape Muslim Marriage Law 1 Muhaddithorg
          by AwesomeIslam•

          SHARIA LAW:

          A FATHER CANNOT BE EXECUTED FOR MURDERING HIS WIVES OR CHILDREN.

          In Saudi Arabia, the human rights group “Women to Drive” is protesting the light sentence given a Muslim preacher for the torture, rape and murder of his five-year old daughter, on suspicion that she was not a virgin. According to various reports, it is said that according to sharia law, a father cannot be executed for murdering his children, nor a husband for murdering his wives.

          The following ruling is promulgated by orthodox Sunni Islam; a parent is “not subject to retaliation” (or, retribution) “for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.” Jihad Watch attributes the worldwide epidemic in honor killings to the spread of Muslims worldwide. According to some Islamic scholars, honor killings predate all the major contemporary religions of the world, and are part of the common primitive, tribal and patriarchal prehistory of mankind.

          However, international surveys indicate that many Muslims believe their religion sanctions honor killings. The recent ruling from Saudi Arabia indicates honor killing continues to be countenanced by Muslim jurists in majority Muslim countries. As to the meaning of “blood money,” it pertains to paying for the economic loss suffered by the victim or next of kin.

          According to the Talmud, in the case of a loss due to simple negligence, it is equal to three components: (A) medical expenses, (B) the loss of wages, and (C) the amount a person of similar status would pay to avoid the pain and suffering. In the case of a loss due to criminal negligence short of premeditated murder, the law of retribution (“eye for an eye”) pertains, although the victim could exercise mercy and accept only blood money. In the case of premeditated murder, there can be no mercy. That there is a distinction between simple negligence (such as an industrial accident) and criminal negligence is made clear in Deuteronomy Chapter 19.

          The law of retribution is thus confined to crimes as opposed to mere torts; and even in the case of criminal negligence, mercy might be exercised. While we are on the subject of “eye for an eye,” I will comment briefly of what Jesus had to say. He said “whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matthew 5:39) Being hit on the right check is to be hit with the left or weak hand of the offender. It’s a Jewish idiom for being insulted. Jesus said do not return insult for insult, but see if an actual harm follows. In my Army days, we put it this way, don’t get into a pissing contest. (Somehow, I don’t think Jesus would put it that way.) Why even school children know this. They say, “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.”

          Getting back to the law retribution, we could say that a parent is presumed to love his children and, so, in the absence of strong evidence, will only be held liable for blood money when responsible for the death of a child. If sharia law merely establishes a refutable presumption, it would make sense. Indeed, if you think that both revelation and reason are witnesses to the truth, reason would guide your interpretation of the Koran. This is how conservative Jews approach the Bible. We say you have to realize the texts come from a culture and literary style where allegory, exaggeration, sarcasm and humor are often employed, even where there are degrees of “no.” But, in Islam, the orthodox have been in charge for a long time now, and they almost insist that sharia law is to be followed even if it contradicts reason. I will conclude with a consideration of how faithful the Islamic scholars are the principle of restitution. As a forensic economist, I have numerous times offered my expert opinion to courts of law dealing with economic loss calculation. To be sure, I would adjust my calculation according to any specific information regarding the earnings potential or life expectancy of a particular person. In the absence of such information, I can only go by averages. Considering the per capita GDP of Saudi Arabia ($25,000), her work life expectancy (from 21 to 62), and the time value of money (at 6%), the economic loss suffered by the girl’s death is approximately $400,000. Not the puny amount $50,000 that has been reported! Those who claim they are doing justice are liars. And that they claim to do justice in the Name of God, they are damn liars! The man who killed this girl should, according to sharia law, be sold into slavery if he cannot pay $400,000, even if it accepted that he killed the girl out of a simple negligence. But, it is obvious that more than simple negligence was involved.

          Saudi Arabia’s Royal Family has intervened in the case of a leading cleric who raped and tortured his five-year-old daughter to death, causing outrage at home and abroad.
          Lama al-Ghamdi was admitted to hospital in the town of Hotat Bani Tamim in November with a crushed skull, broken back and shattered ribs. Social workers said that she had been repeatedly raped and her body burnt.

          REMEMBER Lama al-Ghamdi

          Lama al-Ghamdi a five year old child, was raped & tortured to death by her celebrity cleric father Fayhan al-Ghamdi.
          Lama al-Ghamdi’s back was broken and she had been raped and burned. She died in October from her injuries after seven months in hospital. Her father Fayhan al-Ghamdi, a prominent Islamist preacher, admitted beating her. Her mother Syeda Mohammed Ali, has said she will bring a case against her ex-husband.

          5 Feb 2013

          REMEMBER Lama al-Ghamdi, the 5 year old Saudi child who was RAPED & MURDERED by her MUSLIM PREACHER father. He paid BLOOD MONEY & WALKED FREE.

          • LuckybinRaj, you said : “Would God – who has the entire universe to worry about – be
            bothered to send verse after verse covering for Mohammed’s sexual misdeeds? Would God send verses allowing Mohammed to bed any “believing woman who offers herself”, and at the same time threaten Mohammed’s wives with dire consequences if they indulged in adultery? What kind of “God” is this Allah, anyway? The answer is – Allah is not God. Allah is just the ventriloquist dummy of a charlatan named Mohammed”, correct??

            Show us only ONE verse from the Quran which show his sexual misdeeds.

            A challenge to you!!!

          • EDUCATING MOHAMMEDANS ABOUT THEIR CULT OF DEATH:

            MUHAMMAD’S ALLAH PLAYS THE PIMP

            Once, Muhammad entered his wife Hafsa’s room for some reason. Hafsa was not there, but he found her lovely young maid Maria instead.

            He grabbed her and jumped into the bed with her for a quickie.
            But the quickie was not quick enough and Hafsa walked in and started yelling…
            “In my house, on my bed !!!”
            http://hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&BookID=33&TOCID=2939

            To quieten her down and to please her, he promised never to touch her maid again.
            However, Allah did not approve of this sacrifice and revealed the following ayas (verses):

            “O thou prophet! wherefore dost thou prohibit what God has made lawful to thee (slave girl Maria); craving to please thy wives (Hafsa)? …God has allowed you to expiate your oaths. (go sleep with Hafsa’s maid)” Qur’an, 66:1-2

            “Verily, your Lord (Allah) is ever quick to fulfill your whims and desires” Aisha

            Sura 66
            Sura 66 At-Tahrim (Banning, Prohibition)
            1
            O Prophet! Why holdest thou to be forbidden that which Allah has made lawful to thee? Thou seekest to please thy consorts. But Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
            2
            Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases): and Allah is your Protector, and He is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom.
            3
            When the Prophet disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his consorts, and she then divulged it (to another), and Allah made it known to him, he confirmed part thereof and repudiated a part. Then when he told her thereof, she said, “Who told thee this? “He said, “He told me Who knows and is well-acquainted (with all things).”
            4
            If ye two turn in repentance to Him, your hearts are indeed so inclined; But if ye back up each other against him, truly Allah is his Protector, and Gabriel, and (every) righteous one among those who believe,- and furthermore, the angels – will back (him) up.
            5
            It may be, if he divorced you (all), that Allah will give him in exchange consorts better than you,- who submit (their wills), who believe, who are devout, who turn to Allah in repentance, who worship (in humility), who travel (for Faith) and fast,- previously married or virgins.
            6
            O ye who believe! save yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is Men and Stones, over which are (appointed) angels stern (and) severe, who flinch not (from executing) the Commands they receive from Allah, but do (precisely) what they are commanded.
            7
            (They will say), “O ye Unbelievers! Make no excuses this Day! Ye are being but requited for all that ye did!”
            8
            O ye who believe! Turn to Allah with sincere repentance: In the hope that your Lord will remove from you your ills and admit you to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow,- the Day that Allah will not permit to be humiliated the Prophet and those who believe with him. Their Light will run forward before them and by their right hands, while they say, “Our Lord! Perfect our Light for us, and grant us Forgiveness: for Thou hast power over all things.”
            9
            O Prophet! Strive hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge (indeed).
            10
            Allah sets forth, for an example to the Unbelievers, the wife of Noah and the wife of Lut: they were (respectively) under two of our righteous servants, but they were false to their (husbands), and they profited nothing before Allah on their account, but were told: “Enter ye the Fire along with (others) that enter!”
            11
            And Allah sets forth, as an example to those who believe the wife of Pharaoh: Behold she said: “O my Lord! Build for me, in nearness to Thee, a mansion in the Garden, and save me from Pharaoh and his doings, and save me from those that do wrong”;
            12
            And Mary the daughter of ‘Imran, who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into (her body) of Our spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His Revelations, and was one of the devout (servants).
            Introduction
            This is one of the most fascinating Suras in the entire Qur’an. In 12 verses, Muhammad violates a deal that he made with his wives, makes and breaks an oath, and receives a “revelation” from Allah just in time to get him out of trouble.
            Period of Revelation
            This Sura is considered, by most commentators, as Medinan.
            History
            What is happening in this Sura? Syed Maududi talks around, but does not address, the issues of this Sura in his commentary – and for good reasons! Fortunately, Al-Baizâwi, (Commentary Vol.II, pp. 340-341), gives an explanation of this passage:
            “It is related that Mohammed was alone in company with Mary in Ayshah’s or Hafsah’s turn. Hafsah became aware of that and therefore scolded him about it. He declared he had taken an oath, but admitted his unlawful behaviour, therefore these verses descended.” (“Mizanu’l Haqq, page 330). (The “Mishkat” names Zainab instead of Hafsah – “Mishkat” II, pages 680-681).
            The complete story is told in the Rauzatu’r Safâ , Vol. II, page 188):
            “Mary (the Copt) was a Christian slave given to Mohammed 7 A.H. (628 A.D.) by the Governor of Egypt, Elmokaukas. Her sister, Shereena was also given at the same time. Mohammed became intimate with Mary and she bore him Ibrahim, who died in 10 A.H. The intimacy took place in the home and bed of his wife Hafsah (daughter of Umar) who was absent at that moment and on the day which was either her or Ayshah’s turn. When Hafsah found this out and questioned him he promised (on oath) not to touch Mary again if she would keep this a secret, and promised that Umar and Abu-Bakr should be his successors. Hafsah, however, told Ayshah about this event, and for a full month Mohammed had no dealings with any of his wives, living with Mary alone.” During that period this “revelation” was given. (“Der Koran”, translated by Ludwig Ullman, Footnote 2 of Sura 66:1-2, page 456).
            Another source tells us:
            As she waited for them to come out, her jealousy broke all bounds. When, finally, Mariyah left the quarters and Hafsah entered, she said to the Prophet: “I have seen who was here. By God, that was an insult to me. You would not have dared to do that if I amounted to anything at all in your eyes”. At the moment Muhammad realized that such deep-lying jealousy might even move Hafsah to broadcast what she had seen among the other wives. In an attempt to please her, Muhammad promised that he would not go unto Mariyah if she would only refrain from broadcasting what she had seen. (Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, p. 436).
            Muhammad’s wives had to take revolving “turns” to be with their husband. Muhammad ignored his own system and had sexual relations with Mary the Copt on a day that was either Hafsah’s or Aishah’s “turn”. Hafsah discovered Muhammad’s breach of protocol and became upset. Muhammad promised her that he would not have sexual relations with Mary, probably out of fear that Hafsah would tell his favorite wife, Aishah – whom he married when she was a child of about 9 years of age.
            Hafsah and Aishah were, according to the traditions, often competitors for Muhammad’s attention, and Hafsah told Aishah the entire sordid story. We can only imagine the anger of Aishah and the other wives of Muhammad. In retaliation, Muhammad boycotted the other wives, in respect to his sexual relations with them, and co-habituated exclusively with Mary. After one month, we are told by the traditions and the Qur’an that Allah intervened on Muhammad’s behalf.
            If we believe the testimony of the Qur’an, Allah tells Muhammad that it is acceptable for him to break his own oaths! Imagine Almighty God promoting and commending a breach of an oath made by Muhammad, especially under such circumstances as the satiation of Muhammad’s carnal desires!
            But wait, things become much worse! Allah warns Muhammad’s wives against conspiring against the “Prophet”. If they do not heed this warning, they will face Almighty God, the Archangel Gabriel and all of the angels, as well as all of the righteous. What chance would these poor women have against such opposition?
            Another threat against the wives of Muhammad is that Almighty God, in complete disregard to His revelations in earlier scriptures against divorce, will permit Muhammad to divorce his wives AND find prettier wives for him! But the intimidation does not end with the threats of divorce! God threatens the wives of Muhammad AND their families with the eternal fires of Hell! After Muhammad’s lies and betrayal, his wives are commanded to repent (for what I am honestly not sure) and Muhammad is exhorted to fight against the unbelievers. We are told that Almighty God then gave the wives of Muhammad “positive role models” of female behavior, including Mary the mother of Jesus who is incorrectly called the daughter of Imran! But who cares about the details at a time like this?
            Theology
            Breaking Oaths
            In the Old and New Testaments, God said that the making and taking of oaths was a very serious matter and was not to be entered into lightly. However, if we believe the Qur’an, God allowed Muhammad to break his own oaths for his own convenience to satisfy his own desires! Why would God change his eternal will and his eternal word to fulfill the desires of one man?
            The Issue of Almighty God Interfering with Muhammad’s Domestic Problems
            Another difficulty with this Sura is the fact that God rushes head on into Muhammad’s domestic disputes in order to intervene on Muhammad’s behalf! If we believe the Muslim argument that the Qur’an is the eternal, uncreated word of Almighty God, then why would God record these threats for all of eternity? What moral lesson are we to learn from all of this? Clearly these “revelations” were “received” by Muhammad so that he could excuse himself from the consequences of his own moral weaknesses. I can understand why the people in Muhammad’s day accepted this nonsense without question – they feared for their lives. I cannot understand why people accept such hypocrisy today as the alleged words of an Almighty and All-Righteous God!
            THE PERFECT MUSLIM
            And surely thou hast sublime morals
            (Surat Al-Qalam 68:4).

            Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar
            (Surat Al-Ahzab 33:21).

            Muslims believe that the Koran is the eternal word/laws of god to acts as a divine guidance for mankind about how to live a moral, righteous life. Prophet Muhammad, the highest perfection of human life and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct in Islamic belief, emulated the guidance of Allah perfectly.

            Muhammad fantasized about baby Aisha before soliciting her from her father

            Sahih Bukhari 9.140 Narrated ‘Aisha:

            Allah’s apostle said to me, “you were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, ‘uncover (her),’ and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), ‘if this is from Allah, then it must happen.

            Sahih al-Bukhari, volume 7, book 62, number 17 Narrated jabir bin ‘abdullah:

            When I got married, Allah’s apostle said to me, “what type of lady have you married?” I replied, “I have married a matron.” he said, “why, don’t you have a liking for the virgins and for fondling them?” Jabir also said: Allah’s apostle said, “why didn’t you marry a young girl so that you might play with her and she with you?”

            Muhammad, 50, marries baby Aisha at age 6

            Sahih Bukhari volume 5, book 58, number 234

            Narrated Aisha: the prophet engaged (married) me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, um ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me.

            …….she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some ansari women who said, “best wishes and Allah’s blessing and a good luck.” then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

            Bukhari vol 8, bk 73, no 151

            Narrated ‘Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the prophet, & my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the prophet would call them to join & play with me. (the playing with the dolls & similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-bari page 143, vol.13)

            PREPUBESCENT BRIDES

            Quran 65.4 “and those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘iddah (prescribed divorce period), if you have doubts (about their p The most striking thing about his statement, however, was that it was not an apology; it was a logical, proud justification for preserving the death penalty as a punishment for apostasy. Al-Qaradawi sounded matter-of-fact, indicating no moral conflict, nor even hesitation, about this policy in Islam. On the contrary, he asserted the legitimacy of Islamic laws in relying on vigilante street justice through fear, intimidation, torture & murder against any person who might dare to leave Islam.
            eriods), is three months, and for those who have no courses [(i.e. They are still immature) their ‘iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise, except in case of death] .

            And for those who are pregnant (whether they are divorced or their husbands are dead), their ‘iddah (prescribed period) is until they deliver (their burdens) (give birth) and whosoever fears Allah and keeps his duty to him, he will make his matter easy for him.”

            Sura (65:4) lays down rules for divorce and sets the prescribed period for divorce. It clearly says, Muslim men can marry (and divorce) little girls who have not yet reached menstruation age. This means that Muslim men were allowed to marry baby girls. This is the eternal word of god. This is an eternal law of Allah. All Muslims must believe in this teaching. Otherwise, they are no longer Muslims but apostates of Islam.

            HOW TO THIGH
            Now let us see how it is practiced on a female child & who began this evil practice. According to an official Fatwa issued in Saudi Arabia, the prophet Muhammad began to practice thighing his child-bride, Aisha when she was 6 years old until she reached 9 years of age (Fatwa No. 31409). The hadith, which was quoted earlier, mentioned the prophet Muhammad started performing literal sex with Aisha ONLY when she reached the age of 9 (Sahih al-Bukhari, book 62, hadith No. 89).

            Muslim scholars collectively agree, a child becomes an adult, available for sexual intercourse as soon as she reaches the age of nine. Likewise, the Shari’a allows any of the faithful to marry a six-year-old child.
            According to the fatwa, the prophet Muhammad could not have sex with his fiancée, Aisha when she was six due to her small size & age. However, the fatwa said that at age six, he would put his penis between her thighs and massage it gently because he did not want to harm her.

            Imagine a man of 51 removing the clothes of a 6-year-old girl and slipping his erect penis between her thighs, rubbing her until he ejaculated and his semen ran down her thighs. To this day, this is considered a benevolent act on the part of the adult male “not wanting to harm her.” What harm could be inflicted upon a young girl mentally and emotionally if not a grown man showing her his penis and stripping her of her clothes and rubbing his male organ between her legs?

            Of course the twisted mind that does such an evil to a female child, would not hesitate to ejaculate on her body. And if this sexually perverted evil frame of mind committed such an act upon a child, the pedophile would not stop at ejaculating on her. His evil desire would go further and rape the child before she was a mature adult. This is exactly what Muhammad did to Aisha when she was yet a child of 9.

            Before she reached puberty, he began to have sex with her. Let us see what the fatwa said about the prophet of Islam and his child-bride, Aisha.“Praise be to Allah and peace be upon the one after whom there is no [further] prophet. After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwas (religious decrees) reviewed the question presented to the grand Mufti Abu Abdullah Muhammad Al-Shamari, with reference number 1809 issued on 3/8/1421(Islamic calendar).

            The inquirer asked the following:‘It has become wide spread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufakhathat of the children (mufakhathat literally translated means “placing between the thighs of children” which means placing the male erected penis between the thighs of a child). What is the opinion of scholars knowing full well that the prophet, the peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, also practiced the “thighing” of Aisha – the mother of believers ?’
            After the committee studied the issue, they gave the following reply: ‘It has not been the practice of the Muslims throughout the centuries to resort to this unlawful practice that has come to our countries from pornographic movies that the kofar (infidels) and enemies of Islam send. As for the Prophet, peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, thighing his fiancée Aisha. She was six years of age and he could not have intercourse with her due to her small age.

            That is why the prophet peace and prayers of Allah be upon him placed his penis between her thighs and massaged it lightly, as the apostle of Allah had control of his penis not like other believers’” (Fatwa No. 31409).

            Thighing of children is practiced in many Arab and Muslim countries, notably in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, and the Gulf countries. Also evil practices like altamatu’a bil almuka’aba (pleasure from sexual contact with her breasts), altamatu’a bil alsagirah (pleasure from sexual contact with a baby girl), altamatu’a bil alradi’ah, (pleasure from sexual contact with a suckling female infant), (Reported by Baharini Women’s Rights Activist, Ghada Jamshir)

            Mohammed heard one of his wives was leaving him, so he rushed home where he found her on the carpet in front of the tent with her belongings; he sat down beside her & said, “I heard you were planning to leave me?”
            She replied, “Yes, I heard your other wives saying, you were a pedophile!”
            Mohammed thinks for a minute or so & then responds,
            “that’s a mighty big word for a 6 year old child.”

            YOU TUBE
            Pedophilia in Islam , thighing children , fondling underage girls pedophilia – whole film

            by Hoplit300•

            What is “thighing”?

            by neotropic9•

            **Thighing**Mufakhathat

            by bigtone1979Taiwan•

            Thighing of Female Children In Islam
            by Thomas Ahmed•
            Child Bride in Islam.

            Sure 65:4 Mufa’ Khathat – thighing ISLAM

            by Merauder2000•
            wwwislamqacom wwwislamqacom wwwaltafsircom schnellmannorg

            Muhammad Aisha Pedophile Child Rape Muslim Marriage Law 1 Muhaddithorg
            by AwesomeIslam•

            The Qur’an and Marrying Little Girls

            Islam does allow you to marry pre-menstruating girls. The following verse is from At-Talaq (or Divorce). Islam’s main concern during a divorce is knowing who the father is (in case of a pregnancy). The waiting period is known as iddah.

            65.4 Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if you have any doubts, is three months, AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NO COURSES (it is the same): for those who are pregnant, their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make things easy for them.

            Tafsir al-Jalalayn (Commentary)
            And [as for] those of your women who (read allā’ī or allā’i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] those who have NOT YET MENSTRUATED, because of their YOUNG AGE, their period shall [also] be three months — both cases apply to other than those whose spouses have died; for these [latter] their period is prescribed in the verse: they shall wait by themselves for four months and ten [days] [Q. 2:234]. And those who are pregnant, their term, the conclusion of their prescribed [waiting] period if divorced or if their spouses be dead, shall be when they deliver. And whoever fears God, He will make matters ease for him, in this world and in the Hereafter.

            Tafsir Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahid
            (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) [65:4]. Said Muqatil: “When the verse (Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart…), Kallad ibn al-Nu‘man ibn Qays al-Ansari said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is the waiting period of the woman who does not menstruate and the woman who has not menstruated yet? And what is the waiting period of the pregnant woman?’ And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse”. Abu Ishaq al-Muqri’ informed us Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdun> Makki ibn ‘Abdan Abu’l-Azhar Asbat ibn Muhammad Mutarrif Abu ‘Uthman ‘Amr ibn Salim who said: “When the waiting period for divorced and widowed women was mentioned in Surah al-Baqarah, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, some women of Medina are saying: there are other women who have not been mentioned!’ He asked him: ‘And who are they?’ He said: ‘Those WHO ARE TOO YOUNG [such that they have not started menstruating yet], those who are too old [whose menstruation has stopped] and those who are pregnant’. And so this verse (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) was revealed”.

            Islamic Websitehttp://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/12667
            “And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise…”

            Tafsir ibn Kathir (Read at your own leisure)
            http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=65&tid=54223

            SHARIA LAW:

            A FATHER CANNOT BE EXECUTED FOR MURDERING HIS WIVES OR CHILDREN.
            In Saudi Arabia, the human rights group “Women to Drive” is protesting the light sentence given a Muslim preacher for the torture, rape and murder of his five-year old daughter, on suspicion that she was not a virgin. According to various reports, it is said that according to sharia law, a father cannot be executed for murdering his children, nor a husband for murdering his wives.

            The following ruling is promulgated by orthodox Sunni Islam; a parent is “not subject to retaliation” (or, retribution) “for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.” Jihad Watch attributes the worldwide epidemic in honor killings to the spread of Muslims worldwide. According to some Islamic scholars, honor killings predate all the major contemporary religions of the world, and are part of the common primitive, tribal and patriarchal prehistory of mankind.

            However, international surveys indicate that many Muslims believe their religion sanctions honor killings. The recent ruling from Saudi Arabia indicates honor killing continues to be countenanced by Muslim jurists in majority Muslim countries. As to the meaning of “blood money,” it pertains to paying for the economic loss suffered by the victim or next of kin.

            According to the Talmud, in the case of a loss due to simple negligence, it is equal to three components: (A) medical expenses, (B) the loss of wages, and (C) the amount a person of similar status would pay to avoid the pain and suffering. In the case of a loss due to criminal negligence short of premeditated murder, the law of retribution (“eye for an eye”) pertains, although the victim could exercise mercy and accept only blood money. In the case of premeditated murder, there can be no mercy. That there is a distinction between simple negligence (such as an industrial accident) and criminal negligence is made clear in Deuteronomy Chapter 19.

            The law of retribution is thus confined to crimes as opposed to mere torts; and even in the case of criminal negligence, mercy might be exercised. While we are on the subject of “eye for an eye,” I will comment briefly of what Jesus had to say. He said “whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matthew 5:39) Being hit on the right check is to be hit with the left or weak hand of the offender. It’s a Jewish idiom for being insulted. Jesus said do not return insult for insult, but see if an actual harm follows. In my Army days, we put it this way, don’t get into a pissing contest. (Somehow, I don’t think Jesus would put it that way.) Why even school children know this. They say, “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.”

            Getting back to the law retribution, we could say that a parent is presumed to love his children and, so, in the absence of strong evidence, will only be held liable for blood money when responsible for the death of a child. If sharia law merely establishes a refutable presumption, it would make sense. Indeed, if you think that both revelation and reason are witnesses to the truth, reason would guide your interpretation of the Koran. This is how conservative Jews approach the Bible. We say you have to realize the texts come from a culture and literary style where allegory, exaggeration, sarcasm and humor are often employed, even where there are degrees of “no.” But, in Islam, the orthodox have been in charge for a long time now, and they almost insist that sharia law is to be followed even if it contradicts reason. I will conclude with a consideration of how faithful the Islamic scholars are the principle of restitution. As a forensic economist, I have numerous times offered my expert opinion to courts of law dealing with economic loss calculation. To be sure, I would adjust my calculation according to any specific information regarding the earnings potential or life expectancy of a particular person. In the absence of such information, I can only go by averages. Considering the per capita GDP of Saudi Arabia ($25,000), her work life expectancy (from 21 to 62), and the time value of money (at 6%), the economic loss suffered by the girl’s death is approximately $400,000. Not the puny amount $50,000 that has been reported! Those who claim they are doing justice are liars. And that they claim to do justice in the Name of God, they are damn liars! The man who killed this girl should, according to sharia law, be sold into slavery if he cannot pay $400,000, even if it accepted that he killed the girl out of a simple negligence. But, it is obvious that more than simple negligence was involved.

            Saudi Arabia’s Royal Family has intervened in the case of a leading cleric who raped and tortured his five-year-old daughter to death, causing outrage at home and abroad.
            Lama al-Ghamdi was admitted to hospital in the town of Hotat Bani Tamim in November with a crushed skull, broken back and shattered ribs. Social workers said that she had been repeatedly raped and her body burnt.

            REMEMBER Lama al-Ghamdi

            Lama al-Ghamdi a five year old child, was raped & tortured to death by her celebrity cleric father Fayhan al-Ghamdi.
            Lama al-Ghamdi’s back was broken and she had been raped and burned. She died in October from her injuries after seven months in hospital. Her father Fayhan al-Ghamdi, a prominent Islamist preacher, admitted beating her. Her mother Syeda Mohammed Ali, has said she will bring a case against her ex-husband.

            5 Feb 2013

            The mother of a five-year-old Saudi girl who was tortured to death by her ‘celebrity cleric’ father, has said she wants him brought to justice.
            Lama al-Ghamdi died in October having suffered multiple injuries including a crushed skull, broken ribs and left arm as well as extensive bruising.
            It has been alleged that she had also been repeatedly raped and that the injuries she sustained from the sexual abuse had been burned.

            Lama suffered multiple injuries including a crushed skull, broken ribs and back, bruising and burns. She had been raped repeatedly and died of her injuries in October
            It was previously reported that her father Fayhan al-Ghamdi, a prominent Islamist preacher who regularly appears on television in Saudi Arabia, had been released after paying ‘blood money’ to his ex-wife, and Lama’s mother, Syeda Mohammed Ali.
            It has now emerged that Lama’s mother is bringing her own case against al-Ghamdi, who is still in prison.

            ‘Even BABIES must wear the burka’: Saudi cleric says newborn girls should have their faces veiled to help ward off sex attacks
            Taliban shooting victim Malala, 15, nominated for Nobel Peace Prize for ‘commitment so threatening to the extremists they tried to kill her’
            Welcome to Bin Laden Land! Pakistan plans £19million amusement park with zoo, mini-golf and ski ramp in town where Al Qaeda leader was killed
            ‘My dear child is dead, and all I want now is justice so I can close my eyes and know she didn’t die in vain,’ Syeda Mohammed Ali, told CNN, adding that her daughter was ‘brutally tortured in the most shocking ways.’
            She is divorced from al-Ghamdi who is remarried and has two more children, and claims the torture happened whilst Lama was in her father’s care in March last year.
            ‘The state needs to even consider taking his two children from him and his wife away because I fear for their lives,’ she added.

            Torture: Saudi preacher Fayhan al-Ghamdi admitting beating his daughter with a cable and is said to have been concerned about his five-year-old daughter’s virginity
            ‘These are not some unfounded accusations, but everything is based on the medical examination by the hospital and the team of physicians who treated Lama when she was first admitted.’
            She said al-Ghamdi had voiced concerns about five-year-old Lama’s virginity.
            According to the Saudi Arabian Human Rights Commission, al-Ghamdi has been imprisoned for the past eight months and that the case is still under review.
            Syeda Mohammed Ali said her ex-husband has admitted to the torture and will face justice when the next hearing in the case takes place in two weeks.
            Activists from the group Women to Drive said the preacher had doubted Lama’s virginity and had her checked up by a medic.
            Randa al-Kaleeb, a social worker from the hospital where Lama was admitted, said the girl’s back was broken and that she had been repeatedly raped and her injuries burned.
            It was reported that al-Ghamdi agreed to pay £31,000 ($50,000) in blood money, a fact denied by Lama’s mother who says al-Ghamdi did not rape Lama.
            Activists say under Islamic laws a father cannot be executed for murdering his children. Husbands can also not be executed for murdering their wives, the group say.
            Three Saudi activists, including Manal al-Sharif, who started the women’s right to drive campaign, have raised objections to the case as it highlights the urgent need for legislation to protect women and children from domestic abuse.
            Manal al-Sharif has launched a campaign on Twitter using the hashtag ‘Ana Lama’, which is translated as I am Lama, calling for an improvement on the judicial treatment of women and children.
            Local reports say public anger in Saudi Arabia is also growing and authorities have said they will create a 24-hour hotline to take calls about child abuse.

        • M & M,

          Ignorance & illiteracy are 2 of the biggest problems in the Middle East & that is why so many people to to the West – to be educated!

          You need to go West M & M.

      • Larry, after quoting the long Hadith-you commented and said, “The Muslims are obviously left in a very difficult position”, correct?

        Answer : It is a fake hadith as sufis are number one innovators of Islam therefore you wasted our time for nothing as the Muslims are NOT obviously left in a very difficult position!!!

        • Larry sorry Lucky, We asked you : Show us only ONE verse from the Quran which shows his sexual misdeeds.

          A challenge to you!!!

          How come you have NOT answered that? Also, we would like to request you to shorten your lengthy comments to enable us go through them, okay?

          • Muhammad passed down revelations from Allah that clearly condoned sleeping with underage girls, even by the standard of puberty. Qur’an (65:4) relates rules for divorce, one of them being that a waiting period of three months is established to determine that the woman is not pregnant. But the same rule applies to “those too who have not had their courses,” meaning girls who have not begun to menstruate. (In our opinion, this would have been a great time for Allah to have said something else instead like, “a real man is one who marries an actual, grown woman”… but that’s just us).

          • Allah managed to hand down quite a few “revelations” that sanctioned Muhammad’s personal pursuit of sex to the doubters around him. Interestingly they have become part of the the eternal, infallible word of the Qur’an, to be memorized by generations of Muslims for whom they have no possible relevance.

            Qur’an (33:37) – “But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them; and Allah’s command shall be performed.” No doubt millions of young Muslims, trying to outdo one another at memorizing the Qur’an, have wondered about what this verse means and why it is there. In fact, this is a “revelation” of convenience that Allah just happened to hand down at a time when Muhammad lusted after his daughter-in-law, Zaynab, – a state of affairs that disturbed local customs. The verse “commands” Muhammad to marry the woman (following her husband’s gracious divorce). As for why this should be part of the eternal word of God…?

            Qur’an (33:50) – “O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you; and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her– specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; ” This is another special command that Muhammad handed down to himself that allows virtually unlimited sex, divinely sanctioned by Allah. One assumes that this “revelation” was meant to assuage some sort of disgruntlement in the community over Muhammad’s hedonism.

            Qur’an (33:51) – “You may put off whom you please of them, and you may take to you whom you please, and whom you desire of those whom you had separated provisionally; no blame attaches to you; this is most proper, so that their eyes may be cool and they may not grieve, and that they should be pleased” This is in reference to a situation in which Muhammad’s wives were grumbling about his preference for sleeping with a slave girl (Mary the Copt) instead of them. Accordingly, Muhammad may sleep with whichever wife (or slave) he wishes without having to hear the others complain… as revealed in Allah’s literal and perfect words to more than a billion Muslims.

            Qur’an (66:1-5) – “O Prophet! Why ban thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives?…” Another remarkable verse of sexual convenience concerns an episode in which Muhammad’s wives were jealous of the attention that he was giving to a Christian slave girl. But, as he pointed out to them, to neglect the sexual availability of his slaves was against Allah’s will for him!

            Qur’an (4:24) – “And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.” Allah even permitted Muhammad and his men to have sex with married slaves, such as those captured in battle.

          • PLUM, YOU ARE ONE STUPID, IGNORANT MOHAMMEDAN:

            THOSE WHO REJECT SUNNAH/HADITH OF MOHAMMED ARE NEITHER SUNNI NOR SHIIA.

            QUEER SEXUALITY & IDENTITY IN QURAN & HADITH

            by Faris Malik

            The Qur’an generally scorns “approaching males in lust”, as well as the castration of males, as the sin of the people of Lot (Qur’an 7:81, 26:165-166, 27:55, 29:28-29).

            7:81 “Indeed you approach males in lust excluding women…”
            Arabic: اِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّنْ دُوْنِ النِّسَآءِ
            26:165-166 “What! Do you approach the males of the worlds and forsake those whom your Lord has created for you for your mates?”
            Arabic: آ تَاْتُوْنَ الذُّكْرانَ مِنَ الْعلَميْنَ \ وَتَذَرُوْنَ مَا خَلَقَ لَكُمْ رَبُّكُمْ مِّنَ اَزْوَاجِكُمْ
            27:55 “Will you indeed approach males in lust excluding women?”
            Arabic: آ ئِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّنْ دُوْنِ النِّسَآءِ
            29:28-29 “Most surely you are guilty of an indecency which none of the nations has ever done before you; What! do you come unto the males and cut the passageways [i.e. vas deferens and/or urethra] and do so in your private clubs?”
            Arabic: اِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الْفَاحِشَةَ مَا سَبَقَكُمْ بِهَا مِنْ اَحَدٍ مِّنْ الْعلَمِيْنَ \ آ ئِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الرِّجَالَ وَتَقْطَعُوْنَ السَّبِيْلَ وَتَاْتُوْنَ فِي نَادِيْكُمْ

            But the Qur’an does not prohibit using, as passive sex partners, the ancient category of men who by nature lacked desire for women, since such men were not considered “male” as a result of their lack of arousal for women. This kind of man is often known as “gay” in modern times, but in the ancient world he was identified as an anatomically whole “natural eunuch.” Although the Qur’an never uses the word eunuch [خَصِي], the hadith and the books of the legal scholars do. Furthermore, the Qur’an recognizes that some men are “without the defining skill of males” (24:31: غَيْرِ اُولىِ الاِرْبَةِ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ) and so, as domestic servants, are allowed to see women naked. This is a reference to natural eunuchs, i.e. innately and exclusively gay (if not totally asexual) men.
            A person had to be indifferent to women’s bodies in order to assume the role as a servant in women’s private space. In the following case from the hadith, a household servant who had been falsely assumed to be indifferent to women due to his being an “effeminate man” [mukhannathمُخَنَّث ] was evicted by the Prophet because he unexpectedly exhibited a lascivious attitude toward women:

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 114:
            What is forbidden concerning the entering upon the wife by those imitating women.
            (162) Umm Salama reported that the Prophet, peace be upon him, was at her house, and in the house there was an effeminate man [مُخَنَّث], and the effeminate man said to the brother of Umm Salama, Abdullah bin Abi Umayya: “If God makes you all conquer Ta’if tomorrow, I will point out to you the daughter of Ghailan, for surely she has four when coming towards you and eight when she turns her back.” Then the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: “This one shall not call upon you (pl.).”
            Muslim, Collection of Authentic Traditions, Book XXVI (Greetings), Chapter 12:
            (5415) Umm Salama reported that she had an effeminate man [مُخَنَّث] in her house. The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, was once at the house when he (the effeminate man) said to the brother of Umm Salama, ‘Abdullah b. Abu Umayya: “If God makes you all conquer Ta’if tomorrow, I will point out to you the daughter of Ghailan, for surely she has four when coming towards you and eight when she turns her back.” The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, heard this and he said: “These ones shall not call upon you.”

            (5416) ‘A’isha reported that an effeminate man [مُخَنَّث] used to call upon the wives of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and they considered him to be “without the defining skill” (of males) [فكانوا يعدونه من غيْر أولى الارة]. The Prophet, peace be upon him, came by one day as he (the effeminate man) was sitting with some of his wives and he was describing a woman, saying: “When she comes towards you, she has four, and when she turns her back, she has eight.” Then the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: “I see this one knows these things! He shall not call upon you (pl.).” She (‘A’isha) said then they began to observe veil from him.

            Note that in ‘A’isha’s telling of the story, she states that the women allowed him into their private rooms because they assumed he lacked “the defining skill”. ‘A’isha actually quotes the Qur’anic verse about men who “lack the defining skill of males,” demonstrating that his presence in the women’s space would have been proper according to the Qur’an if only he had in fact been “without the defining skill.” However, the statement of the effeminate man about the daughter of Ghailan, whatever it meant, indicated to Muhammad that he did not lack the defining skill of males and that, on the contrary, he had an appreciation of women as sexual objects. This disqualifies him as an intimate domestic servant according to the Qur’an as well as the standards of the day. In a system that depends on household servants to be heterosexually indifferent, the main risk is that this indifference can be faked. In other words, an ordinary male can pretend to be an exclusive homosexual in order to gain free access to the private space of women.
            There are other ahadith against cross-dressers in which the Prophet specifically curses “males” who imitate women and women who imitate males, and in which the consequence of their malfeasance is that he “evicts them from the houses.” The specific reference to “males” who do this (as opposed to non-male eunuchs, for example) is made very explicit:

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXXII (Dress), Chapter 61:
            (773) The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, cursed female-impersonators [m.pl.] who are males, and male-impersonators [f.pl.] who are women.
            Arabic: لَعَنَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صلى اللهُ عليهِ وَسلَّمَ المُتَشَبِّهِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ بالنِّساءِ وَالمُتَشَبِّهاتِ مِنَ النِّساءِ بالرِّجالِ
            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXXII (Dress), Chapter 62:
            (774) The Prophet, peace be upon him, cursed the effeminate men [m.pl.] who are males, and the male-pretenders [f.pl.] who are women, and he said: Evict them from your houses, and the Prophet, peace be upon him, evicted such-and-such [m.sg.] and ‘Umar evicted such-and-such [f.sg.].
            Arabic: لَعَنَ النَّبِي صلى اللهُ عليهِ وَسلَّمَ المُخَنَّثِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالمُتَرَجِّلاتِ مِنَ النِّساءِ وَ قَالَ: أخْرِجُوهُمْ مِنْ بُيُوتِكُمْ، قالَ: فأخْرَجَ النَّبِيُّ صلى اللهُ عليهِ وَسلَّمَ فُلانا، وأخْرَجَ عُمَرُ فُلانَةَ

            The words “males” and “women” are obviously emphatic here because the grammar does not really require them to be used, unless it be for emphasis or clarification. Masculine gender is already provided grammatically by the endings on the words “impersonators” and “effeminates,” and feminine gender is already provided in the words “impersonators” and “male-pretenders.” Given the emphasis, the curse is specifically directed only at “males” and “women,” and does not cover non-males who might be female-impersonators (or non-women who might be male-impersonators, if indeed there was a recognition of “non-women”). It’s okay to be a drag queen as long as you are not a straight man posing to gain access to unsuspecting women, or to the wives of unsuspecting husbands.
            The Qur’an recognizes that there are some people who are “ineffectual” [عَقِيم], thus neither male nor female:
            42:49 “To Allah belongs the dominion over the heavens and the earth. It creates what It wills. It prepares for whom It wills females, and It prepares for whom It wills males.
            50 Or It marries together the males and the females, and It makes those whom It wills to be ineffectual. Indeed It is the Knowing, the Powerful.”
            Arabic: للهِ مُلْكُ السَّموتِ وَالْاَرْضِ يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَآءُ يَهَبُ لِمَنْ يَّشَآءُ اِنَاثاً وَّيَهَبُ لِمَنْ يَّشَآءُ الذُّكُوْرَ \ اَوْ يُزَوَّجُهُمْ ذُكْرَاناً وَّاِنَاثاً وَيَجْعَلُ مَنْ يَّشَآءُ عَقِيْماً اِنَّهُ عَلِيْمٌ قَدِيْمٌ
            These last two verses (42:49 and 50) are usually interpreted differently in English translations to say that God bestows daughters or sons on whom It wills and gives some people both sons and daughters. But there are problems with this interpretation, one of which being that the word for causing to marry or pairing up [زَوَّجَ] is used in the second verse. When families have boys and girls, the boys and girls do not usually arrive in pairs! The second problem is that, in Qur’anic verses mentioning males and females together, the males are usually mentioned first, and the females second (e.g., 3:195, 4:12, 4:124, 6:143-144, 16:97, 40:40, 42:50, 49:13, 53:21, 53:45, 75:39, 92:3). This is the only verse in the Qur’an, as far as I know, in which the female is mentioned before the male. If these two verses were talking about sons and daughters, we would expect sons to be mentioned before daughters.
            In this case, the “males first” principle would indicate that the lines are referring to females and males not as offspring, but as counterparts, i.e. objects of desire, for “whom(ever) God wills.” The female objects of desire are mentioned first because they are most typically objects of desire for males. Hence, even this verse is referring to males first, as the most typical “whom(ever)” for whom God prepares females. Yet the use of the word “whom(ever)” leaves it open for females to be objects of desires for other females as well, when God wills, and for males to be love objects for females and other passive non-males. I believe this verse is very neatly and concisely describing the varieties of sexual orientation and gender, which Allah, the All-Knowing and All-Powerful, creates as Allah wishes.
            The ineffectual can include abstinent women as well as men, and in fact “the abstinent ones among women, who do not hope for marriage” [وَالْقَوَاعِدُ مِنَ النِّسآءِ الّتِي لَا يَرْجُوْنَ نِكَاحاً], are permitted to “put off their cover” in Sura 24:60.
            Another intriguing example of a gender variant woman is Jesus’s mother Mary. According to ancient notions about procreation, males were the only ones capable of producing seed. It would be impossible for a woman to give birth to a child, let alone a boy, without receiving seed from a male. In Christianity, this problem is solved by making God the male father of Jesus. According to the Qur’an, however, God does not procreate. This means that the seed that became Jesus came from within Mary. If Mary carried viable seed originating from within her, then by ancient definitions, she was a male, despite appearances to the contrary. So the Qur’an says that, when Mary was born, her mother declared that she was a female baby, but God knew better:

            (Qur’an 3:36) Lord, surely, I have brought it forth a female – and Allah knew best what she brought forth – and the male is not like the female…
            Arabic: رَبِّ اِنِّي وَضَعْتُهَآ اُنْثى وَاللهُ اَعْلَمُ بِمَا وَضَعَت وَلَيْسَ الذَّكَرُ كَالاُنْثى

            There are other traditions about the gender variance of Mary. I have argued elsewhere that Mary’s virginity is not merely the innocent state of a girl who has not yet known a man, but a more permanent rejection of sex with men, like that of the Vestal virgins in Rome. In Isaiah 7:14, it is predicted that a virgin will conceive bear a son, but the word for virgin used there is not the generic bethulah (בתולה) used throughout the Hebrew scripture for girls who have not yet had sex. Instead, the word almah (עלמה) is used, a very rare word in the scriptures, which is the female counterpart to elem (עלמ), meaning boy. In the other verses in which it is used, it is compatible with a meaning of tomboy or rebuffer of men (cf. Proverbs 30:18-19, in which an almah appears to be impermeable to men).
            Homosexual activity by straight men
            Homosexual activity by homosexuals (eunuchs) is not spoken of in the Qur’an, which mentions only the unjust homosexual rape perpetrated by straight men against other straight men. Besides the Lut story, sexual exploitation of straight males is also alluded to in the assurance that the prophet Joseph’s slaveholders “abstained from him” (12:20: وَكَانُوْا فِيهِ مِنَ الزَّاهِدِيْنَ).
            But the Qur’an and hadith also have traces of the permitted homosexual desires of straight men. There is even a hadith in Bukhari, admittedly giving not the Prophet’s opinion but that of Abu Jafar, according to which a pedophile is prohibited from marrying the mother of his boy-beloved if there is penetration:

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 25:
            As for whom(ever) plays with a boy: if he caused him to enter him, then he shall not marry his mother.
            Arabic: فِيمَنْ يَلْعَبُ بالصَّبِي: إنْ أدْخَلَهُ فِيهِ فَلا يَتَزَوَّجَنَّ أُمَّهُ

            (This rule is accompanied in the same chapter by prohibitions against a man marrying both a mother and her daughter.) Apparently according to this hadith, even sexual penetration of a boy is not considered sodomy, because if it was, surely the sodomite would have more worries than whether he could marry the boy’s mother! Like whether he preferred to die by fire, stoning, or falling from a high tower! These are some of the punishments mentioned in the hadith for “doing as the people of Lut did.” [A reader wrote in to say that this hadith would not necessarily imply that penetration of boys was not sodomy, but could be a recognition of the fact that not all crimes will be discovered and punished and that one who does penetrate a boy, even if he is not punished for sodomy for whatever reason, should at least know in his own conscience that the mother of his boyfriend is off limits. In any case, one possible inference from this hadith is still very interesting: namely, that if a man plays with a boy without penetration, then marrying the mother is still a possibility!!]
            The distinction between pederasty (sex with boys) and sodomy (penetration of “males”) was commonly, albeit not universally maintained throughout the ancient world, and indeed survived throughout most of the history of Islam until at least the nineteenth century (in spite of the futile objections of some medieval scholars). Apparently, boy-love was considered okay by many people because, like “natural eunuchs,” adolescent boys were also thought to lack the “defining skill of males” (sexual potency with women). The Qur’an itself gives support to pederasts in its glimpses of paradise:

            52:24 And they shall have boys [غِلْمَانٌ] who will walk around among them, as if they were hidden pearls.
            56:22-23 And dark-eyed ones [حُوْرٌ عِيْنٌ], the like of hidden pearls
            76:19 And boys never altering in age [وِلْدَانٌ مُتَخَلَّدُوْنَ] will circulate among them, when you see them you will count them as scattered pearls.
            2:25 And they shall have immaculate partners [اَزْوَاجٌ مُّطَهَّرَةٌ] in [the gardens] …
            4:57 And they shall have immaculate partners [اَزْوَاجٌ مُّطَهَّرَةٌ] in them …

            One of the great male Sufi contemporaries of Rabi’a al-‘Adawiyya provided a divine justification for a pederastic relationship, which was repeated without a hint of disapproval in a 10th century book about great Sufi women:

            One day Rabi’a saw Rabah [al-Qaysi] kissing a young boy [وهو يقبّل صبيا صغيرا]. ‘Do you love him?’ she asked. ‘Yes,’ he said. To which she replied, ‘I did not imagine that there was room in your heart to love anything other than God, the Glorious and Mighty!’ Rabah was overcome at this and fainted. When he awoke, he said, ‘On the contrary, this is a mercy that God Most High has put into the hearts of his slaves.’
            (Quoted from as-Sulami, Early Sufi Women = ذكر النّسوة المتعبّدات الصّوفيات, translated by Rkia E. Cornell, Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae, 1999, pp. 78-79.)

            Sexual use of eunuchs
            Besides boys, straight Muslim men were occasionally interested in grown adults as well, provided they were not “male.” There is a hadith in which the Prophet’s companions asked whether they were allowed to use men (presumably prisoners of war) as eunuchs to fulfill their sexual urges, since they were far from their wives.

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 6:
            (9) Narrated ibn Mas’ud: We used to fight alongside the Prophet, peace be upon him. There were no women with us, so we said: “O Messenger of God, may we not treat some as eunuchs [ألا نَستَخْصِي]?” He forbade us to do so.

            The version in Bukhari, Book LXII Ch. 8:13a says that rather than let the companions “treat [some] as eunuchs” while stuck out on military campaign, the Prophet allowed them to have sex with corrupted women [رَخَّصَ لَنا أنْ نَنكِح المَرأَة بالشَّوْبِ], and he recited to them from the Qur’an (5:87): “O ye who believe! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression.” This reflects the ancient view that a man could only commit adultery by having sex with a married woman (who was not his wife, of course).
            The fact that Muhammad forbade the companions from designating men as eunuchs is not the point here. Of course, using a straight male as a eunuch was wrong — that was essentially the sin of the people of Lut. But what about using a eunuch (i.e. one who permanently lacks arousal with women) as a eunuch? Given that ibn Mas’ud made reference to the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification, and given that the Prophet understood what he meant, that indicates that the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification was known in Arabic society, and was considered a use that was appropriate to eunuchs. Since eunuchs were not considered male, there was no prohibition against it, not even in the Qur’an.
            Eunuchs were still sex objects for straight men in the Mamluk dynasty, according to David Ayalon in Eunuchs, Caliphs, and Sultans: A Study in Power Relationships (Jerusalem, 1999). They not only served to prevent older Mamluks from having sexual access to younger trainees:

            The eunuchs seem to have served as a shield against homosexual lust in yet another way. They themselves formed the target of that lust, thus diverting it from the youngsters. They are described as being womanly and docile in bed at night and manly and warlike by day in a campaign and in similar circumstances (hum nisaa’ li-mutma’inn muqeem wa rijaal in kaanat al-asfaar; li-annahum bil-nahaar fawaaris wa-bil-layl ‘araa’is). [Arabic transcribed by Ayalon on page 34, from Abu Mansur al-Tha’alibi, Al-Lataa’if wal-Zaraa’if, Cairo 1324/1906-7, p. 79, lines 1-7; and the same quote from Tha’alibi in his Tamtheel wal-Muhaadara, Cairo 1381/1961, p. 224.]

            A eunuch Companion?
            As for the issue of whether Muhammad himself expressly acknowledged that some people by nature are incapable of heterosexuality, thus being natural eunuchs, consider the following ahadith.
            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 2:
            The Statement of the Prophet, peace be upon him: “Whoever is able to perform coitus should get married, for it helps him lower his gaze and use his private parts in the best way.” And should he get married who does not have the ability to consummate a marriage?
            (3) Narrated ‘Alqama: […] I heard [Abdullah] saying [to Uthman]: […] The Prophet, peace be upon him, once said to us: “O young men! Whoever among you is able to perform coitus, he should get married, and whoever is not able, should abstain, because for him it is a harm.”
            The Arabic of the last sentence is: يا مَعْشَرَ الشَّبابِ مَن اسْتَطاعَ مِنْكُم الباءَةَ فَلْيَتَزَوَّجْ، وَمَنْ لَمْ يَستَطِيع فَعَلَيْهِ بالصَّوْم، فإنَّهُ لَهُ وِجاءٌ

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 3:
            Whoever is not able to perform coitus should abstain.
            (4) Narrated Abdullah: We were with the Prophet, peace be upon him, as young men and we did not feel any passion. And the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, said to us: “O young men! Whoever among you is able to perform coitus, he should get married, and whoever is not able, should abstain, because for him it is a harm.”
            In the next case, a specific man, Uthman bin Madh’un, comes to ask if he can be permitted to live a life of asceticism, and he is not allowed to:
            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 8:
            What is disliked about asceticism and eunuchism.
            (11) Narrated Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas: The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, forbade Uthman bin Madh’un to be an ascetic, and if he had allowed him, we would have lived as eunuchs.
            (12) Narrated Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas: He forbade this, that is to say, the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, forbade ‘Uthman bin Madh’un, and if he had allowed him to be an ascetic, we would have lived as eunuchs.
            The Arabic of the last sentence is: وَلَوْ أجازَ لَهُ النَّبَتُّلَ لاخْتَصَيْنا
            But notice the different outcome in the following case:
            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 8:
            (13b) Narrated Abu Huraira: I said, “O Messenger of God, I am a young male, and I fear torment for my soul, but I do not find [or feel] that with which to marry a woman” [إنِّي رَجُلٌ شابٌّ وأنا أخافُ على نَفسِي العَنَتَ وَلا أجِدُ ما أتَزَوَّجُ بِهِ النِّساءَ]. He remained silent, then I said the same thing again, and he remained silent, and I said the same thing again, and he remained silent, and then I said the same thing again. Then the Prophet of God, peace be upon him, said: “O Abu Huraira, the pen is dried as to what you are suited for. So be a eunuch for that reason or leave it alone.” [يا أبا هُرَيْرَةَ، جَفَّ القَلَمُ بِمَا أنتَ لاق فاخْتَصِ عَلى ذَلِكَ أوْ ذَرْ].
            If Muhammad’s answer to Abu Huraira is to make sense, then of course it must bear a relation to the statement Abu Huraira made. First we have to ask what kind of torment Abu Huraira feared for his soul? Muhammad Muhsin Khan, the translator of Bukhari into English, interpreted it as fear of committing illicit sexual intercourse. If that interpretation is correct, then we still have to determine what “illicit sexual intercourse” would mean for Abu Huraira. As a self-described “male,” two forms of sexual activity would be inadmissible and therefore the temptation to them would cause torment for his soul: the desire to be sexually passive with a man (known as ubnah أُبنَة) or the desire to commit adultery with a female. Yet, Abu Huraira [“the father of kittens”] seemed to hint at a solution to his dilemma when he said he did not “find” that which was required for marrying a woman. The Arabic word for “find” [وَجِدَ] also has the meaning of “feel, sense”. If Abu Huraira’s statement meant he did not feel passion for women, then obviously he could not be fearing the temptation to adultery with women. In that case, only passive homosexuality was a danger. However, if he would not ever marry a woman, due to impotency with women or for any other reason, then he would not be acting as a male, but rather as a eunuch, in which case passive homosexuality would not be forbidden for him. But Muhammad cautions him that his identity, either as a eunuch or as a male, has already been determined by his Creator (“the pen is dried”), and he must figure it out which it is and live his life accordingly. If he ever intends to have sex with a woman (i.e. act as a male), then he must avoid passive homosexuality and get married.

            Prohibition of public displays
            Finally, there is a pair of verses calling for punishment in cases of indecency (فَاحِشَة) between people of any gender (4:15-16). These verses are often cited as a prohibition of homosexuality because one of the verses refers to indecency committed by women (with the implication that men were not involved). But in referring separately to an act committed by women, these verses are simply covering all the bases, so to speak. In order to address all cases, it is necessarily for grammatical reasons to deal separately with an offense by women only. As to what is meant by an indecency, the text does not specify. But in order for someone to be convicted of the offense, four eyewitnesses have to testify to it, which seems to indicate some sort of public act. Certainly the idea that, for the sake of decency, erotic behavior should be carried out in private goes back at least as far as Plato. In any case, by “indecency,” these verses are not referring to homosexuality per se, since two people of opposite sex can also be covered by verse 4:16.

            WHY ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

            Satan Attends Every Muslim Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant
            Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)

            Whenever a Muslim child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)
            Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

            ARABIC POETRY GLORIFIES SODOMY

            O THE JOY OF SODOMY

            So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
            Turn not away from it–
            therein is wondrous pleasure.
            Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
            twisting on his temple
            and ride as he stands like some gazelle
            standing to her mate.
            A lad whom all can see girt with sword
            and belt not like your whore who has
            to go veiled.
            Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
            very best to mount them, for women are
            the mounts of the devils

            ARAB POET Abu Nuwas:

            ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER F–KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

            In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

            EVEN MOHAMMED & HIS COMPANIONS WERE FINGER F–KED

            ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

            You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
            In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.
            TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

            “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

            For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

            CLERIC YASSER HABIB EXPOSES UMAR

            It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
            A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

            The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
            One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.

            If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

            Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

            When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

          • Lucky, you have stupidly tried to connect your western ideology of homosexuality to Islam not only here on the earth but as well in the hereafter… you are a stupid dirty foul minded dude!

            Quran 52:24 Pickthall: And there go round, waiting on them menservants of their own, as they were hidden pearls.

            Does the above verse mention anything about sex?

            No!!!!!!!!!!

            To wait on them means their (manservant’s) presence will be perpetual in serving them in paradise by going round, from one to the other.

            76:19 Pickthall: There wait on them immortal youths, whom, when thou seest, thou wouldst take for scattered pearls. (being a homo your dirty mind may infer homsexuality here!)

            2:25 (SI) And they will have therein purified spouses, and they will abide therein eternally. (companions means spouses as SI rightfully translated!!)

          • WHY ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

            Satan Attends Every Muslim Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant
            Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)

            Whenever a Muslim child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)
            Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

            ARABIC POETRY GLORIFIES SODOMY

            O THE JOY OF SODOMY

            So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
            Turn not away from it–
            therein is wondrous pleasure.
            Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
            twisting on his temple
            and ride as he stands like some gazelle
            standing to her mate.
            A lad whom all can see girt with sword
            and belt not like your whore who has
            to go veiled.
            Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
            very best to mount them, for women are
            the mounts of the devils

            ARAB POET Abu Nuwas:

            ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER F–KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

            In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

            EVEN MOHAMMED & HIS COMPANIONS WERE FINGER F–KED

            ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

            You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
            In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.
            TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

            “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

            For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

            CLERIC YASSER HABIB EXPOSES UMAR

            It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
            A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

            The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
            One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.
            If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

            Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

            When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

            THERE ARE NO INNOCENT MOHAMMEDANS! THEY ARE ALL CLOSET PERVERTS

            The recent film “Innocence of Muslims” has sparked outrage in the cult following of Islam. In a religion that states that those who insult its “prophet” Mohammad should be put to death, the insanity is self evident. Muslims have cornered the market on cult insanity. If Muhammad was a respectable individual, then maybe this would not be such an issue. The problem lies in the Quran’s documentation of its “prophet”, and the Islamic belief that the Koran is without fault or mistake. “Not one word is incorrect in the Quran”, My Mohammedan friend Ahmed tells me.
            My first response is always…”What about Aisha”????
            You see, Muhammad was a documented Pedophile. He forced his friend Abu Bakr to give him his daughter. He said he had a dream about her and since Allah made him dream about this SIX YEAR OLD GIRL, then it was “gods will” that they be married. Not wanting to offend Allah, Abu Bakr gave his six year old daughter over to Muhammad to be raped.
            (Yes! Any sex with a six year old is rape. There is no possibility for comprehension or consensual sex with a six year old.)
            So the Prophet of Allah had Pedophile dreams about a six year old girl and used god as an excuse to get her into his tent for nightly rapes.
            That is all anyone needs to know about Islam. End of story. Its a sick cult with a perverted old man originating the sick, war loving religion.
            Now let’s look at what the Quran says about the events of the criminal Pedophile act.
            First he took her from her family and married her at six years old:

            Was Muhammad a Pedophile?
            An Examination of Muhammad’s Relationship with a Nine-Year-Old Girl

            For the Western mind, perhaps the most disturbing fact about Islam is that its founder had a sexual relationship with a nine-year-old girl. Because of this, it has become increasingly popular in some circles to refer to the Prophet of Islam as a “pedophile.” This is, of course, extremely offensive to Muslims, who view Muhammad as the ideal servant of God and as the greatest example of what a man should strive to be. Nevertheless, Muhammad’s relationship with a young girl presents a problem for Muslims, especially for those who want to share their faith with others.
            Since much of the following information will come as a shock to those who are unfamiliar with this issue, we must be careful not to jump to hasty conclusions about Muhammad. Pedophilia is one of the most serious charges that can be leveled against a person, so the term “pedophile” should not be used lightly. We must also remember that, if a man has a sexual relationship with a young girl in a culture where such a union is permissible, this doesn’t necessarily mean that the man is a “sexual predator,” as the term “pedophile” implies. Christians especially should be wary of flippant name-calling. With that said, let us carefully examine Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha, recalling the Western principle that a man is innocent until proven guilty.

            FIRST MUSLIM DEFENSE: Aisha was older than nine years old.
            Faced with the arguments of Western critics, Muslim apologists sometimes piece together information from various accounts in an attempt to deny that Aisha was as young as critics often claim:
            The popular misconception as to Aishah’s age may be removed here. . . . Isabah, speaking of the Holy Prophet’s daughter Fatimah, says that she was about five years older than Aishah. It is a well-established fact that Fatimah was born when the Ka’bah was being rebuilt, i.e., five years before the Call. Aishah was therefore born in the year of the Call or a little before it, and she could not have been less than ten years at the time of her marriage with the Holy Prophet in the tenth year of the Call. . . . And as the period between her marriage and its consummation was not less than five years, because the consummation took place in the second year of the Flight, it follows that she could not have been less than fifteen at that time. The popular account that she was six years at marriage and nine years at the time of consummation is decidedly not correct because it supposes the period between the marriage and its consummation to be only three years, and this is historically wrong.[1]

            RESPONSE: The evidence for Muhammad’s marriage to the nine-year-old Aisha is too strong to be ignored.
            The problem with the selective and carefully edited defense just given (other than the complete lack of references) is that it ignores the numerous accounts we now possess which record Aisha’s age when Muhammad consummated his marriage to her. Many of these accounts are from Aisha herself. Indeed, the evidence for Muhammad’s marriage to the young Aisha is as strong as the evidence for just about any other fact in Islam. We have copious traditions relating Muhammad’s marriage proposal when Aisha was six or seven years old, as well as his consummation of that marriage when she was nine:
            Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated that the Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) married her when she was six years old, and he consummated her in marriage when she was nine years old. Then she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).[2]
            Khadijah died three years before the Prophet (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) departed to Madina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old.[3]
            Urwa narrated: The Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years.[4]
            Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.[5]
            Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.[6]
            This is just a sample of the early Muslim traditions reporting Muhammad’s marriage to the young Aisha, but it is sufficient to show that she certainly wasn’t fifteen years old at the time of the consummation, as some Muslims claim.

            In addition to traditions regarding Aisha’s age, the Hadith also provides details about how the relationship began and progressed:
            Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated that the Prophet (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) said to her: “You have been shown to me twice in my dream. I saw you pictured on a piece of silk and someone said (to me), ‘This is your wife.’ When I uncovered the picture, I saw that it was yours. I said: ‘If this is from Allah, it will be done.’”[7]

            After having this dream about Aisha, Muhammad proceeded to ask her father Abu Bakr for her hand in marriage. Abu Bakr understandably objected at first, but Muhammad was able to persuade him to agree. Aisha was later taken to Muhammad’s house:
            The Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) asked Abu Bakr for Aisha’s hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said: “But I am your brother.” The Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “You are my brother in Allah’s religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.”[8]

            Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated: The Prophet (the blessing and peace of
            Allah be upon him) married me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Madina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Umm Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said: “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.[9]

            Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated: When the Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and nothing surprised me but the coming of Allah’s Apostle to me in the forenoon.[10]

            Once Aisha was a part of Muhammad’s household, she became his favorite wife, even after he married several other women. Indeed, Muhammad’s other wives had to plead with him for treatment equal to that of Aisha:[11]
            The wives of Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) were in two groups. One group consisted of Aisha, Hafsa, Safiyya and Sauda; and the other group consisted of Umm Salama and the other wives of Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him). The Muslims knew that Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) loved Aisha, so if any of them had a gift and wished to give it to Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him), he would delay it, till Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) had come to Aisha’s home . . . The group of Umm Salama discussed the matter together and decided that Umm Salama should request Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) to tell the people to send their gifts to him in whatever wife’s house he was. . . .

            [Muhammad replied]: “Do not hurt me regarding Aisha, as the Divine Inspiration did not reveal it to me on any of the beds except that of Aisha.” . . . Then the group of Umm Salama called Fatimah, the daughter of Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) and sent her to Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) to say to him: “Your wives request to treat them and the daughter of Abu Bakr on equal terms.”[12]

            Thus, Aisha held a place of special favor among Muhammad’s wives, which caused a great deal of tension among the women. Since it may be taken as historically certain that Aisha was very young when her marriage to Muhammad was consummated, critics sometimes charge that Muhammad’s preference for Aisha reveals his preference for young girls. The Hadith offers a certain amount of support for this view:

            When I took the permission of Allah’s Apostle (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him), he asked me whether I had married a matron. He said: “Why hadn’t you married a virgin that would play with you, and you would play with her?” I replied: “O Allah’s Apostle! My father died and I have young sisters, so I felt it not proper that I should marry a young girl like them who would neither teach them manners nor serve them.”[13]
            Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him), and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) would call them to join and play with me.[14]

            Nevertheless, it must be noted that, if Muhammad had truly been obsessed with young girls, he could have taken many others as his wives. Muhammad eventually held complete power in Medina and later in Mecca, yet he didn’t build himself a harem of young girls. Since there isn’t enough evidence to support the charge that Muhammad had a perverted obsession with prepubescent girls, critics should be careful when making such a claim.

            To sum up, the evidence makes it abundantly clear (1) that Muhammad had sexual intercourse with Aisha when she was very young, (2) that this relationship was pursued by Muhammad after he dreamed about her, and (3) that she was his favorite wife. With so much historical data reporting the age of Aisha, it should be obvious that Muslims who deny Muhammad’s relationship with her only do so out of embarrassment.

            SECOND MUSLIM DEFENSE: Morality is relative to one’s culture.
            Another method of defending Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha is the Muslim appeal to moral relativism. According to this view, since different cultures have different standards of morality, it is wrong to criticize the standards of others based on one’s own ethical system. Consider the following responses by Maqsood Jafri and Abdur Rahman Squires:
            The Arabs practiced polygamy. In the wake of custom the Prophet Muhammad married some ladies. Hazrat Khadijah was fifteen years older [than] him at the time of marriage. Most of them were his age sake. In his fifties he married Hazrat Aiysha, the daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr when she was just bloomed to youth. Hinting this marriage some of the orientalists charge Prophet Muhammad as a “pedophile”. It was not only the Prophet Muhammad who had married a young girl [but] even the father of Hazrat Aiysha, Hazrat Abu Bakr had also married a young girl in his sixties. It was . . . part of the prevalent Arab culture and custom. Hence not to be taken seriously.[15]

            The large majority of Islamic jurists say that the earliest time which a marriage can be consummated is at the onset of sexual maturity (bulugh), meaning puberty. Since this was the norm of all Semitic cultures and it still is the norm of many cultures today—it is certainly not something that Islam invented.[16]
            Thus, since the practice of marrying young girls was “part of the prevalent Arab culture and custom,” it is “not to be taken seriously” as a criticism of Islam.

            RESPONSE: Islam is utterly inconsistent with moral relativism.
            This defense is truly amazing, for, when defending Muhammad’s moral perfection, Muslims often maintain that Muhammad condemned the Arab culture for the prevalent immorality:

            After spending his life in such chaste, pure and civilized manner, there comes a revolution in [Muhammad’s] being. He wearies of the darkness and ignorance, corruption, immorality, idolatry, and disorder which surround him on all sides. . . . He wants to get hold of that power with which he might bring about the downfall of the corrupt and disorderly world and lay the foundations of a new and better one. . . . He wanted to change the whole structure of society which had been handed down to them from time immemorial.[17]

            Muslims are quick to point out immorality around the world, especially in the West. It seems, then, that they are suggesting a very inconsistent message. When confronted with an immoral practice in another culture, Muslims cry out in one accord, “We condemn these practices, for they are against the eternal, perfect, and unalterable Law of God!” Yet, whenever the moral character of Muhammad is being scrutinized, Muslims suddenly say, “Don’t judge Muhammad! You should remember that he was from a different culture! Marrying young girls was common in Arabia, and it still is, thanks to Muhammad’s precedent. Different people have different moral standards, so no one should worry about Muhammad’s sexual relationship with a nine-year-old girl.”
            This convenient switch from moral absolutism to moral relativism is logically unacceptable. If it is wrong to judge the practices of another culture, then both Muhammad and the Qur’an were wrong for condemning immoral practices in Arabia. But if condemning immoral practices is acceptable, then Muslim apologists need a better response to criticisms of Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha.

            THIRD MUSLIM DEFENSE: Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha was part of God’s plan.
            Muslim apologists have developed another answer to Muhammad’s critics, namely, that Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha was part of God’s divine plan (i.e. God had an important reason for it):
            It should be borne in mind that, like all acts of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him), even this marriage had a Divine purpose behind it. Hazrat Aisha was a precocious girl and was developing both in mind and body with rapidity peculiar to such rare personalities. She was admitted to the house of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) just at the threshold of her puberty, the most impressionable and formative period of her life. It was the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) who nurtured her sensibilities and directed the growth of her faculties to the most fruitful channel and thus she was made to play an eminent role in the history of Islam. Moreover, she was the only virgin lady to enter the House of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) and was thus very competent to share the feelings of other ladies of younger age who had numerous questions to ask from the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) with regard to sexual ethics and morality. These ladies felt shy of asking them through the elderly wives of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) out of modesty. They could speak out their minds comparatively more freely to Aisha who was more or less of their own age group.[18]
            Puberty is a biological sign which shows that a woman is capable of bearing children. Can anyone logically deny this? Part of the wisdom behind the Prophet Muhammad’s marriage to Aishah just after she reached puberty is to firmly establish this as a point of Islamic Law, even though it was already a cultural norm in all Semitic societies (including the one Jesus grew up in).[19]

            Here Muslim apologists argue that Muhammad married Aisha for a divine purpose. Young girls who had questions about sex needed someone to talk to, and who better for this task than the young wife of the Prophet? Further, Muhammad wanted to establish puberty as an appropriate age for marriage, so he decided to demonstrate this rule by marrying Aisha.

            RESPONSE: Muslims have failed to offer a sufficient reason for God to ordain the marriage.
            There are numerous problems with this defense. First, such a response could be used to justify nearly any behavior. Consider a husband on trial for beating his wife. When he takes the stand, he explains, “Your Honor, many women are victims of spousal abuse, and they need someone to talk to. Out of the kindness of my heart, I decided to beat my wife, so that she would be able to comfort other women whose husbands beat them.” Such an explanation would never be accepted (except, perhaps, in countries under Islamic rule, where the Qur’an guarantees a husband’s right to beat his wife[20]). Besides, if Muhammad had outlawed sex with children instead of becoming a willing participant, little girls wouldn’t have to worry about sex, and they wouldn’t need to question Aisha.

            Second, it isn’t necessary for a lawgiver to institute laws by performing actions that create a precedent. In other words, Muhammad didn’t need to marry a young girl in order establish a law about marrying girls who had reached puberty. Muhammad, as Islam’s lawgiver, could have simply issued a decree. For instance, Muhammad allowed husbands to beat their wives. Was it necessary for Muhammad to beat his wives in order to establish this as a law? Certainly not. Similarly, when an American lawmaker says that killing someone in self-defense is acceptable, no one argues that the lawmaker must go out and kill someone in self-defense if his law is to stand. Hence, the argument that Muhammad needed to marry a young girl to establish puberty as the appropriate age for marriage completely fails.

            Third, the Muslim claim that Aisha was a “precocious child” strains the evidence. Aisha herself reports that, when she was taken to Muhammad’s house, she was playing on a swing with her friends. She was also still playing with dolls. Based on the evidence, Aisha sounds like a normal little girl, not like a young adult. Besides, Muhammad didn’t marry her because she was precocious; he married her because he was dreaming about her.

            Fourth, it is unlikely that God was using Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha to establish puberty as the appropriate age for marriage, since the Qur’an itself seems to allow marriage to prepubescent girls. According to Surah 65:4, a man must wait three months to divorce a wife who hasn’t yet reached menses. If Islam allows a man to divorce a girl who isn’t old enough to have her period, it follows that Islam also allows a man to marry a girl who hasn’t yet reached menses. And if the Qur’an allows marriage to prepubescent girls, then Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha would in no way rule out such a practice. (In the spirit of interpretive charity, I’m open to alternative interpretations of the Qur’an here. That is, I’m willing to give Muslims the benefit of the doubt if they offer another reasonable view of this passage. Based solely on 65:4, I would say that several interpretations of the text are possible. However, if we consider early Muslim commentaries on the verse, the understanding I give above appears strongest.

            Fifth, Muslims search for reasons to justify Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha because they are convinced that everything Muhammad did had a divine purpose behind it. When critics point out Muhammad’s numerous murders and assassinations, Muslims claim that these violent acts were just. When critics note the extent of Muhammad’s polygamy, or his participation in the slave-trade, or his countless robberies,[21] Muslims provide answers based on the view that Muhammad was an outstanding moral example. Similarly, when Muslims are confronted with the evidence for Muhammad’s sexual encounters with Aisha, they assume that there must have been a reason for it. They then invent reasons for Muhammad’s behavior (i.e. the other little girls needed someone to talk to about sex), and they offer these reasons as a defense of Muhammad’s morality. However, non-Muslims do not share this confidence in Muhammad’s moral perfection. Indeed, when non-Muslims hear about Muhammad’s violence, his greed, his polygamy, and his support of spousal abuse, we aren’t as quick to say “He must have had a reason” as Muslims seem to be. Because of this, Muslim justifications for Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha sound hollow when presented as a logical defense of his actions.
            Finally, Muslim explanations for Muhammad’s behavior fail to take into account the dangers that accompany sex at a young age. Many Muslims claim that, as soon as a young girl gets her first period, she is ready to bear children. This “old enough to bleed, old enough to breed” mentality, aside from being disgusting, is completely false. A nine-year-old girl isn’t ready for sex or children, even if she reaches menses earlier than other little girls. Children that young are still growing; when they become pregnant, their bodies divert nutritional resources to the developing fetus, depriving the growing girls of much-needed vitamins and minerals. Further, complications often result from adolescent pregnancies, because the bodies of the young girls simply aren’t ready to give birth.

            The West has discerned the dangers posed by adolescent pregnancies. Muslim apologists often claim that marriage to young girls was common in biblical times. This may be correct, but it is because these marriages were part of the culture, not because God endorsed them. Whereas many Christian countries have recognized the potential harms brought on by pregnancies among adolescent girls and have raised the legal age for marriage, Muslim countries are often kept from such advancements because of Muhammad. This is very interesting, for Muslims often claim that Muhammad was scientifically enlightened and that the Qur’an is a scientific masterpiece.[22] In reality, Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha is injuring young girls across the Middle East and North Africa. The dangers have even been noted by the United Nations, which issued the following report in an attempt to curb the practices supported by Islam:

            Traditional cultural practices reflect values and beliefs held by members of a community for periods often spanning generations. Every social grouping in the world has specific traditional cultural practices and beliefs, some of which are beneficial to all members, while others are harmful to a specific group, such as women. These harmful traditional practices include female genital mutilation (FGM); forced feeding of women; early marriage; the various taboos or practices which prevent women from controlling their own fertility; nutritional taboos and traditional birth practices; son preference and its implications for the status of the girl child; female infanticide; early pregnancy; and dowry price. Despite their harmful nature and their violation of international human rights laws, such practices persist because they are not questioned and take on an aura of morality in the eyes of those practicing them.

            Child marriage robs a girl of her childhood-time necessary to develop physically, emotionally and psychologically. In fact, early marriage inflicts great emotional stress as the young woman is removed from her parents’ home to that of her husband and in-laws. Her husband, who will invariably be many years her senior, will have little in common with a young teenager. It is with this strange man that she has to develop an intimate emotional and physical relationship. She is obliged to have intercourse, although physically she might not be fully developed.

            Health complications that result from early marriage in the Middle East and North Africa, for example, include the risk of operative delivery, low weight and malnutrition resulting from frequent pregnancies and lactation in the period of life when the young mothers are themselves still growing.

            Early pregnancy can have harmful consequences for both young mothers and their babies. According to UNICEF, no girl should become pregnant before the age of 18 because she is not yet physically ready to bear children. Babies of mothers younger than 18 tend to be born premature and have low body weight; such babies are more likely to die in the first year of life. The risk to the young mother’s own health is also greater. Poor health is common among indigent pregnant and lactating women.

            In many parts of the developing world, especially in rural areas, girls marry shortly after puberty and are expected to start having children immediately. Although the situation has improved since the early 1980’s, in many areas the majority of girls under 20 years of age are already married and having children. Although many countries have raised the legal age for marriage, this has had little impact on traditional societies where marriage and child-bearing confer “status” on a woman.
            An additional health risk to young mothers is obstructed labor, which occurs when the baby’s head is too big for the orifice of the mother. This provokes vesicovaginal fistulas, especially when an untrained traditional birth attendant forces the baby’s head out unduly.[23]

            Contrary to Muslim claims, a nine-year-old girl just isn’t ready for sexual intercourse or for its possible ramifications (i.e. pregnancy, giving birth, breast-feeding, and raising a child). It is unnecessarily dangerous, for a much safer relationship could be crafted if the marriage were to take place several years later, when the girl reaches her late teens. Muslims may respond to this by arguing, “But Aisha never became pregnant, so none of this matters.” Yet it does matter. Every year, countless young girls, still playing with dolls, are taken to live with much older husbands. If these husbands were to be challenged, they wouldn’t respond by saying, “But it’s part of Arabic culture”; instead, they would reply, “It can’t be wrong, because Muhammad did it.” In other words, even if we grant the bizarre claim that Aisha was somehow ready for sex and marriage, most nine-year-old girls aren’t ready for sex and marriage. Yet the practice of marrying children continues to this day in many Muslim countries, largely because Muslims hold up Muhammad as their highest role model.

            FOURTH MUSLIM DEFENSE: The average lifespan in Muhammad’s day was so low that people had to marry young.
            Osama Abdallah argues that Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha was understandable because people in Muhammad’s day needed to marry early:
            Life 1400 years ago was very rough in the too hot desert. From my personal knowledge, the average life span back then was 50 years. People used to die from all kinds of diseases. Both parents of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for instance, died natural deaths before he even knew them.[24]
            On this view, since people could die at any time in the “hot desert,” they would get married at a very early age to make sure they had as many years together as possible.

            RESPONSE: Muhammad was already more than fifty years old when he consummated his marriage to Aisha, so there was no need for him to marry such a young girl.
            Abdallah’s claim might make sense if Muhammad had been nine or ten years old when he married Aisha. But the Prophet of Islam was already well advanced in years. He was far closer to death than any young woman he might marry, so why not marry a young woman instead of a young girl? Why not marry a fully developed twenty-year-old instead of a little girl playing on a swing? By marrying Aisha when she was so young, Muhammad was, in effect, condemning her to a life of widowhood, for the Qur’an prohibited the marrying of Muhammad’s widows (33:53). Beyond all this, Abdallah’s argument ignores the facts. Muhammad didn’t marry Aisha because the average life span was fifty years old; instead, he married her because (1) he had been dreaming about her, and (2) he had the power to persuade Abu Bakr to give him his daughter in marriage.

            FIFTH MUSLIM DEFENSE: Other people have done it too—even Christians!
            Abdallah also employs an “everybody’s doing it, so it’s okay” defense:
            Not only was it a custom in the Arab society to Engage/Marry a young girl, it was also common in the Jewish society. The case of Mary the mother of Jesus comes to mind. In non biblical sources she was between 11-14 years old when she conceived Jesus. Mary had already been “BETROTHED” to Joseph before conceiving Jesus. Joseph was a much older man. Therefore Mary was younger than 11-14 years of age when she was “BETHROED” to Joseph. We Muslims would never call Joseph a Child Molester, nor would we refer to the “Holy Ghost” of the Bible, that “Impregnated” Mary as a “Rapist” or “Adulterer.”.[25]

            RESPONSE: Besides committing the “tu quoque” fallacy, this defense misses the point of the criticism against Muhammad.
            Tu quoque is a type of fallacy that attempts to ignore a criticism because of some hypocrisy found in the critic. For instance, suppose I’m a thief. One day, I catch someone stealing my car, and I say, “Stop, Thief!” If the person stealing my car turns to me and says, “But you’re a thief too, so it’s not wrong for me to steal,” he will be committing the tu quoque fallacy.

            Muslims rely heavily on the tu quoque. When people criticize Islam for terrorism, it’s common to hear Muslims say, “But Americans are killing Arabs!” as if this were a meaningful response to the charge. Likewise, when someone says, “Look at all the people Muhammad killed,” Muslims respond by saying, “But people were killed in the Bible too.”
            To say that Joseph married a young girl in the Bible does nothing to address the problem of Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha. At best, such a defense would only show that Christians are being inconsistent. But in reality, the Muslim defense doesn’t even show this, since their comparison fails for several reasons.
            First, there is no real historical data reporting the age of Mary when she married Joseph. True, given the custom of the time, she was probably fairly young, perhaps as young as twelve or thirteen. But since we have no historical references to her age, we can’t rule out the possibility that Mary was twenty years old. The point here is this: people criticize Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha based on what we know (i.e. that Aisha was nine years old), whereas Muslims reply based on what we don’t know (i.e. the age of Mary).

            Second, we must not forget that thirteen years old is very different from nine years old. Nine-year-old girls typically haven’t reached menses. In a best case scenario, a girl that young may have entered the beginning stages of puberty. A thirteen-year-old girl, on the other hand, may be coming to the end of puberty. Thus, even if we grant a young age for Mary, there would still be a world of difference between her and Aisha.

            Third, Muslim apologists seem to miss the fact that Joseph is not the standard of morality in Christianity. When critics point to the age of Aisha, they are arguing something like this: “You’re trying to tell me that Muhammad was the greatest moral example of all time and that I should believe everything he says? I can’t believe that a person who would have sex with a little girl was the greatest man ever.” More simply, Muhammad is foundational to Islam. If there is a problem with Muhammad, there is a problem with Islam. If Muhammad was immoral, then it becomes difficult to take his teachings seriously. Thus, it makes no sense for a Muslim to say, “Well, Joseph married a young girl too.” Joseph isn’t foundational to Christianity. If an ancient text were found tomorrow, and this ancient text proved that Joseph was a thief and a murderer, this wouldn’t affect Christianity at all, because Christians don’t consider him to be a prophet, or a bringer of revelation, or even an important figure in Christianity. Thus, if Muslims want to show that Christians are being inconsistent, they need to show that Jesus, or Peter, or Paul, or someone central to Christianity, did the things that Muhammad did. Fortunately, Jesus was sinless, and the apostles lived exemplary lives once they had committed themselves to Jesus.

            The internet is filled with examples of Muslims responses of this sort. Muslim websites constantly note that young girls are married in various countries and that these young girls sometimes give birth. No one doubts this. The problem is that this has nothing to do with whether or not marriage to a nine-year-old girl is morally acceptable for a mighty prophet. The fact that Muslims are forced to resort to an “everyone’s doing it” defense shows that they have run out of responses.

            ASSESSMENT: While the evidence isn’t enough to condemn Muhammad as a “pedophile,” his sexual relationship with Aisha is unacceptable.
            Muhammad has been accused of pedophilia in numerous writings, sermons, and conversations. We have seen that the earliest Muslim traditions offer support for this view. However, the evidence sustaining the charge of pedophilia is perhaps too limited to warrant such a harsh conclusion. We know that Muhammad had a sexual relationship with a young girl, and that this was reprehensible. Yet we must take cultural differences into consideration in formulating an accurate appraisal of a person’s character. In Muhammad’s society, sexual intercourse was acceptable when a girl reached menses, and Muhammad may have waited until Aisha had reached this age. (Note: There’s no good historical evidence that Muhammad waited for Aisha to reach menses. However, I think it’s important to be generous in our interpretations as much as possible, so I’m willing to grant, for the sake of argument, that Aisha had reached puberty.)
            Similarly, we don’t have enough information to call Muhammad a “pervert.” While Muhammad’s sexual acts may seem startling, we don’t know enough about the nature of these acts to condemn him as a sexual deviant or a predator.

            Nevertheless, Muslims are too hasty in dismissing Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha. We can’t simply ignore a prophet’s marriage to a nine-year-old girl. Muslims view Muhammad as the highest example of a moral life, but his marriage to Aisha conflicts with that view. If they want to put Muhammad forward as the standard of morality, Muslims need to come to terms with the many questionable things Muhammad did, as well as the awful impact of these actions.

            There is a simple, but highly explicit, way to evaluate the importance of Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha. We must begin by trying to get a mental picture of a morally perfect man. For Muslims, this will include all the things they have been taught about Muhammad. According to their picture, he is kind, generous, patient, humble, and trustworthy. He protects orphans and widows, endures persecution, helps the needy, and promotes justice. He prays faithfully, fasts regularly, and obeys God in everything. He is loyal to his friends and patient with his enemies. He never gives in when tempted with evil. Now we must picture that same man in a room with an innocent little girl. He takes away her doll, climbs on top of her, and puts his penis inside her. She doesn’t know what is happening because she is too young to know much about sex. Frightened and confused, she cries because of the pain and bleeds on her bed, but she tries to remain quiet out of respect for her new husband, who, in return, endangers her life.

            If a person is able to keep the same vision of moral perfection throughout that description, he may have the faith necessary to be a Muslim. But if his vision of the perfect man is at odds with what Muhammad did on numerous occasions, he will need to look elsewhere for an ideal human being.

            Notes:
            [1] Maulana Muhammad Ali, Muhammad the Prophet (St. Lambert: Payette and Sims, 1993), pp. 183-184.
            [2] Sahih Al-Bukhari, Dr. Muhammad Matraji, tr. (New Delhi: Islamic Book Service, 2002), Number 5133. See also 5134.
            [3] Ibid., Number 3896.
            [4] Ibid., Number 5158.
            [5] Sahih Muslim, Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, tr., Number 3310.
            [6] Ibid, Number 3311.
            [7] Sahih Al-Bukhari, Number 3895. See also Number 5078.
            [8] Ibid., Number 5081.
            [9] Ibid., Number 3894.
            [10] Ibid., Number 5160.
            [11] The Qur’an commands husbands to treat their wives equally (4:3), a command that Muhammad clearly violated. Of course, the same verse also forbids husbands to marry more than four women, but Muhammad received a revelation granting him immunity from this law (33:50).
            [12] Ibid., Number 2581.
            [13] Ibid., Number 2967.
            [14] Ibid., Number 6130.
            [15] Professor Maqsood Jafri, “On The Character of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).”
            [16] Abdur Rahman Squires, “The Young Marriage of Aishah.”
            [17] Abul A’la Mawdudi, Towards Understanding Islam (Islamic Circle of North America, 1986), pp. 53, 56.
            [18] Sahih Muslim, Note 1860 (p. 716).
            [19] Squires, “The Young Marriage of Aishah.”
            [20] According to the Quran, “Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great” (v. 4:34, M.H. Shakir Translation).
            [21] For references, see “Islam Beheaded.”
            [22] For more on this, see “Talking Ants and Shrinking Humans.”
            [23] Office of the High Commissioner for Human rights, Fact Sheet No. 23, “Harmful Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children.” (Online source) The actual report is much longer than the selections quoted here.
            [24] See http://www.answering-islam.com/aisha.htm.
            [25] Ibid.

        • EDUCATING DUMB PLUM & ALL MOHAMMEDANS:

          QUEER SEXUALITY & IDENTITY IN THE QURAN & HADITH

          by Faris Malik
          The Qur’an generally scorns “approaching males in lust”, as well as the castration of males, as the sin of the people of Lot (Qur’an 7:81, 26:165-166, 27:55, 29:28-29).

          7:81 “Indeed you approach males in lust excluding women…”
          Arabic: اِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّنْ دُوْنِ النِّسَآءِ
          26:165-166 “What! Do you approach the males of the worlds and forsake those whom your Lord has created for you for your mates?”
          Arabic: آ تَاْتُوْنَ الذُّكْرانَ مِنَ الْعلَميْنَ \ وَتَذَرُوْنَ مَا خَلَقَ لَكُمْ رَبُّكُمْ مِّنَ اَزْوَاجِكُمْ
          27:55 “Will you indeed approach males in lust excluding women?”
          Arabic: آ ئِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّنْ دُوْنِ النِّسَآءِ
          29:28-29 “Most surely you are guilty of an indecency which none of the nations has ever done before you; What! do you come unto the males and cut the passageways [i.e. vas deferens and/or urethra] and do so in your private clubs?”
          Arabic: اِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الْفَاحِشَةَ مَا سَبَقَكُمْ بِهَا مِنْ اَحَدٍ مِّنْ الْعلَمِيْنَ \ آ ئِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الرِّجَالَ وَتَقْطَعُوْنَ السَّبِيْلَ وَتَاْتُوْنَ فِي نَادِيْكُمْ

          But the Qur’an does not prohibit using, as passive sex partners, the ancient category of men who by nature lacked desire for women, since such men were not considered “male” as a result of their lack of arousal for women. This kind of man is often known as “gay” in modern times, but in the ancient world he was identified as an anatomically whole “natural eunuch.” Although the Qur’an never uses the word eunuch [خَصِي], the hadith and the books of the legal scholars do. Furthermore, the Qur’an recognizes that some men are “without the defining skill of males” (24:31: غَيْرِ اُولىِ الاِرْبَةِ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ) and so, as domestic servants, are allowed to see women naked. This is a reference to natural eunuchs, i.e. innately and exclusively gay (if not totally asexual) men.
          A person had to be indifferent to women’s bodies in order to assume the role as a servant in women’s private space. In the following case from the hadith, a household servant who had been falsely assumed to be indifferent to women due to his being an “effeminate man” [mukhannathمُخَنَّث ] was evicted by the Prophet because he unexpectedly exhibited a lascivious attitude toward women:

          Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 114:
          What is forbidden concerning the entering upon the wife by those imitating women.
          (162) Umm Salama reported that the Prophet, peace be upon him, was at her house, and in the house there was an effeminate man [مُخَنَّث], and the effeminate man said to the brother of Umm Salama, Abdullah bin Abi Umayya: “If God makes you all conquer Ta’if tomorrow, I will point out to you the daughter of Ghailan, for surely she has four when coming towards you and eight when she turns her back.” Then the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: “This one shall not call upon you (pl.).”
          Muslim, Collection of Authentic Traditions, Book XXVI (Greetings), Chapter 12:
          (5415) Umm Salama reported that she had an effeminate man [مُخَنَّث] in her house. The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, was once at the house when he (the effeminate man) said to the brother of Umm Salama, ‘Abdullah b. Abu Umayya: “If God makes you all conquer Ta’if tomorrow, I will point out to you the daughter of Ghailan, for surely she has four when coming towards you and eight when she turns her back.” The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, heard this and he said: “These ones shall not call upon you.”

          (5416) ‘A’isha reported that an effeminate man [مُخَنَّث] used to call upon the wives of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and they considered him to be “without the defining skill” (of males) [فكانوا يعدونه من غيْر أولى الارة]. The Prophet, peace be upon him, came by one day as he (the effeminate man) was sitting with some of his wives and he was describing a woman, saying: “When she comes towards you, she has four, and when she turns her back, she has eight.” Then the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: “I see this one knows these things! He shall not call upon you (pl.).” She (‘A’isha) said then they began to observe veil from him.

          Note that in ‘A’isha’s telling of the story, she states that the women allowed him into their private rooms because they assumed he lacked “the defining skill”. ‘A’isha actually quotes the Qur’anic verse about men who “lack the defining skill of males,” demonstrating that his presence in the women’s space would have been proper according to the Qur’an if only he had in fact been “without the defining skill.” However, the statement of the effeminate man about the daughter of Ghailan, whatever it meant, indicated to Muhammad that he did not lack the defining skill of males and that, on the contrary, he had an appreciation of women as sexual objects. This disqualifies him as an intimate domestic servant according to the Qur’an as well as the standards of the day. In a system that depends on household servants to be heterosexually indifferent, the main risk is that this indifference can be faked. In other words, an ordinary male can pretend to be an exclusive homosexual in order to gain free access to the private space of women.
          There are other ahadith against cross-dressers in which the Prophet specifically curses “males” who imitate women and women who imitate males, and in which the consequence of their malfeasance is that he “evicts them from the houses.” The specific reference to “males” who do this (as opposed to non-male eunuchs, for example) is made very explicit:

          Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXXII (Dress), Chapter 61:
          (773) The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, cursed female-impersonators [m.pl.] who are males, and male-impersonators [f.pl.] who are women.
          Arabic: لَعَنَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صلى اللهُ عليهِ وَسلَّمَ المُتَشَبِّهِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ بالنِّساءِ وَالمُتَشَبِّهاتِ مِنَ النِّساءِ بالرِّجالِ
          Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXXII (Dress), Chapter 62:
          (774) The Prophet, peace be upon him, cursed the effeminate men [m.pl.] who are males, and the male-pretenders [f.pl.] who are women, and he said: Evict them from your houses, and the Prophet, peace be upon him, evicted such-and-such [m.sg.] and ‘Umar evicted such-and-such [f.sg.].
          Arabic: لَعَنَ النَّبِي صلى اللهُ عليهِ وَسلَّمَ المُخَنَّثِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالمُتَرَجِّلاتِ مِنَ النِّساءِ وَ قَالَ: أخْرِجُوهُمْ مِنْ بُيُوتِكُمْ، قالَ: فأخْرَجَ النَّبِيُّ صلى اللهُ عليهِ وَسلَّمَ فُلانا، وأخْرَجَ عُمَرُ فُلانَةَ

          The words “males” and “women” are obviously emphatic here because the grammar does not really require them to be used, unless it be for emphasis or clarification. Masculine gender is already provided grammatically by the endings on the words “impersonators” and “effeminates,” and feminine gender is already provided in the words “impersonators” and “male-pretenders.” Given the emphasis, the curse is specifically directed only at “males” and “women,” and does not cover non-males who might be female-impersonators (or non-women who might be male-impersonators, if indeed there was a recognition of “non-women”). It’s okay to be a drag queen as long as you are not a straight man posing to gain access to unsuspecting women, or to the wives of unsuspecting husbands.
          The Qur’an recognizes that there are some people who are “ineffectual” [عَقِيم], thus neither male nor female:
          42:49 “To Allah belongs the dominion over the heavens and the earth. It creates what It wills. It prepares for whom It wills females, and It prepares for whom It wills males.
          50 Or It marries together the males and the females, and It makes those whom It wills to be ineffectual. Indeed It is the Knowing, the Powerful.”
          Arabic: للهِ مُلْكُ السَّموتِ وَالْاَرْضِ يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَآءُ يَهَبُ لِمَنْ يَّشَآءُ اِنَاثاً وَّيَهَبُ لِمَنْ يَّشَآءُ الذُّكُوْرَ \ اَوْ يُزَوَّجُهُمْ ذُكْرَاناً وَّاِنَاثاً وَيَجْعَلُ مَنْ يَّشَآءُ عَقِيْماً اِنَّهُ عَلِيْمٌ قَدِيْمٌ
          These last two verses (42:49 and 50) are usually interpreted differently in English translations to say that God bestows daughters or sons on whom It wills and gives some people both sons and daughters. But there are problems with this interpretation, one of which being that the word for causing to marry or pairing up [زَوَّجَ] is used in the second verse. When families have boys and girls, the boys and girls do not usually arrive in pairs! The second problem is that, in Qur’anic verses mentioning males and females together, the males are usually mentioned first, and the females second (e.g., 3:195, 4:12, 4:124, 6:143-144, 16:97, 40:40, 42:50, 49:13, 53:21, 53:45, 75:39, 92:3). This is the only verse in the Qur’an, as far as I know, in which the female is mentioned before the male. If these two verses were talking about sons and daughters, we would expect sons to be mentioned before daughters.
          In this case, the “males first” principle would indicate that the lines are referring to females and males not as offspring, but as counterparts, i.e. objects of desire, for “whom(ever) God wills.” The female objects of desire are mentioned first because they are most typically objects of desire for males. Hence, even this verse is referring to males first, as the most typical “whom(ever)” for whom God prepares females. Yet the use of the word “whom(ever)” leaves it open for females to be objects of desires for other females as well, when God wills, and for males to be love objects for females and other passive non-males. I believe this verse is very neatly and concisely describing the varieties of sexual orientation and gender, which Allah, the All-Knowing and All-Powerful, creates as Allah wishes.
          The ineffectual can include abstinent women as well as men, and in fact “the abstinent ones among women, who do not hope for marriage” [وَالْقَوَاعِدُ مِنَ النِّسآءِ الّتِي لَا يَرْجُوْنَ نِكَاحاً], are permitted to “put off their cover” in Sura 24:60.
          Another intriguing example of a gender variant woman is Jesus’s mother Mary. According to ancient notions about procreation, males were the only ones capable of producing seed. It would be impossible for a woman to give birth to a child, let alone a boy, without receiving seed from a male. In Christianity, this problem is solved by making God the male father of Jesus. According to the Qur’an, however, God does not procreate. This means that the seed that became Jesus came from within Mary. If Mary carried viable seed originating from within her, then by ancient definitions, she was a male, despite appearances to the contrary. So the Qur’an says that, when Mary was born, her mother declared that she was a female baby, but God knew better:

          (Qur’an 3:36) Lord, surely, I have brought it forth a female – and Allah knew best what she brought forth – and the male is not like the female…
          Arabic: رَبِّ اِنِّي وَضَعْتُهَآ اُنْثى وَاللهُ اَعْلَمُ بِمَا وَضَعَت وَلَيْسَ الذَّكَرُ كَالاُنْثى

          There are other traditions about the gender variance of Mary. I have argued elsewhere that Mary’s virginity is not merely the innocent state of a girl who has not yet known a man, but a more permanent rejection of sex with men, like that of the Vestal virgins in Rome. In Isaiah 7:14, it is predicted that a virgin will conceive bear a son, but the word for virgin used there is not the generic bethulah (בתולה) used throughout the Hebrew scripture for girls who have not yet had sex. Instead, the word almah (עלמה) is used, a very rare word in the scriptures, which is the female counterpart to elem (עלמ), meaning boy. In the other verses in which it is used, it is compatible with a meaning of tomboy or rebuffer of men (cf. Proverbs 30:18-19, in which an almah appears to be impermeable to men).
          Homosexual activity by straight men
          Homosexual activity by homosexuals (eunuchs) is not spoken of in the Qur’an, which mentions only the unjust homosexual rape perpetrated by straight men against other straight men. Besides the Lut story, sexual exploitation of straight males is also alluded to in the assurance that the prophet Joseph’s slaveholders “abstained from him” (12:20: وَكَانُوْا فِيهِ مِنَ الزَّاهِدِيْنَ).
          But the Qur’an and hadith also have traces of the permitted homosexual desires of straight men. There is even a hadith in Bukhari, admittedly giving not the Prophet’s opinion but that of Abu Jafar, according to which a pedophile is prohibited from marrying the mother of his boy-beloved if there is penetration:

          Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 25:
          As for whom(ever) plays with a boy: if he caused him to enter him, then he shall not marry his mother.
          Arabic: فِيمَنْ يَلْعَبُ بالصَّبِي: إنْ أدْخَلَهُ فِيهِ فَلا يَتَزَوَّجَنَّ أُمَّهُ

          (This rule is accompanied in the same chapter by prohibitions against a man marrying both a mother and her daughter.) Apparently according to this hadith, even sexual penetration of a boy is not considered sodomy, because if it was, surely the sodomite would have more worries than whether he could marry the boy’s mother! Like whether he preferred to die by fire, stoning, or falling from a high tower! These are some of the punishments mentioned in the hadith for “doing as the people of Lut did.” [A reader wrote in to say that this hadith would not necessarily imply that penetration of boys was not sodomy, but could be a recognition of the fact that not all crimes will be discovered and punished and that one who does penetrate a boy, even if he is not punished for sodomy for whatever reason, should at least know in his own conscience that the mother of his boyfriend is off limits. In any case, one possible inference from this hadith is still very interesting: namely, that if a man plays with a boy without penetration, then marrying the mother is still a possibility!!]
          The distinction between pederasty (sex with boys) and sodomy (penetration of “males”) was commonly, albeit not universally maintained throughout the ancient world, and indeed survived throughout most of the history of Islam until at least the nineteenth century (in spite of the futile objections of some medieval scholars). Apparently, boy-love was considered okay by many people because, like “natural eunuchs,” adolescent boys were also thought to lack the “defining skill of males” (sexual potency with women). The Qur’an itself gives support to pederasts in its glimpses of paradise:

          52:24 And they shall have boys [غِلْمَانٌ] who will walk around among them, as if they were hidden pearls.
          56:22-23 And dark-eyed ones [حُوْرٌ عِيْنٌ], the like of hidden pearls
          76:19 And boys never altering in age [وِلْدَانٌ مُتَخَلَّدُوْنَ] will circulate among them, when you see them you will count them as scattered pearls.
          2:25 And they shall have immaculate partners [اَزْوَاجٌ مُّطَهَّرَةٌ] in [the gardens] …
          4:57 And they shall have immaculate partners [اَزْوَاجٌ مُّطَهَّرَةٌ] in them …

          One of the great male Sufi contemporaries of Rabi’a al-‘Adawiyya provided a divine justification for a pederastic relationship, which was repeated without a hint of disapproval in a 10th century book about great Sufi women:

          One day Rabi’a saw Rabah [al-Qaysi] kissing a young boy [وهو يقبّل صبيا صغيرا]. ‘Do you love him?’ she asked. ‘Yes,’ he said. To which she replied, ‘I did not imagine that there was room in your heart to love anything other than God, the Glorious and Mighty!’ Rabah was overcome at this and fainted. When he awoke, he said, ‘On the contrary, this is a mercy that God Most High has put into the hearts of his slaves.’
          (Quoted from as-Sulami, Early Sufi Women = ذكر النّسوة المتعبّدات الصّوفيات, translated by Rkia E. Cornell, Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae, 1999, pp. 78-79.)

          Sexual use of eunuchs
          Besides boys, straight Muslim men were occasionally interested in grown adults as well, provided they were not “male.” There is a hadith in which the Prophet’s companions asked whether they were allowed to use men (presumably prisoners of war) as eunuchs to fulfill their sexual urges, since they were far from their wives.

          Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 6:
          (9) Narrated ibn Mas’ud: We used to fight alongside the Prophet, peace be upon him. There were no women with us, so we said: “O Messenger of God, may we not treat some as eunuchs [ألا نَستَخْصِي]?” He forbade us to do so.

          The version in Bukhari, Book LXII Ch. 8:13a says that rather than let the companions “treat [some] as eunuchs” while stuck out on military campaign, the Prophet allowed them to have sex with corrupted women [رَخَّصَ لَنا أنْ نَنكِح المَرأَة بالشَّوْبِ], and he recited to them from the Qur’an (5:87): “O ye who believe! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression.” This reflects the ancient view that a man could only commit adultery by having sex with a married woman (who was not his wife, of course).
          The fact that Muhammad forbade the companions from designating men as eunuchs is not the point here. Of course, using a straight male as a eunuch was wrong — that was essentially the sin of the people of Lut. But what about using a eunuch (i.e. one who permanently lacks arousal with women) as a eunuch? Given that ibn Mas’ud made reference to the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification, and given that the Prophet understood what he meant, that indicates that the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification was known in Arabic society, and was considered a use that was appropriate to eunuchs. Since eunuchs were not considered male, there was no prohibition against it, not even in the Qur’an.
          Eunuchs were still sex objects for straight men in the Mamluk dynasty, according to David Ayalon in Eunuchs, Caliphs, and Sultans: A Study in Power Relationships (Jerusalem, 1999). They not only served to prevent older Mamluks from having sexual access to younger trainees:

          The eunuchs seem to have served as a shield against homosexual lust in yet another way. They themselves formed the target of that lust, thus diverting it from the youngsters. They are described as being womanly and docile in bed at night and manly and warlike by day in a campaign and in similar circumstances (hum nisaa’ li-mutma’inn muqeem wa rijaal in kaanat al-asfaar; li-annahum bil-nahaar fawaaris wa-bil-layl ‘araa’is). [Arabic transcribed by Ayalon on page 34, from Abu Mansur al-Tha’alibi, Al-Lataa’if wal-Zaraa’if, Cairo 1324/1906-7, p. 79, lines 1-7; and the same quote from Tha’alibi in his Tamtheel wal-Muhaadara, Cairo 1381/1961, p. 224.]

          A eunuch Companion?
          As for the issue of whether Muhammad himself expressly acknowledged that some people by nature are incapable of heterosexuality, thus being natural eunuchs, consider the following ahadith.
          Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 2:
          The Statement of the Prophet, peace be upon him: “Whoever is able to perform coitus should get married, for it helps him lower his gaze and use his private parts in the best way.” And should he get married who does not have the ability to consummate a marriage?
          (3) Narrated ‘Alqama: […] I heard [Abdullah] saying [to Uthman]: […] The Prophet, peace be upon him, once said to us: “O young men! Whoever among you is able to perform coitus, he should get married, and whoever is not able, should abstain, because for him it is a harm.”
          The Arabic of the last sentence is: يا مَعْشَرَ الشَّبابِ مَن اسْتَطاعَ مِنْكُم الباءَةَ فَلْيَتَزَوَّجْ، وَمَنْ لَمْ يَستَطِيع فَعَلَيْهِ بالصَّوْم، فإنَّهُ لَهُ وِجاءٌ

          Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 3:
          Whoever is not able to perform coitus should abstain.
          (4) Narrated Abdullah: We were with the Prophet, peace be upon him, as young men and we did not feel any passion. And the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, said to us: “O young men! Whoever among you is able to perform coitus, he should get married, and whoever is not able, should abstain, because for him it is a harm.”
          In the next case, a specific man, Uthman bin Madh’un, comes to ask if he can be permitted to live a life of asceticism, and he is not allowed to:
          Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 8:
          What is disliked about asceticism and eunuchism.
          (11) Narrated Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas: The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, forbade Uthman bin Madh’un to be an ascetic, and if he had allowed him, we would have lived as eunuchs.
          (12) Narrated Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas: He forbade this, that is to say, the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, forbade ‘Uthman bin Madh’un, and if he had allowed him to be an ascetic, we would have lived as eunuchs.
          The Arabic of the last sentence is: وَلَوْ أجازَ لَهُ النَّبَتُّلَ لاخْتَصَيْنا
          But notice the different outcome in the following case:
          Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 8:
          (13b) Narrated Abu Huraira: I said, “O Messenger of God, I am a young male, and I fear torment for my soul, but I do not find [or feel] that with which to marry a woman” [إنِّي رَجُلٌ شابٌّ وأنا أخافُ على نَفسِي العَنَتَ وَلا أجِدُ ما أتَزَوَّجُ بِهِ النِّساءَ]. He remained silent, then I said the same thing again, and he remained silent, and I said the same thing again, and he remained silent, and then I said the same thing again. Then the Prophet of God, peace be upon him, said: “O Abu Huraira, the pen is dried as to what you are suited for. So be a eunuch for that reason or leave it alone.” [يا أبا هُرَيْرَةَ، جَفَّ القَلَمُ بِمَا أنتَ لاق فاخْتَصِ عَلى ذَلِكَ أوْ ذَرْ].
          If Muhammad’s answer to Abu Huraira is to make sense, then of course it must bear a relation to the statement Abu Huraira made. First we have to ask what kind of torment Abu Huraira feared for his soul? Muhammad Muhsin Khan, the translator of Bukhari into English, interpreted it as fear of committing illicit sexual intercourse. If that interpretation is correct, then we still have to determine what “illicit sexual intercourse” would mean for Abu Huraira. As a self-described “male,” two forms of sexual activity would be inadmissible and therefore the temptation to them would cause torment for his soul: the desire to be sexually passive with a man (known as ubnah أُبنَة) or the desire to commit adultery with a female. Yet, Abu Huraira [“the father of kittens”] seemed to hint at a solution to his dilemma when he said he did not “find” that which was required for marrying a woman. The Arabic word for “find” [وَجِدَ] also has the meaning of “feel, sense”. If Abu Huraira’s statement meant he did not feel passion for women, then obviously he could not be fearing the temptation to adultery with women. In that case, only passive homosexuality was a danger. However, if he would not ever marry a woman, due to impotency with women or for any other reason, then he would not be acting as a male, but rather as a eunuch, in which case passive homosexuality would not be forbidden for him. But Muhammad cautions him that his identity, either as a eunuch or as a male, has already been determined by his Creator (“the pen is dried”), and he must figure it out which it is and live his life accordingly. If he ever intends to have sex with a woman (i.e. act as a male), then he must avoid passive homosexuality and get married.

          Prohibition of public displays
          Finally, there is a pair of verses calling for punishment in cases of indecency (فَاحِشَة) between people of any gender (4:15-16). These verses are often cited as a prohibition of homosexuality because one of the verses refers to indecency committed by women (with the implication that men were not involved). But in referring separately to an act committed by women, these verses are simply covering all the bases, so to speak. In order to address all cases, it is necessarily for grammatical reasons to deal separately with an offense by women only. As to what is meant by an indecency, the text does not specify. But in order for someone to be convicted of the offense, four eyewitnesses have to testify to it, which seems to indicate some sort of public act. Certainly the idea that, for the sake of decency, erotic behavior should be carried out in private goes back at least as far as Plato. In any case, by “indecency,” these verses are not referring to homosexuality per se, since two people of opposite sex can also be covered by verse 4:16.

          WHY ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

          Satan Attends Every Muslim Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant
          Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)

          Whenever a Muslim child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)
          Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

          ARABIC POETRY GLORIFIES SODOMY

          O THE JOY OF SODOMY

          So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
          Turn not away from it–
          therein is wondrous pleasure.
          Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
          twisting on his temple
          and ride as he stands like some gazelle
          standing to her mate.
          A lad whom all can see girt with sword
          and belt not like your whore who has
          to go veiled.
          Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
          very best to mount them, for women are
          the mounts of the devils

          ARAB POET Abu Nuwas:

          ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER F–KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

          In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

          EVEN MOHAMMED & HIS COMPANIONS WERE FINGER F–KED

          ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

          You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
          In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.
          TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

          “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

          For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

          CLERIC YASSER HABIB EXPOSES UMAR

          It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
          A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

          The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
          One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.
          If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

          Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

          When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

          • Lucky, you are truly funny! What is so hard in interpreting :

            Quran 42:49 Pickthall: … He createth what He will. He bestoweth female (offspring) upon whom He will, and bestoweth male (offspring) upon whom He will.
            (very clear : Allah gives either all sons or all daughters)

            42:50 Pickthall: Or He mingleth them, males and females, and He maketh barren whom He will.
            (very clear : or Allah mixes first son or daughter then daughter or son meaning He can give you a male, then a daughter, in another pregnancy a daughter and then a son or vice versa. And He maketh barren means He can make a couple to remain childless for as long as he Wills.
            Example : My brother-in-law is childless though he is married for 20 years and I have five children..first two sons then a daughter, son and finally a daughter!!)

            I do not see any reason of distorting the verses to make it hard to understand.

            Islam is not only a religion but the best religion on the surface of the earth!!

            Quran condemns homosexuality in the strongest words!!

          • MOHAMMEDANISM:

            THE GREATEST CULT IN THE WORLD FOR PEDOPHILES, QUEERS, PSYCHOPATHIC MURDERERS & THIEVES:

            QUEER SEXUALITY & IDENTITY IN THE QURAN & HADITH

            by Faris Malik

            The Qur’an generally scorns “approaching males in lust”, as well as the castration of males, as the sin of the people of Lot (Qur’an 7:81, 26:165-166, 27:55, 29:28-29).

            7:81 “Indeed you approach males in lust excluding women…”
            Arabic: اِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّنْ دُوْنِ النِّسَآءِ
            26:165-166 “What! Do you approach the males of the worlds and forsake those whom your Lord has created for you for your mates?”
            Arabic: آ تَاْتُوْنَ الذُّكْرانَ مِنَ الْعلَميْنَ \ وَتَذَرُوْنَ مَا خَلَقَ لَكُمْ رَبُّكُمْ مِّنَ اَزْوَاجِكُمْ
            27:55 “Will you indeed approach males in lust excluding women?”
            Arabic: آ ئِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الرِّجَالَ شَهْوَةً مِّنْ دُوْنِ النِّسَآءِ
            29:28-29 “Most surely you are guilty of an indecency which none of the nations has ever done before you; What! do you come unto the males and cut the passageways [i.e. vas deferens and/or urethra] and do so in your private clubs?”
            Arabic: اِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الْفَاحِشَةَ مَا سَبَقَكُمْ بِهَا مِنْ اَحَدٍ مِّنْ الْعلَمِيْنَ \ آ ئِنَّكُمْ لَتَاْتُوْنَ الرِّجَالَ وَتَقْطَعُوْنَ السَّبِيْلَ وَتَاْتُوْنَ فِي نَادِيْكُمْ

            But the Qur’an does not prohibit using, as passive sex partners, the ancient category of men who by nature lacked desire for women, since such men were not considered “male” as a result of their lack of arousal for women. This kind of man is often known as “gay” in modern times, but in the ancient world he was identified as an anatomically whole “natural eunuch.” Although the Qur’an never uses the word eunuch [خَصِي], the hadith and the books of the legal scholars do. Furthermore, the Qur’an recognizes that some men are “without the defining skill of males” (24:31: غَيْرِ اُولىِ الاِرْبَةِ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ) and so, as domestic servants, are allowed to see women naked. This is a reference to natural eunuchs, i.e. innately and exclusively gay (if not totally asexual) men.
            A person had to be indifferent to women’s bodies in order to assume the role as a servant in women’s private space. In the following case from the hadith, a household servant who had been falsely assumed to be indifferent to women due to his being an “effeminate man” [mukhannathمُخَنَّث ] was evicted by the Prophet because he unexpectedly exhibited a lascivious attitude toward women:

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 114:
            What is forbidden concerning the entering upon the wife by those imitating women.
            (162) Umm Salama reported that the Prophet, peace be upon him, was at her house, and in the house there was an effeminate man [مُخَنَّث], and the effeminate man said to the brother of Umm Salama, Abdullah bin Abi Umayya: “If God makes you all conquer Ta’if tomorrow, I will point out to you the daughter of Ghailan, for surely she has four when coming towards you and eight when she turns her back.” Then the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: “This one shall not call upon you (pl.).”
            Muslim, Collection of Authentic Traditions, Book XXVI (Greetings), Chapter 12:
            (5415) Umm Salama reported that she had an effeminate man [مُخَنَّث] in her house. The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, was once at the house when he (the effeminate man) said to the brother of Umm Salama, ‘Abdullah b. Abu Umayya: “If God makes you all conquer Ta’if tomorrow, I will point out to you the daughter of Ghailan, for surely she has four when coming towards you and eight when she turns her back.” The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, heard this and he said: “These ones shall not call upon you.”

            (5416) ‘A’isha reported that an effeminate man [مُخَنَّث] used to call upon the wives of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and they considered him to be “without the defining skill” (of males) [فكانوا يعدونه من غيْر أولى الارة]. The Prophet, peace be upon him, came by one day as he (the effeminate man) was sitting with some of his wives and he was describing a woman, saying: “When she comes towards you, she has four, and when she turns her back, she has eight.” Then the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: “I see this one knows these things! He shall not call upon you (pl.).” She (‘A’isha) said then they began to observe veil from him.

            Note that in ‘A’isha’s telling of the story, she states that the women allowed him into their private rooms because they assumed he lacked “the defining skill”. ‘A’isha actually quotes the Qur’anic verse about men who “lack the defining skill of males,” demonstrating that his presence in the women’s space would have been proper according to the Qur’an if only he had in fact been “without the defining skill.” However, the statement of the effeminate man about the daughter of Ghailan, whatever it meant, indicated to Muhammad that he did not lack the defining skill of males and that, on the contrary, he had an appreciation of women as sexual objects. This disqualifies him as an intimate domestic servant according to the Qur’an as well as the standards of the day. In a system that depends on household servants to be heterosexually indifferent, the main risk is that this indifference can be faked. In other words, an ordinary male can pretend to be an exclusive homosexual in order to gain free access to the private space of women.
            There are other ahadith against cross-dressers in which the Prophet specifically curses “males” who imitate women and women who imitate males, and in which the consequence of their malfeasance is that he “evicts them from the houses.” The specific reference to “males” who do this (as opposed to non-male eunuchs, for example) is made very explicit:

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXXII (Dress), Chapter 61:
            (773) The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, cursed female-impersonators [m.pl.] who are males, and male-impersonators [f.pl.] who are women.
            Arabic: لَعَنَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صلى اللهُ عليهِ وَسلَّمَ المُتَشَبِّهِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ بالنِّساءِ وَالمُتَشَبِّهاتِ مِنَ النِّساءِ بالرِّجالِ
            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXXII (Dress), Chapter 62:
            (774) The Prophet, peace be upon him, cursed the effeminate men [m.pl.] who are males, and the male-pretenders [f.pl.] who are women, and he said: Evict them from your houses, and the Prophet, peace be upon him, evicted such-and-such [m.sg.] and ‘Umar evicted such-and-such [f.sg.].
            Arabic: لَعَنَ النَّبِي صلى اللهُ عليهِ وَسلَّمَ المُخَنَّثِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالمُتَرَجِّلاتِ مِنَ النِّساءِ وَ قَالَ: أخْرِجُوهُمْ مِنْ بُيُوتِكُمْ، قالَ: فأخْرَجَ النَّبِيُّ صلى اللهُ عليهِ وَسلَّمَ فُلانا، وأخْرَجَ عُمَرُ فُلانَةَ

            The words “males” and “women” are obviously emphatic here because the grammar does not really require them to be used, unless it be for emphasis or clarification. Masculine gender is already provided grammatically by the endings on the words “impersonators” and “effeminates,” and feminine gender is already provided in the words “impersonators” and “male-pretenders.” Given the emphasis, the curse is specifically directed only at “males” and “women,” and does not cover non-males who might be female-impersonators (or non-women who might be male-impersonators, if indeed there was a recognition of “non-women”). It’s okay to be a drag queen as long as you are not a straight man posing to gain access to unsuspecting women, or to the wives of unsuspecting husbands.
            The Qur’an recognizes that there are some people who are “ineffectual” [عَقِيم], thus neither male nor female:
            42:49 “To Allah belongs the dominion over the heavens and the earth. It creates what It wills. It prepares for whom It wills females, and It prepares for whom It wills males.
            50 Or It marries together the males and the females, and It makes those whom It wills to be ineffectual. Indeed It is the Knowing, the Powerful.”
            Arabic: للهِ مُلْكُ السَّموتِ وَالْاَرْضِ يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَآءُ يَهَبُ لِمَنْ يَّشَآءُ اِنَاثاً وَّيَهَبُ لِمَنْ يَّشَآءُ الذُّكُوْرَ \ اَوْ يُزَوَّجُهُمْ ذُكْرَاناً وَّاِنَاثاً وَيَجْعَلُ مَنْ يَّشَآءُ عَقِيْماً اِنَّهُ عَلِيْمٌ قَدِيْمٌ
            These last two verses (42:49 and 50) are usually interpreted differently in English translations to say that God bestows daughters or sons on whom It wills and gives some people both sons and daughters. But there are problems with this interpretation, one of which being that the word for causing to marry or pairing up [زَوَّجَ] is used in the second verse. When families have boys and girls, the boys and girls do not usually arrive in pairs! The second problem is that, in Qur’anic verses mentioning males and females together, the males are usually mentioned first, and the females second (e.g., 3:195, 4:12, 4:124, 6:143-144, 16:97, 40:40, 42:50, 49:13, 53:21, 53:45, 75:39, 92:3). This is the only verse in the Qur’an, as far as I know, in which the female is mentioned before the male. If these two verses were talking about sons and daughters, we would expect sons to be mentioned before daughters.
            In this case, the “males first” principle would indicate that the lines are referring to females and males not as offspring, but as counterparts, i.e. objects of desire, for “whom(ever) God wills.” The female objects of desire are mentioned first because they are most typically objects of desire for males. Hence, even this verse is referring to males first, as the most typical “whom(ever)” for whom God prepares females. Yet the use of the word “whom(ever)” leaves it open for females to be objects of desires for other females as well, when God wills, and for males to be love objects for females and other passive non-males. I believe this verse is very neatly and concisely describing the varieties of sexual orientation and gender, which Allah, the All-Knowing and All-Powerful, creates as Allah wishes.
            The ineffectual can include abstinent women as well as men, and in fact “the abstinent ones among women, who do not hope for marriage” [وَالْقَوَاعِدُ مِنَ النِّسآءِ الّتِي لَا يَرْجُوْنَ نِكَاحاً], are permitted to “put off their cover” in Sura 24:60.
            Another intriguing example of a gender variant woman is Jesus’s mother Mary. According to ancient notions about procreation, males were the only ones capable of producing seed. It would be impossible for a woman to give birth to a child, let alone a boy, without receiving seed from a male. In Christianity, this problem is solved by making God the male father of Jesus. According to the Qur’an, however, God does not procreate. This means that the seed that became Jesus came from within Mary. If Mary carried viable seed originating from within her, then by ancient definitions, she was a male, despite appearances to the contrary. So the Qur’an says that, when Mary was born, her mother declared that she was a female baby, but God knew better:

            (Qur’an 3:36) Lord, surely, I have brought it forth a female – and Allah knew best what she brought forth – and the male is not like the female…
            Arabic: رَبِّ اِنِّي وَضَعْتُهَآ اُنْثى وَاللهُ اَعْلَمُ بِمَا وَضَعَت وَلَيْسَ الذَّكَرُ كَالاُنْثى

            There are other traditions about the gender variance of Mary. I have argued elsewhere that Mary’s virginity is not merely the innocent state of a girl who has not yet known a man, but a more permanent rejection of sex with men, like that of the Vestal virgins in Rome. In Isaiah 7:14, it is predicted that a virgin will conceive bear a son, but the word for virgin used there is not the generic bethulah (בתולה) used throughout the Hebrew scripture for girls who have not yet had sex. Instead, the word almah (עלמה) is used, a very rare word in the scriptures, which is the female counterpart to elem (עלמ), meaning boy. In the other verses in which it is used, it is compatible with a meaning of tomboy or rebuffer of men (cf. Proverbs 30:18-19, in which an almah appears to be impermeable to men).
            Homosexual activity by straight men
            Homosexual activity by homosexuals (eunuchs) is not spoken of in the Qur’an, which mentions only the unjust homosexual rape perpetrated by straight men against other straight men. Besides the Lut story, sexual exploitation of straight males is also alluded to in the assurance that the prophet Joseph’s slaveholders “abstained from him” (12:20: وَكَانُوْا فِيهِ مِنَ الزَّاهِدِيْنَ).
            But the Qur’an and hadith also have traces of the permitted homosexual desires of straight men. There is even a hadith in Bukhari, admittedly giving not the Prophet’s opinion but that of Abu Jafar, according to which a pedophile is prohibited from marrying the mother of his boy-beloved if there is penetration:

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 25:
            As for whom(ever) plays with a boy: if he caused him to enter him, then he shall not marry his mother.
            Arabic: فِيمَنْ يَلْعَبُ بالصَّبِي: إنْ أدْخَلَهُ فِيهِ فَلا يَتَزَوَّجَنَّ أُمَّهُ

            (This rule is accompanied in the same chapter by prohibitions against a man marrying both a mother and her daughter.) Apparently according to this hadith, even sexual penetration of a boy is not considered sodomy, because if it was, surely the sodomite would have more worries than whether he could marry the boy’s mother! Like whether he preferred to die by fire, stoning, or falling from a high tower! These are some of the punishments mentioned in the hadith for “doing as the people of Lut did.” [A reader wrote in to say that this hadith would not necessarily imply that penetration of boys was not sodomy, but could be a recognition of the fact that not all crimes will be discovered and punished and that one who does penetrate a boy, even if he is not punished for sodomy for whatever reason, should at least know in his own conscience that the mother of his boyfriend is off limits. In any case, one possible inference from this hadith is still very interesting: namely, that if a man plays with a boy without penetration, then marrying the mother is still a possibility!!]
            The distinction between pederasty (sex with boys) and sodomy (penetration of “males”) was commonly, albeit not universally maintained throughout the ancient world, and indeed survived throughout most of the history of Islam until at least the nineteenth century (in spite of the futile objections of some medieval scholars). Apparently, boy-love was considered okay by many people because, like “natural eunuchs,” adolescent boys were also thought to lack the “defining skill of males” (sexual potency with women). The Qur’an itself gives support to pederasts in its glimpses of paradise:

            52:24 And they shall have boys [غِلْمَانٌ] who will walk around among them, as if they were hidden pearls.
            56:22-23 And dark-eyed ones [حُوْرٌ عِيْنٌ], the like of hidden pearls
            76:19 And boys never altering in age [وِلْدَانٌ مُتَخَلَّدُوْنَ] will circulate among them, when you see them you will count them as scattered pearls.
            2:25 And they shall have immaculate partners [اَزْوَاجٌ مُّطَهَّرَةٌ] in [the gardens] …
            4:57 And they shall have immaculate partners [اَزْوَاجٌ مُّطَهَّرَةٌ] in them …

            One of the great male Sufi contemporaries of Rabi’a al-‘Adawiyya provided a divine justification for a pederastic relationship, which was repeated without a hint of disapproval in a 10th century book about great Sufi women:

            One day Rabi’a saw Rabah [al-Qaysi] kissing a young boy [وهو يقبّل صبيا صغيرا]. ‘Do you love him?’ she asked. ‘Yes,’ he said. To which she replied, ‘I did not imagine that there was room in your heart to love anything other than God, the Glorious and Mighty!’ Rabah was overcome at this and fainted. When he awoke, he said, ‘On the contrary, this is a mercy that God Most High has put into the hearts of his slaves.’
            (Quoted from as-Sulami, Early Sufi Women = ذكر النّسوة المتعبّدات الصّوفيات, translated by Rkia E. Cornell, Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae, 1999, pp. 78-79.)

            Sexual use of eunuchs
            Besides boys, straight Muslim men were occasionally interested in grown adults as well, provided they were not “male.” There is a hadith in which the Prophet’s companions asked whether they were allowed to use men (presumably prisoners of war) as eunuchs to fulfill their sexual urges, since they were far from their wives.

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 6:
            (9) Narrated ibn Mas’ud: We used to fight alongside the Prophet, peace be upon him. There were no women with us, so we said: “O Messenger of God, may we not treat some as eunuchs [ألا نَستَخْصِي]?” He forbade us to do so.

            The version in Bukhari, Book LXII Ch. 8:13a says that rather than let the companions “treat [some] as eunuchs” while stuck out on military campaign, the Prophet allowed them to have sex with corrupted women [رَخَّصَ لَنا أنْ نَنكِح المَرأَة بالشَّوْبِ], and he recited to them from the Qur’an (5:87): “O ye who believe! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression.” This reflects the ancient view that a man could only commit adultery by having sex with a married woman (who was not his wife, of course).
            The fact that Muhammad forbade the companions from designating men as eunuchs is not the point here. Of course, using a straight male as a eunuch was wrong — that was essentially the sin of the people of Lut. But what about using a eunuch (i.e. one who permanently lacks arousal with women) as a eunuch? Given that ibn Mas’ud made reference to the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification, and given that the Prophet understood what he meant, that indicates that the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification was known in Arabic society, and was considered a use that was appropriate to eunuchs. Since eunuchs were not considered male, there was no prohibition against it, not even in the Qur’an.
            Eunuchs were still sex objects for straight men in the Mamluk dynasty, according to David Ayalon in Eunuchs, Caliphs, and Sultans: A Study in Power Relationships (Jerusalem, 1999). They not only served to prevent older Mamluks from having sexual access to younger trainees:

            The eunuchs seem to have served as a shield against homosexual lust in yet another way. They themselves formed the target of that lust, thus diverting it from the youngsters. They are described as being womanly and docile in bed at night and manly and warlike by day in a campaign and in similar circumstances (hum nisaa’ li-mutma’inn muqeem wa rijaal in kaanat al-asfaar; li-annahum bil-nahaar fawaaris wa-bil-layl ‘araa’is). [Arabic transcribed by Ayalon on page 34, from Abu Mansur al-Tha’alibi, Al-Lataa’if wal-Zaraa’if, Cairo 1324/1906-7, p. 79, lines 1-7; and the same quote from Tha’alibi in his Tamtheel wal-Muhaadara, Cairo 1381/1961, p. 224.]

            A eunuch Companion?
            As for the issue of whether Muhammad himself expressly acknowledged that some people by nature are incapable of heterosexuality, thus being natural eunuchs, consider the following ahadith.
            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 2:
            The Statement of the Prophet, peace be upon him: “Whoever is able to perform coitus should get married, for it helps him lower his gaze and use his private parts in the best way.” And should he get married who does not have the ability to consummate a marriage?
            (3) Narrated ‘Alqama: […] I heard [Abdullah] saying [to Uthman]: […] The Prophet, peace be upon him, once said to us: “O young men! Whoever among you is able to perform coitus, he should get married, and whoever is not able, should abstain, because for him it is a harm.”
            The Arabic of the last sentence is: يا مَعْشَرَ الشَّبابِ مَن اسْتَطاعَ مِنْكُم الباءَةَ فَلْيَتَزَوَّجْ، وَمَنْ لَمْ يَستَطِيع فَعَلَيْهِ بالصَّوْم، فإنَّهُ لَهُ وِجاءٌ

            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 3:
            Whoever is not able to perform coitus should abstain.
            (4) Narrated Abdullah: We were with the Prophet, peace be upon him, as young men and we did not feel any passion. And the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, said to us: “O young men! Whoever among you is able to perform coitus, he should get married, and whoever is not able, should abstain, because for him it is a harm.”
            In the next case, a specific man, Uthman bin Madh’un, comes to ask if he can be permitted to live a life of asceticism, and he is not allowed to:
            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 8:
            What is disliked about asceticism and eunuchism.
            (11) Narrated Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas: The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, forbade Uthman bin Madh’un to be an ascetic, and if he had allowed him, we would have lived as eunuchs.
            (12) Narrated Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas: He forbade this, that is to say, the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, forbade ‘Uthman bin Madh’un, and if he had allowed him to be an ascetic, we would have lived as eunuchs.
            The Arabic of the last sentence is: وَلَوْ أجازَ لَهُ النَّبَتُّلَ لاخْتَصَيْنا
            But notice the different outcome in the following case:
            Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book LXII (Marriage), Chapter 8:
            (13b) Narrated Abu Huraira: I said, “O Messenger of God, I am a young male, and I fear torment for my soul, but I do not find [or feel] that with which to marry a woman” [إنِّي رَجُلٌ شابٌّ وأنا أخافُ على نَفسِي العَنَتَ وَلا أجِدُ ما أتَزَوَّجُ بِهِ النِّساءَ]. He remained silent, then I said the same thing again, and he remained silent, and I said the same thing again, and he remained silent, and then I said the same thing again. Then the Prophet of God, peace be upon him, said: “O Abu Huraira, the pen is dried as to what you are suited for. So be a eunuch for that reason or leave it alone.” [يا أبا هُرَيْرَةَ، جَفَّ القَلَمُ بِمَا أنتَ لاق فاخْتَصِ عَلى ذَلِكَ أوْ ذَرْ].
            If Muhammad’s answer to Abu Huraira is to make sense, then of course it must bear a relation to the statement Abu Huraira made. First we have to ask what kind of torment Abu Huraira feared for his soul? Muhammad Muhsin Khan, the translator of Bukhari into English, interpreted it as fear of committing illicit sexual intercourse. If that interpretation is correct, then we still have to determine what “illicit sexual intercourse” would mean for Abu Huraira. As a self-described “male,” two forms of sexual activity would be inadmissible and therefore the temptation to them would cause torment for his soul: the desire to be sexually passive with a man (known as ubnah أُبنَة) or the desire to commit adultery with a female. Yet, Abu Huraira [“the father of kittens”] seemed to hint at a solution to his dilemma when he said he did not “find” that which was required for marrying a woman. The Arabic word for “find” [وَجِدَ] also has the meaning of “feel, sense”. If Abu Huraira’s statement meant he did not feel passion for women, then obviously he could not be fearing the temptation to adultery with women. In that case, only passive homosexuality was a danger. However, if he would not ever marry a woman, due to impotency with women or for any other reason, then he would not be acting as a male, but rather as a eunuch, in which case passive homosexuality would not be forbidden for him. But Muhammad cautions him that his identity, either as a eunuch or as a male, has already been determined by his Creator (“the pen is dried”), and he must figure it out which it is and live his life accordingly. If he ever intends to have sex with a woman (i.e. act as a male), then he must avoid passive homosexuality and get married.

            Prohibition of public displays
            Finally, there is a pair of verses calling for punishment in cases of indecency (فَاحِشَة) between people of any gender (4:15-16). These verses are often cited as a prohibition of homosexuality because one of the verses refers to indecency committed by women (with the implication that men were not involved). But in referring separately to an act committed by women, these verses are simply covering all the bases, so to speak. In order to address all cases, it is necessarily for grammatical reasons to deal separately with an offense by women only. As to what is meant by an indecency, the text does not specify. But in order for someone to be convicted of the offense, four eyewitnesses have to testify to it, which seems to indicate some sort of public act. Certainly the idea that, for the sake of decency, erotic behavior should be carried out in private goes back at least as far as Plato. In any case, by “indecency,” these verses are not referring to homosexuality per se, since two people of opposite sex can also be covered by verse 4:16.
            THE SEALED NECTAR OF MOHAMMEDANISM.
            THE PERFECT MUSLIM
            And surely thou hast sublime morals
            (Surat Al-Qalam 68:4).

            Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar
            (Surat Al-Ahzab 33:21).

            Muslims believe that the Koran is the eternal word/laws of god to acts as a divine guidance for mankind about how to live a moral, righteous life. Prophet Muhammad, the highest perfection of human life and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct in Islamic belief, emulated the guidance of Allah perfectly.

            Muhammad fantasized about baby Aisha before soliciting her from her father

            Sahih Bukhari 9.140 Narrated ‘Aisha:

            Allah’s apostle said to me, “you were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, ‘uncover (her),’ and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), ‘if this is from Allah, then it must happen.

            Muhammad, 50, marries baby Aisha at age 6

            Sahih Bukhari volume 5, book 58, number 234

            Narrated Aisha: the prophet engaged (married) me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, um ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me.

            …….she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some ansari women who said, “best wishes and Allah’s blessing and a good luck.” then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

            Bukhari vol 8, bk 73, no 151

            Narrated ‘Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the prophet, & my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the prophet would call them to join & play with me. (the playing with the dolls & similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-bari page 143, vol.13)

            HOW TO THIGH

            Now let us see how thighing is practiced on a female child & who began this evil practice. According to an official Fatwa issued in Saudi Arabia, the prophet Muhammad began to practice thighing his child-bride, Aisha when she was 6 years old until she reached 9 years of age (Fatwa No. 31409). The hadith mentioned the prophet Muhammad started performing literal sex with Aisha ONLY when she reached the age of 9 (Sahih al-Bukhari, book 62, hadith No. 89).

            Muslim scholars collectively agree, a child becomes an adult, available for sexual intercourse as soon as she reaches the age of nine. Likewise, the Shari’a allows any of the faithful to marry a six-year-old child.
            According to the fatwa, the prophet Muhammad could not have sex with his fiancée, Aisha when she was six due to her small size & age. However, the fatwa said that at age six, he would put his penis between her thighs and massage it gently because he did not want to harm her.

            Imagine a man of 51 removing the clothes of a 6-year-old girl and slipping his erect penis between her thighs, rubbing her until he ejaculated and his semen ran down her thighs. To this day, this is considered a benevolent act on the part of the adult male “not wanting to harm her.” What harm could be inflicted upon a young girl mentally and emotionally if not a grown man showing her his penis and stripping her of her clothes and rubbing his male organ between her legs?

            Of course the twisted mind that does such an evil to a female child, would not hesitate to ejaculate on her body. And if this sexually perverted evil frame of mind committed such an act upon a child, the pedophile would not stop at ejaculating on her. His evil desire would go further and rape the child before she was a mature adult. This is exactly what Muhammad did to Aisha when she was yet a child of 9.

            Before she reached puberty, he began to have sex with her. Let us see what the fatwa said about the prophet of Islam and his child-bride, Aisha.“Praise be to Allah and peace be upon the one after whom there is no [further] prophet. After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwas (religious decrees) reviewed the question presented to the grand Mufti Abu Abdullah Muhammad Al-Shamari, with reference number 1809 issued on 3/8/1421(Islamic calendar).

            The inquirer asked the following:‘It has become wide spread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufakhathat of the children (mufakhathat literally translated means “placing between the thighs of children” which means placing the male erected penis between the thighs of a child). What is the opinion of scholars knowing full well that the prophet, the peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, also practiced the “thighing” of Aisha – the mother of believers ?’
            After the committee studied the issue, they gave the following reply: ‘It has not been the practice of the Muslims throughout the centuries to resort to this unlawful practice that has come to our countries from pornographic movies that the kofar (infidels) and enemies of Islam send. As for the Prophet, peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, thighing his fiancée Aisha. She was six years of age and he could not have intercourse with her due to her small age.

            That is why the prophet peace and prayers of Allah be upon him placed his penis between her thighs and massaged it lightly, as the apostle of Allah had control of his penis not like other believers’” (Fatwa No. 31409).

            Thighing of children is practiced in many Arab and Muslim countries, notably in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, and the Gulf countries. Also evil practices like altamatu’a bil almuka’aba (pleasure from sexual contact with her breasts), altamatu’a bil alsagirah (pleasure from sexual contact with a baby girl), altamatu’a bil alradi’ah, (pleasure from sexual contact with a suckling female infant), (Reported by Baharini Women’s Rights Activist, Ghada Jamshir)

            AISHA WASHING SEMEN FROM MUHAMMAD’S CLOTHES

            From the Hadith of Bukhari:

            Volume 1, Book 4, Number 229:

            Narrated ‘Aisha:

            I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).

            Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:

            Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar:

            I asked ‘Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. ”

            Volume 1, Book 4, Number 232:

            Narrated ‘Amr bin Maimun:

            I heard Sulaiman bin Yasar talking about the clothes soiled with semen. He said that ‘Aisha had said, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayers while water spots were still visible on them.

            Volume 1, Book 4, Number 233:

            Narrated ‘Aisha:

            I used to wash the semen off the clothes of the Prophet and even then I used to notice one or more spots on them.

            From the Hadith of Bukhari:

            Volume 1, Book 4, Number 229:

            Narrated ‘Aisha:

            I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).

            Volume 1, Book 4, Number 230:

            Narrated ‘Aisha:

            as above (229).

            Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:

            Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar:

            I asked ‘Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. ”

            Volume 1, Book 4, Number 232:

            Narrated ‘Amr bin Maimun:

            I heard Sulaiman bin Yasar talking about the clothes soiled with semen. He said that ‘Aisha had said, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayers while water spots were still visible on them.

            Volume 1, Book 4, Number 233:

            Narrated ‘Aisha:

            I used to wash the semen off the clothes of the Prophet and even then I used to notice one or more spots on them.

            Mohammed heard one of his wives was leaving him, so he rushed home where he found her on the carpet in front of the tent with her belongings; he sat down beside her & said, “I heard you were planning to leave me?”
            She replied, “Yes, I heard your other wives saying, you were a pedophile!”
            Mohammed thinks for a minute or so & then responds,
            “that’s a mighty big word for a 6 year old child.”

            THE QURAN
            &
            MARRYING LITTLE GIRLS
            Islam does allow you to marry pre-menstruating girls. The following verse is from At-Talaq (or Divorce). Islam’s main concern during a divorce is knowing who the father is (in case of a pregnancy). The waiting period is known as iddah.

            65.4 Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if you have any doubts, is three months, AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NO COURSES (it is the same): for those who are pregnant, their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make things easy for them.

            Tafsir al-Jalalayn (Commentary)
            And [as for] those of your women who (read allā’ī or allā’i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] those who have NOT YET MENSTRUATED, because of their YOUNG AGE, their period shall [also] be three months — both cases apply to other than those whose spouses have died; for these [latter] their period is prescribed in the verse: they shall wait by themselves for four months and ten [days] [Q. 2:234]. And those who are pregnant, their term, the conclusion of their prescribed [waiting] period if divorced or if their spouses be dead, shall be when they deliver. And whoever fears God, He will make matters ease for him, in this world and in the Hereafter.

            Tafsir Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahid
            (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) [65:4]. Said Muqatil: “When the verse (Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart…), Kallad ibn al-Nu‘man ibn Qays al-Ansari said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is the waiting period of the woman who does not menstruate and the woman who has not menstruated yet? And what is the waiting period of the pregnant woman?’ And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse”. Abu Ishaq al-Muqri’ informed us Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdun> Makki ibn ‘Abdan Abu’l-Azhar Asbat ibn Muhammad Mutarrif Abu ‘Uthman ‘Amr ibn Salim who said: “When the waiting period for divorced and widowed women was mentioned in Surah al-Baqarah, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, some women of Medina are saying: there are other women who have not been mentioned!’ He asked him: ‘And who are they?’ He said: ‘Those WHO ARE TOO YOUNG [such that they have not started menstruating yet], those who are too old [whose menstruation has stopped] and those who are pregnant’. And so this verse (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) was revealed”.

            Islamic Websitehttp://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/12667
            “And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise…”

            Tafsir ibn Kathir (Read at your own leisure)
            http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=65&tid=54223

            AIN’T GONNA FOLLOW NO CHILD MOLESTER

            They try to tell me my religion is wrong

            They try to tell me to follow Islam

            They said their prophet was a righteous dude

            But I found out none of their words were true

            I read the Quran and I read the hadith

            And the sickness of Muhammad was apparent to me

            He justified perversion in the name of Allah

            When he married a girl too young for a bra

            II

            She was playing with dolls when the prophet came

            Her childhood was stolen in Allah’s name

            Aisha was nine when he took her to bed

            Don’t tell me that fool’s not sick in the head

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester,

            Islam is not for me.

            Islam is not for me.

            III

            The sickness of the Islamic mind

            Has caused the Mullahs to be blind

            To justify their prophet they would justify sin

            So the sins of the prophet are repeated again

            All over the world in Islamic states

            9 year old girls suffer cruel fate

            Sold into marriage to twisted men

            And Aisha’s sad story is repeated again

            IV

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester,

            Islam is not for me.

            Islam is not for me.

            Do you care about women all over the world?

            Do you care about those little girls?

            Then stand up and fight for human rights

            Speak out against the laws of Islam

            V

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester,

            Islam is not for me.

            Islam is not for me.

            Islam is not for me.

            WHY ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

            Satan Attends Every Muslim Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant
            Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)

            Whenever a Muslim child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)
            Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

            ARABIC POETRY GLORIFIES SODOMY

            O THE JOY OF SODOMY

            So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
            Turn not away from it–
            therein is wondrous pleasure.
            Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
            twisting on his temple
            and ride as he stands like some gazelle
            standing to her mate.
            A lad whom all can see girt with sword
            and belt not like your whore who has
            to go veiled.
            Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
            very best to mount them, for women are
            the mounts of the devils

            ARAB POET Abu Nuwas:

            ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER F–KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

            In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

            EVEN MOHAMMED & HIS COMPANIONS WERE FINGER F–KED

            ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

            You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
            In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.
            TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

            “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

            For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

            CLERIC YASSER HABIB EXPOSES UMAR

            It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
            A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

            The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
            One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.
            If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

            Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

            When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

    • Lucky, do you have a loo to do poo-poo?

      Inventing a better toilet for India, funded by Bill Gates!!!!

      Microsoft co-founder and billionaire Bill Gates, through his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, has launched “reinvent the toilet challenge – India”.

      “Last year we issued a call to reinvent the toilet. Now we’re issuing one specifically for #India,” Mr Gates tweeted today.

      Hehe…”Also, 60 per cent of the world’s population without access to a toilet are in India”.

      (http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/inventing-a-better-toilet-for-india-)

      • TOILET TRAINING IGNORANT, STUPID, BRAIN DEAD MOHAMMEDANS:

        3 STONES MOHAMMEDAN TOILET PAPER

        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.163
        Narrated Abu Huraira
        Allah’s Apostle said, “If anyone of you performs ablution he should put water in his nose and then blow it out and whoever cleans his private parts with stones should do so with odd numbers. And whoever wakes up from his sleep should wash his hands before putting them in the water for ablution, because nobody knows where his hands were during sleep.”
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.158
        Narrated Abdullah
        The Prophet went out to answer the call of nature and asked me to bring three stones. I found two stones and searched for the third but could not find it. So took a dried piece of dung and brought it to him. He took the two stones and threw away the dung and said, “This is a filthy thing.”
        Al-Bukhari- 1.157
        Narrated Abu Huraira
        I followed the Prophet while he was going out to answer the call of nature. He used not to look this way or that. So, when I approached near him he said to me, “Fetch for me some stones for cleaning the privates parts, and do not bring a bone or a piece of dung.” So I brought the stones in the corner of my garment and placed them by his side and I then went away from him. When he finished having a shit, he used them.
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.155
        Narrated Abu Qatada
        Allah’s Apostle said, “Whenever anyone of you drinks water, he should not breathe in the drinking utensil, and whenever anyone of you goes to a lavatory, he should neither touch his penis nor clean his private parts with his right hand.”
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.150
        Narrated Abdullah bin Umar
        I went up to the roof of Hafsa’s house for some job and I saw Allah’s Apostle answering the call of nature facing Sham (Syria, Jordan, Palestine and Lebanon regarded as one country) with his back towards the Qibla. (See Hadith No. 147).

        2 BRICKS-3 STONES & A GOOD SHIT

        Sahih Al-Bukhari – 1.151
        Narrated Abdullah bin Umar
        Once I went up the roof of our house and saw Allah’s Apostle answering the call of nature while sitting over two bricks facing Baitul-Maqdis (Jerusalem). (See Hadith No. 147).
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.147
        Narrated Abdullah bin Umar
        People say, “Whenever you sit for answering the call of nature, you should not face the Qibla or Baitul-Maqdis (Jerusalem).” I told them, “Once I went up the roof of our house and I saw Allah’s Apostle answering the call of nature while sitting on two bricks facing Baitul-Maqdis (Jerusalem) (but there was a screen covering him.)” (Fateh-al-Bari, Page 258, Vol. 1).

        DON’T HOLD YOUR WILLIE IN THE LOO

        Sahih Al-Bukhari – 1.156
        Narrated Abu Qatada
        The Prophet said, “Whenever anyone of you has a piss he should not hold his penis or clean his private parts with his right hand. (And while drinking) one should not breathe in the drinking utensil.”
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.224
        Once the Prophet went to the dumps of some people and passed urine while standing. He then asked for water and so I brought it to him and he performed ablution.

        PISSING IN MOSQUE

        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.219
        Narrated Abu Huraira
        A Bedouin stood up and started making water in the mosque. The people caught him but the Prophet ordered them to leave him & to pour a bucket or a tumbler of water over the place where he had pissed. The Prophet then said, “You have been sent to make things easy & not to make them difficult.”

        PISSING ON YOUR SHOES

        Bukhari – 1.215
        Narrated Ibn Abbas
        Once the Prophet, while passing through one of the graveyards of Medina or Mecca heard the voices of two persons who were being tortured in their graves. The Prophet said, “These two persons are being tortured not for a major sin (to avoid).” The Prophet then added, “Yes! (they are being tortured for a major sin).

        Indeed, one of them never saved himself from being soiled with his urine while the other used to go about with calumnies (to make enmity between friends). The Prophet then asked for a green leaf of a date-palm tree, broke it into two pieces and put one on each grave. On being asked why he had done so, he replied, “I hope that their torture might be lessened, till these get dried.”
        Bukhari – 1.217
        Narrated Ibn Abbas
        The Prophet once passed by two graves and said, “These 2 persons are being tortured not for a major sin (to avoid). One of them never saved himself from being soiled with his urine, while the other made enmity between friends.” The Prophet then took a green leaf of a date-palm tree, split it into (pieces) and fixed one on each grave. They said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Why have you done so?” He replied, “I hope that their punishment might be lessened till these (the pieces of the leaf) become dry.”

        PISSING IN STAGNANT WATER

        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.239
        Narrated Abu Huraira
        Allah’s Apostle said, “We (Muslims) are the last (people to come in the world) but (will be) the foremost (on the Day of Resurrection).” The same narrator told that the Prophet had said, “You should not pass urine in stagnant water which is not flowing then (you may need to) wash in it.”
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.226
        Narrated Abu Wail
        Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari used to lay great stress on the question of urination and he used to say, “If anyone from Bani Israel happened to soil his clothes with urine, he used to cut that portion away.” Hearing that, Hudhaifa said to Abu Wail, “I wish he (Abu Musa) didn’t (lay great stress on that matter).” Hudhaifa added, “Allah’s Apostle went to the dumps of some people and urinated while standing.”
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.225
        Narrated Hudhaifa
        The Prophet and I walked till we reached the dumps of some people. He stood, as any one of you stands, behind a wall and urinated. I went away, but he beckoned me to come. So I approached him and stood near his back till he finished.

        MILK & URINE SMOOTHIE

        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.234
        Narrated Abu Qilaba
        Anas said, “Some people of ‘Ukl or ‘Uraina tribe came to Medina and its climate did not suit them. So the Prophet ordered them to go to the herd of (Milch) camels and to drink their milk and urine (as a medicine). So they went as directed and after they became healthy, they killed the shepherd of the Prophet and drove away all the camels.
        PART 2
        The news reached the Prophet early in the morning and he sent (men) in their pursuit and they were captured and brought at noon. He then ordered to cut their hands and feet (and it was done), and their eyes were branded with heated pieces of iron, They were put in ‘Al-Harra’ and when they asked for water, no water was given to them.” Abu Qilaba said, “Those people committed theft and murder, became infidels after embracing Islam and fought against Allah and His Apostle .”

        THE CHILD WHO PISSED ON MO & LIVED

        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.222
        Narrated Aisha
        (the mother of faithful believers) A child was brought to Allah’s Apostle and it urinated on the garment of the Prophet. The Prophet asked for water and poured it over the soiled place.
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.223
        I brought my young son, who had not started eating (ordinary food) to Allah’s Apostle who took him and made him sit in his lap. The child urinated on the garment of the Prophet, so he asked for water and poured it over the soiled (area) and did not wash it.

        UMAR IS ALLAH

        Bukhari – 1.148
        Narrated Aisha
        The wives of the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. ‘Umar used to say to the Prophet “Let your wives be veiled,” but Allah’s Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam’a the wife of the Prophet went out at ‘Isha’ time and she was a tall lady. ‘Umar addressed her and said, “I have recognized you, O Sauda.”
        PART 2
        He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of “Al-Hijab” (A complete body cover excluding the eyes).

        FARTING IN THE MOSQUE

        PART 1

        A Fartwa on farting in the mosque
        by SHEIKYERMAMI on AUGUST 31, 2009
        Islam Q & A:

        She passes wind(FARTS) continually; does this mean she cannot go to the mosque?
        Am I not allowed to pray in the mosque, because I suffer from constant emission of wind (FARTING) that does not have a smell? How often do I have to do wudoo’ in order to offer obligatory and naafil prayers?.

        PART 2

        Praise be to Allaah.

        Firstly:

        Emission of wind (FARTING) invalidates wudoo’, because of the report narrated by al-Bukhaari (135) from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “No prayer will be accepted from one who is in a state of minor impurity until he does wudoo’.” A man from Hadramawt said: What is minor impurity, O Abu Hurayrah? He said: Breaking wind (FARTING) silently or loudly.

        PART 3

        2 WAYS TO FART

        Breaking wind (FARTING) is of two types:
        1.
        Where there is a time when it stops, such as if it was coming out, then it stops for a while during which one can do wudoo’ and pray. In this case, you have to do wudoo’ and pray during the time when it stops.

        • PART 4

        THE SECOND WAY TO FART
        2.

        Where it is continual (FARTING) and there is no time when it stops, rather it may come out at any time. In this case you should do wudoo’ for every prayer after the time for that prayer begins, and pray the obligatory prayer and whatever naafil prayers you want with this wudoo’, and whatever wind comes out will not affect you, even if that is during prayer.

        MO-HAM-MAD HATER OF FARTS

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 137:
        Narrated Abu Huraira:

        Allah’s Apostle said, “The prayer of a person who does Hadath (passes, urine, stool or wind) (FARTING, PISSING or SHITTING) is not accepted till he performs (repeats) the ablution.” A person from Hadaramout asked Abu Huraira, “What is ‘Hadath’?” Abu Huraira replied, ” ‘Hadath’ means the passing of wind (FARTING) from the anus.”

        Note: Ritualistic cleaning is necessary after farting.

        TO ALL YOU BUTT-SNIFFERS

        “Allaah intends for you ease”

        [al-Baqarah 2:185]

        “and has not laid upon you in religion any hardship”

        If what comes out (FART) has an unpleasant smell, it is not permissible for you to go to the mosque, because of the annoyance that this will cause to the worshipers and the angels.
        [al-Hajj 22:78].

        End quote.

        BIG FART

        It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (5/411):

        The basic principle is that emission of wind (FARTING) invalidates wudoo’, but if it comes out of a person constantly, he has to do wudoo’ for each prayer when he wants to pray, then if it (FART) comes out of him whilst he is praying, it will not invalidate the prayer and he has to continue his prayer until he completes it, as a concession from Allah to His slaves and so as to relieve them of hardship, as Allah says (interpretation of the meaning)

        WHY MUSLIMS CAN’T EAT CABBAGE & BACON (fart, fart, fart)

        Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
        If a person cannot remain in a state of purity for the length of the prayer, he should do wudoo’ and pray, and it will not matter if anything comes out of him during the prayer, and this wudoo’ will not be invalidated by that, according to the consensus of the imams. The most he has to do is do wudoo’ for each prayer.

        End quote from Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 21/221.

        DR MUHAMMAD, I PRESUME?

        His Quack Cures
        Narrated Abu Huraira:

        The Prophet said “If a house fly falls in the drink of anyone of you, he should dip it (in the drink), for one of its wings has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 54, Number 537)

        Why is Muhammad making sure with his instruction that the fly gets a full body ablution in your drink, transferring the maximum number of bacteria and diseases into it?

        Here is what the medical world says:

        There are many bacteria and parasites that infest the fly, making flies a major factor in spreading many diseases by touching surfaces with their legs or their saliva. After walking on much excrement, flies may carry up to as many as 6 million bacterias on their feet. SO BE WARY OF FOODS THAT HAVE BEEN TOUCHED BY A FLY!

        … A well fed fly defecates at least once every 5 minutes!

        Another website has this to say about flies:

        … The two-winged flies constitute a larger order of insects and well over 110,000 different species are known throughout the world. This group forms one of the most highly specialized of insect orders and many species are of the utmost significance in regard to human welfare. If there is anything as “harmless as a fly”, it is certainly not the common housefly or any of its relatives.

        Diseases, e.g., malaria, dysentery, sleeping sickness, onchocerciasis, elephantiasis and yellow fever are carried or transmitted from man to man by bloodsucking dipterous flies. Many other diseases are transmitted mechanically by flies due to the habit exhibited by many species of sucking liquid from excreta and other decaying organic matter and then settling on and vomiting on your food.

        The fly was made to distribute quantities of pathogenic disease organisms. Its 6 feet are equipped with bristles and sticky pads and its proboscis is hairy. A sticky liquid comes out of the hollow hairs on their feet allowing them to walk upside down and on glass, etc. The fly’s digestive tract is an incubator for germs!

        No doubt, the stress put on a fly by drowning it, would only cause it to vomit and defecate even more, releasing an extra portion of germs into your drink!

        … A well fed fly defecates at least once every 5 minutes!

        Narrated ‘Aisha:
        I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, & my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join & play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)Bukhari 8. 73.151

        Some Muslims claim that it was Abu Bakr who approached Muhammad asking him to marry his daughter.

        THIS IS NOT TRUE!

        The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for ‘Aisha’s hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said “But I am your brother.” The Prophet said, “You are my brother in Allah’s religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.” Bukhari 7.62.18

        The Arab year is lunar, which is shorter than the solar year. In solar years, Aisha was 8 years 9 months old when Muhammad consummated his marriage with her. Consummate? This is a nice way to say raped her. According to Muslims, a woman must consent to her marriage or the marriage is null. How can a 6-years old child consent to her marriage? Without a consent, how can we call this relationship between a 51 years old man and a 6-years old child, MARRIAGE?

        SATAN PISSING IN MUSLIM EARS

        Bukhari Hadith 2:245
        Narrated ‘Abdullah :
        A person was mentioned before the Prophet (p.b.u.h) and he was told that he had kept on sleeping till morning and had not got up for the prayer. The Prophet said,
        “Satan urinated (PISSED) in his ears.”

        YOU MUST HEAR THE FART

        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.139
        Narrated Abbas bin Tamim
        My uncle asked Allah’s Apostle about a person who imagined to have passed wind during the prayer. Allah’s Apostle replied: “He should not leave his prayers unless he hears sound or smells something.”
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.242
        Narrated Anas
        The Prophet once spat in his clothes.

        WANKING MO

        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.232
        Narrated Amr bin Maimun
        I heard Sulaiman bin Yasar talking about the clothes soiled with semen. He said that ‘Aisha had said, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayers while water spots were still visible on them.”
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.229
        Narrated Aisha
        I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.206
        Narrated Abdullah bin Abbas
        Allah’s Apostle ate a piece of cooked mutton from the shoulder region and prayed without repeating ablution.
        Source: Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith

        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.207
        Narrated Jafar bin Amr bin Umaiya
        My father said, “I saw Allah’s Apostle taking a piece of (cooked) mutton from the shoulder region and then he was called for prayer. He put his knife down and prayed without repeating ablution.”
        Source: Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith

        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.235
        Narrated Anas
        Prior to the construction of the mosque, the Prophet offered the prayers at sheep-folds.
        “Nod, nod, wink, wink! Mohammed loved a leg of Lamb!

        PEDOPHILIA & BESTIALITY IN MOHAMMEDANISM

        Pedophilia is legal in Islam.
        The law ordering pedophilia is in chapter 65, entitled The Divorce and qualified by Islamic law, which is based on the sunnah, the perfect example of Muhammad recorded in the hadiths, traditions. The context deals with the issue of the waiting period for divorce, and remarriage. The Quran orders Muslim men to wait a period of three months in the case of women who either are no longer menstruating or haven’t yet started their menstrual cycles.
        وَاللَّائِي يَئِسْنَ مِنَ الْمَحِيضِ مِن نِّسَائِكُمْ إِنِ ارْتَبْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَاثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَاللَّائِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ وَأُوْلَاتُ الْأَحْمَالِ أَجَلُهُنَّ أَن يَضَعْنَ حَمْلَهُنَّ وَمَن يَتَّقِ اللَّهَ يَجْعَل لَّهُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِ يُسْرًا
        (4. Those in menopause among your women, for them the `Iddah, if you have doubt, is three months; AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NO MENSTRUATION. And for those who are pregnant, their `Iddah is until they lay down their burden; and whosoever has Taqwa of Allah, He will make his matter easy for him.)
        (5. That is the command of Allah, which He has sent down to you; and whosoever has Taqwa [fear] of Allah, He will expiate from him his sins, and will increase his reward.) Qur’an chapter 65:4
        ISLAMIC LAW
        Islamic law is based on the rules of the Qur’an and the sunnah, the perfect example of Muhammad, the Muslim prophet, recorded in the hadiths, traditions. All Muslims are ordered to imitate Muhammad’s perfect example in thought, word and deed. They are ordered to regard Muhammad as the ideal human being and Islam as the best system for humanity forever, a system that Islamic law orders must rule the world and abolish all other religions, cultures and laws.
        The definition of the word consummate: In Sahih Bukhari, vol. 7, #64, the root word used is dakhala. Hans-Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary p273: it means to enter, to pierce, to penetrate, to consummate, cohabit, to have sex with a female.
        PEDOPHILIA LAWS FROM ISLAM Q&A
        (www.islam-qa.com)
        Question #22442: The ruling on marrying young girls
        Question #12708: Is it acceptable to marry a girl who has not yet started her menses?
        Answer: Marriage to a young girl before she reaches puberty is permissible according to sharee’ah, and it was narrated that there was scholarly consensus on this point.
        1 Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
        And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise [al-Talaaq 65:4]
        In this verse we see that Allaah states that for those who do not menstruate because they are young and have not yet reached the age of puberty the iddah in the case of divorce is three months. This clearly indicates that it is permissible for a young girl who has not started her periods to marry.
        Question #27305: Is it permissible to marry a thirteen year old girl?
        The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) when she was six years old, and he consummated the marriage with her when she was nine, and at that time he was over fifty.
        Al-Bukhaari (3894) and Muslim (1422) narrated that Aa’ishah said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married me when I was six years old and consummated the marriage with me when I was nine.
        It was narrated from Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married her when she was six years old, he consummated the marriage with her when she was nine and she stayed with him for nine years.
        If she has not reached the age of puberty, then her father has the sole right to arrange her marriage and does not have to ask her permission. With regard to the wedding-party of a young married girl at the time of consummating the marriage, if the husband and the guardian of the girl agree upon something that will not cause harm to the young girl, then that may be done. If they disagree, then Ahmad and Abu Ubayd say that once a girl reaches the age of nine then the marriage may be consummated even without her consent, but that does not apply in the case of who is younger. There is nothing in the hadeeth of Aa’ishah to set an age limit or to forbid that in the case of a girl who is able for it before the age of nine.
        Question #8981: What is the punishment for a girl found guilty of adultery if she has not even reached her puberty – she is still a minor?
        Answer: Al-Qurtubi said: The followers of all religions are agreed that adultery is forbidden; no religion regards it as permissible. Hence the punishment for it is one of the most severe punishments, because it is a crime against honor and lineage, which is one of the five basic principles that Islam seeks to protect, namely life, religion, lineage, reason and wealth.
        Tafseer al-Qurtubi, 24/20, 21
        1 If a woman has been previously married i.e., a legitimate marriage with her has been consummated, then her punishment is to be stoned to death.
        2 If the woman is a virgin i.e., she is not married yet or the marriage contract has been done but her husband has not yet consummated the marriage with her then the punishment is one hundred lashes and exile from her country for a year. If the adulterer or adulteress is a minor below the age of puberty, then there is no punishment to be carried out, according to all scholars.
        PEDOPHILIA LAWS FROM ISLAMIC-FATWA.NET
        Question 1809
        After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwahs (religious decrees) reviewed the question forwarded by the grand scholar of the committee with reference number 1809 issued on 3/5/1453 and 7/5/1421 (Islamic calendar)
        Question: It has become widespread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufa’khathat of the children. (mufa’khathat – literally translated, it means “placing between the thighs” which means placing the penis between the thighs of a child) What is the opinion of scholars, knowing full well that the prophet, the peace of Allah be upon him, also practiced the thighing of Aisha – the mother of believers – may Allah be pleased with her.
        Answer: After studying the issue, the committee has answered as follows:
        As for the prophet, thighing his fiancée Aisha, when she was six years of age and not able to consummate the relationship due to her small age. That is why the Prophet used to place his male member between her thighs and massage it, as the prophet had control of his male member not like other men.
        Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, The Supreme Leader of Iran, the Shia Grand Ayatollah, 1979-89 said in his official statements:
        “A man can quench his sexual lusts with a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. Sodomizing the baby is halal (allowed by sharia). If the man penetrates and damages the child, then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however, does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl’s sister. It is better for a girl to marry when her menstruation starts, and at her husband’s house rather than her father’s home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven.”
        Khomeini, “Tahrirolvasyleh” fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990
        It is not illegal for an adult male to ‘thigh’ or enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.
        Ayatu Allah Al Khumaini’s “Tahrir Al wasila” p. 241, issue number 12
        “Young boys or girls in full sexual effervescence are kept from getting married before they reach the legal age of majority. This is against the intention of divine laws. Why should the marriage of pubescent girls and boys be forbidden because they are still minors, when they are allowed to listen to the radio and to sexually arousing music?”
        “The Little Green Book” “Sayings of the Ayatollah Khomeini”, Bantam Books
        On acting; and the ruling on marrying young girls – 22442
        1)What is the ruling of islam acting in movies?.If it is allowed what type of filims must be them?.Also what is the role of women in movies ?.
        2)Why islam allowed to marry children(girls) of age below 10 with out their permission(it is said that in the case of children,it requires the concern of their parents only.I also know it requires to get the permission in the case of adults).Actually marrage has to taken plce between the persons, who have even a little meturity.But in the case of children it not happend.Can you justify this ruling of islam(Child marrage ) ?.
        Praise be to Allaah.
        Firstly:
        The question of acting and related issues has already been dealt with in Question no. 10836. We may add to that:
        Shaykh Abu Bakr Zayd (may Allaah preserve him) said: chivalry [i.e., behaving in a proper and decent manner] is one of the aims of sharee’ah, and anything that undermines that renders a person unfit to give testimony in court. Islam enjoins the loftiest characteristics and forbids base and vile characteristics. How often do viewers see an actor doing silly actions or moving or speaking in a silly manner, or even playing the role of a madman, idiot or fool. Based on this, it is clear to the wise man that acting is one of the things that most undermine chivalry, so it is one of the things that render a person unfit to give testimony in court. Anything that is like that is not approved of in sharee’ah.
        See al-Muru’ah wa Khawaarimuhaa, p. 221, by Mashhoor Hasan
        Secondly:
        Marrying a young girl before she reaches the age of adolescence is permitted in sharee’ah; indeed it was narrated that there was scholarly consensus on this point.
        (a) Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
        “And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise”
        [al-Talaaq 65:4]
        In this verse we see that Allaah has made the ‘iddah in the case of divorce of a girl who does not have periods – because she is young and has not yet reached puberty – three months. This clearly indicates that Allaah has made this a valid marriage.
        (b) It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married her when she was six years old, he consummated the marriage with her when she was nine and she stayed with him for nine years.
        (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 4840; Muslim, 1422)
        The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah when she was six years old and consummated the marriage when she was nine.”
        (Narrated by al-Bukhaari and Muslim; Muslim says ‘seven years’)
        The fact that it is permissible to marry a young girl does not mean that it is permissible to have intercourse with her; rather that should not be done until she is able for it. For that reason the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) delayed the consummation of his marriage to ‘Aa’ishah. Al-Nawawi said: With regard to the wedding-party of a young married girl at the time of consummating the marriage, if the husband and the guardian of the girl agree upon something that will not cause harm to the young girl, then that may be done. If they disagree, then Ahmad and Abu ‘Ubayd say that one a girl reaches the age of nine then the marriage may be consummated even without her consent, but that does not apply in the case of who is younger. Maalik, al-Shaafa’i and Abu Haneefah said: the marriage may be consummated when the girl is able for intercourse, which varies from one girl to another, so no age limit can be set. This is the correct view. There is nothing in the hadeeth of ‘Aa’ishah to set an age limit, or to forbid that in the case of a girl who is able for it before the age of nine, or to allow it in the case of a girl who is not able for it and has reached the age of nine. Al-Dawoodi said: ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) was reached physical maturity (at the time when her marriage was consummated).
        Sharh Muslim, 9/206
        It is preferable for a guardian not to marry off his daughter when she is still young unless there is a valid reason for that.
        Al-Nawawi said:
        It should be noted that al-Shaafa’i and his companions said: It is preferable for fathers and grandfathers not to marry off a virgin until she reaches the age of puberty and they ask her permission, lest she end up in a marriage that she dislikes. What they said does not go against the hadeeth of ‘Aa’ishah, because what they meant is that they should not marry her off before she reaches puberty if there is no obvious interest to be served that they fear will be missed out on if they delay it, as in the hadeeth of ‘Aa’ishah. In that case it is preferable to go ahead with the marriage because the father is enjoined to take care of his child’s interests and not to let a good opportunity slip away.
        And Allaah knows best.
        Sharh Muslim, 9/206.
        Islam Q&A
        EPILEPTIC FIT
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.2
        Narrated Aisha
        (the mother of the faithful believers) Al-Harith bin Hisham asked Allah’s Apostle “O Allah’s Apostle! How is the Divine Inspiration revealed to you?” Allah’s Apostle replied, “Sometimes it is (revealed) like the ringing of a bell, this form of Inspiration is the hardest of all and then this state passes off after I have grasped what is inspired. Sometimes the Angel comes in the form of a man and talks to me and I grasp whatever he says.” ‘Aisha added: Verily I saw the Prophet being inspired Divinely on a very cold day and noticed the sweat dropping from his forehead (as the Inspiration was over).
        ALLAH IS THE ALLAH OF KAABA
        Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith – 1.3
        Narrated Aisha
        (the mother of the faithful believers) The commencement of the Divine Inspiration to Allah’s Apostle was in the form of good dreams which came true like bright daylight, and then the love of seclusion was bestowed upon him. He used to go in seclusion in the cave of Hira where he used to worship (Allah alone) continuously for many days before his desire to see his family. He used to take with him the journey food for the stay and then come back to (his wife) Khadija to take his food likewise again till suddenly the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, “I do not know how to read.”
        The Prophet added, “The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, ‘I do not know how to read.’ Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, ‘I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?’ Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me, and then released me and said, ‘Read in the name of your Lord, who has created (all that exists) has created man from a clot. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous.” (96.1, 96.2, 96.3) Then Allah’s Apostle returned with the Inspiration and with his heart beating severely. Then he went to Khadija bint Khuwailid and said, “Cover me! Cover me!” They covered him till his fear was over and after that he told her everything that had happened and said, “I fear that something may happen to me.” Khadija replied, “Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you. You keep good relations with your kith and kin, help the poor and the destitute, serve your guests generously and assist the deserving calamity-afflicted ones.”
        Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin ‘Abdul ‘Uzza, who, during the Pre-Islamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. Khadija said to Waraqa, “Listen to the story of your nephew, O my cousin!” Waraqa asked, “O my nephew! What have you seen?” Allah’s Apostle described whatever he had seen. Waraqa said, “This is the same one who keeps the secrets (angel Gabriel) whom Allah had sent to Moses. I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out.” Allah’s Apostle asked, “Will they drive me out?” Waraqa replied in the affirmative and said, “Anyone (man) who came with something similar to what you have brought was treated with hostility; and if I should remain alive till the day when you will be turned out then I would support you strongly.” But after a few days Waraqa died and the Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while.
        Jabir bin ‘Abdullah Al-Ansari narrated while talking about the period of pause in revelation reporting the speech of the Prophet “While I was walking, all of a sudden I heard a voice from the sky. I looked up and saw the same angel who had visited me at the cave of Hira sitting on a chair between the sky and the earth. I got afraid of him and came back home and said, ‘Wrap me (in blankets).’ And then Allah revealed the following Holy Verses (of Quran):
        ‘O you (i.e. Muhammad)! wrapped up in garments! Arise and warn (the people against Allah’s Punishment),…’ up to ‘and desert the idols.’ (74.1-5) After this the revelation started coming strongly, frequently and regularly.”
        SUNNAH & QURAN
        1. Allah says: The carcass and it’s blood are forbidden to you (5:3). In explanation of this verse, the corpse of locusts, fish, the livers, spleen of blood are lawful. So the Prophet (SAW) said: He has made two dead things and blood lawful: the locusts and the fish, the liver and the spleen.

        2.
        Baihaqi and others have recorded it as ‘marfu’ type of hadeeth as also ‘mauquf’ type. The ‘isnad’ od ‘mauquf’ is authentic and it is as good as ‘marfu’ tradition, since it is not stated in the form of a ‘ra’y’ (decision based on one individual’s judgement not on Qur’an and Sunnah).

        PART 3

        Allah says: I find not in the message received by me by inspiration any (food) forbidden to be taken by one who wishes to, unless it is dead meat or blood poured forth or the flesh of swine, for it is an abomination, or what is impious (meat) on which a name has been invoked other than Allah’s (6:145).

        PART 4
        The Sunnah has forbidden many things not mentioned in the verse mentioned above: All predatory animals with tusk and every bird with claw are forbidden for consumption. There are other traditions which have forbidden the consumption of such animals as the Prophet (SAW) is reported to have said on the Day of Khayber: Allah and His Messenger have prohibited the consumption of domesticated asses, for they are filth. The two shaikhs have reported it.

        Following are excerpts from an address by Egyptian satirist and TV host Bassem Youssuf, which aired on CBC TV on April 12, 2013.

        Bassem Youssuf: I hereby declare my total support of all that is Muslim Brotherhood. After all, they are our masters now. Where else can you find such a superior race, purer than rainwater?

        It is a superior race, which declares that nobody else belongs to Islam. It is an Aryan race, a superior race, a race that deserves to rule us, to mount us, to dangle its feet over our backs.
        It is a race that is predestined to remain pure and clean, so it cannot marry your kind.

        These Muslim-Brotherhood genes do not come free of charge. Do not resist. Are you crazy? Stand still, do not cross the line. They are your masters.

        Puts on an Adolf-Hitler moustache and carries out a Nazi salute

        Heil Muslim Brotherhood!

    • Bollywood actress Anjum Nayar arrested twice in 24 hours!!

      Two beat marshals arrived at the flat, but to their bewilderment, an intoxicated Nayar started using profanities repeatedly, even directing expletives at the city’s police commissioner.

      She was drunk during the time of incident.

      She said that the female constables started beating her from her flat till the police station and after reaching there, the on duty police officer too misbehaved with her.(ndtv)

      This is what India is coming to!!!

      • GO SUCK A TIT!

        DID YOU EVER HEAR OF BREAST FEEDING MATURE MEN IN MOHAMMEDANISM?

        Breast-Feeding a Man in Islam

        Is it acceptable in Islam for a woman to breast-feed a man then stay with him legally in one room?
        The answer to this question makes the difference between true Muslims who faithfully follow the footsteps of Mohammed and the hypocrites who modify their religion to follow their desires. Allah described them as such in the Quran: Q.28: 50… they only follow their own desires, and who is more astray than one who follow his own desires…
        The issue of breast-feeding men is currently a hot topic in Egypt and has been the focus of the media in many Middle Eastern countries. It all started when Dr. Izzat Attya who is the head of the department of Hadith in Al-Azhar, which is the world’s most prestigious Islamic University, issued a fatwa, or religious opinion. The fatwa declared that, it is legitimate for a working Muslim woman to breast-feed her male colleague to avoid the sin of ‘khulwa’ (staying with a stranger in one room). Similar fatwas had been issued in the past by many sheikhs in many Middle-Eastern countries, but this is the first time it comes from a high level academic of Al-Azhar.
        A Modern Islamic problem, an old solution
        The Problem:
        Dr. Attya noticed that Muslim women frequently work with men in the same offices, with the inevitable possibility that a woman may find herself sitting alone in the same room with one or more of her male colleagues, which, in Islam, is a grave sin. Some of these women are deeply religious, but they need to work. Both the state and the society are forcing these women to sin without doing anything about it.
        The erudite scholar of Al-Azhar, Dr. Attya was asked about the previous fatwas quoting a sahih (= authentic) hadith. His answer was that the quoted hadith is certainly accurate and, if necessary, a Muslim woman is allowed to follow the example set by the prophet.
        We may have different opinions about Al-Azhar and the integrity or political affiliation of its staff, but there is one thing about this institute that remains beyond doubt: its sheikhs (ulama) are second to none in their knowledge about sunni Islam. All other Islamic universities in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, rely on Al-Azhar for academic support. It can be argued that Dr. Izzat Attya is probably the most learned man in the speciality the science of ahadith. He knows every nuance about the texts of the ahadith, their isnad (chain of narrators) and their degree of accuracy. When he says something about ahadith, we better believe him.
        The Solution:
        Dr. Attya proposed an Islamic solution that came directly from the prophet. In the early days of Islam, Muslim women faced a similar problem and the prophet fixed it immediately.
        It all started when Mohammed decided to marry Zainab, the beautiful wife of Zaid, his adopted son, which was impossible under the prevailing laws of Arabia. Mohammed, however, always had under his sleeve the magical trick called the Quran. He ‘revealed’ some verses renouncing the practice of adoption as nonsense and ordered Zaid to divorce his wife, thereby clearing the way for Mohammed to marry her. The plan worked well for Mohammed but created problems for many others.
        Abu Huthayfa and his wife Sahla, had an adopted son (a freed slave) called Salim, who used to work and live in the house freely. As Salim was like a son to her, Sahla used to rely on him to help in the housework. She could stay with him in the same room without having to cover herself from his looks. When Mohammed cancelled the principle of adoption, Salim became a stranger in the house and could no longer be alone with Sahla, Abu Huthayfa’s wife. The Lady complained to Mohammed who immediately provided her with a genius solution- he asked her to breast-feed Salim, after which she would again be allowed to keep him as a son with her in the house.
        She said: ‘but Salim is a man and has a beard!’ Mohammed smiled to her and said ‘I know that’.
        Mohammed’s wife, Aysha, was very happy to hear the news because she also had problems in allowing men in her house. The new ruling came handy particularly after Mohammed’s death because Aysha needed more flexibility in meeting and talking to men about Islam. Aysha was a strong advocate of this practice; she encouraged the daughters of her sisters and the daughters of her brethren to breast-feed those men whom she (Aysha) wished to allow in her home.
        Dr. Attya’s vision is that women are better off making use of this authorization given by Mohammed and breast-feed their male colleagues to avoid the sin of ‘khulwa’ (staying alone with a stranger).
        The Muslims Response:
        Muslims are divided about this fatwa;
        Minority of them (true Muslims) completely agree with the fatwa for an obvious reason; it has a precedence in Islam that happened during the time of Mohammed. The issue of whether this is morally acceptable or not has no relevance, simply because Allah’s wish overrides man’s wish. Allah says in the Quran
        Q.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…
        Some of these Muslims attempted to soften the impact of the fatwa on the shocked Muslim community in various ways. Some expressed reservations about the way the fatwa was presented to the public while others tried to explain that breast-feeding doesn’t necessarily imply direct contact between a man and a woman. They suggested that a woman could collect her milk in a cup and offer it to a male colleague! This group of Muslims try to reform Islam in their own way, in doing so they forget that women do not always produce milk.
        With anger and embarrassment, the majority of Muslims, however, reject the fatwa. They claim that Mohammed could have never allowed something like that. Needless to say this group of Muslims never heard of the above story before. Just goes to show how ignorant Muslimss are of their Cult of Death.
        But the hadith is a credible one, and has been reported by sahih books like Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah. Moreover, this hadith has been thoroughly investigated by a number of highly revered Islamic scholars like Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Hazm and Al Albani. Denying a hadith with such strength would be like denying the existence of main Islamic events like fasting and prayers.
        Our Response
        The Islamic establishment deliberately and consistently hide the ugly face of Islam. The majority of Muslims do not know the magnitude of Mohammed’s violations of the accepted Arabic traditions and moralities. Without much qualm, Mohammed even violated his own Islamic laws to suit his own agenda. Starting from childhood, Muslims are brainwashed to see a polished side of Islam. All of Mohammed’s atrocities, invasions, assassinations and mass murders are carefully presented as justified acts of self-defense against the enemies of Allah. Some of Mohammed’s absurdities, like the hadith above, are deliberately kept in the dark out of reach of ordinary Muslims.
        Following the media and public outrage, Al-Azhar had to explain its position to Millions of Muslims and Dr. Attya was forced to withdraw his fatwa. In his statement, he said he only echoed the opinions expressed by early highly regarded Islamic scholars, but after extensive consultations with Muslim scholars, he now believed the permission to breast feed an adult was an exception given only to Abu Huthayfa’s wife to solve an exceptional problem, but not to other Muslims. The statement fails to explain what was so exceptional about Abu Huthayfa’s case and why Aysha encouraged it.
        Such a U-turn relieved the Islamic community and the Arab media because, as they put it, the fatwa did not blend well with the high morality and logic known to be associated with Islam. It is laughable that Muslims find it difficult to believe that Mohammed told women to breast feed men, but have no problem at all in believing him when he claimed he spent the night with Allah and all his prophets and toured the whole universe. Strange indeed is the Islamic mindset!!
        Addendum
        Saudi Clerics Call For Adult Breast-Feeding
        June 5, 210
        In a surprising development, two senior Saudi clerics today said that Saudi Arabia’s women should give their breast milk to male colleagues and acquaintances in order to safeguard the Islamic law that forbids mixing between the sexes. The clerics, however, failed to reach an agreement among each other on how the milk should be conveyed.
        Recently a fatwa had been issued in the country about adult breast-feeding to establish “maternal relations” and preclude the possibility of sexual contact. The fatwa has already generated enough debates and it is likely that the debate over such explicit topics may force the Saudi government to introduce stricter regulations about how and when fatwas should be issued.
        Sheikh Al Obeikan, an adviser to the royal court and consultant to the Ministry of Justice, had recently said that women who come into regular contact with men, who are not their relatives, should give them their breast milk in order to make them their relatives.
        “The man should take the milk, but not directly from the breast of the woman. He should drink it and then becomes a relative of the family, a fact that allows him to come in contact with the women without breaking Islam’s rules about mixing,” Al Obeikan said, according to Gulf News. ”
        Obeikan’s remarks were followed by an announcement by another powerful Saudi cleric Abi Ishaq Al Huwaini, who asked women to allow the men to suckle the milk directly from their breast.

        References:
        http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2007/05/16/34518.html
        http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=7&Rec=1798
        http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=1&Rec=3379
        http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=1&Rec=3378
        http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=1&Rec=3381
        http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=1&Rec=3382

    • Dear MM, When somebody criticises you or your beliefs then it is good for you, as that will help in improving you. If nobody finds fault in you then that would mean that at least one human is perfect and that would be you. If every person were to believe in Islam then there would be NO other religion and it is just like saying why doesn’t the human population talk only one language, correct?

      Raj is against Islam for his own reasons and has to prove that Islam is a fake religion as he alleges. Your duty is to correct him but not to abuse him as that would take us nowhere. Reason out using the Wisdom of the Quran and establish your arguments favouring your beliefs. Let us reason out without offending anybody as we are NO scholars!!

      Majority of the Muslims do believe in the Hadiths as the words and deeds of the Prophet yet a few disagree with that. Does that make a person a disbeliever? There are certain verses you would like to know their further details and you may pose your questions, as I do…hoping that somebody would respond. How come most Sunnis and Shias believe in those Hadiths written by some Persian writers whose conversion to Islam remains doubtful?

      And so on….

      • Plum apply same school of thought on Hindus whom you criticize at every opportunity . cmon are’nt we sons od Ramallah now?
        🙂
        I guess the pseudo-honest person inside you has been exposed
        regards

    • MM/Raj, I respect the people of India and would like to see them coming out of their cocoons of orthodox illusory barbaric beliefs of fake gods, more fake gods and more and more fake gods.

      Even the old cockerel (Modi) cock-a-doodle-dood that there are more Temples than toilets in India!! Those dudes who prefer Modi to Rahul do not even realise that he has given them a back-slap and pinned them to the floor!!! Bill gates had to come to their rescue in proposing to build more toilets so that they can do proper poo-poo!! Infact the cockerel had destroyed almost 250 temples and not mosques in Gujarat!!!!!!

      The “Babas” are fake, taking millions for a ride. India is the ONLY state in the world where “Babas” mutate on daily basis and make sure that their followers of bogus mythos always remain behind the bars of orthodox nonsensical beliefs. Personally, I don’t give two hoots what others believe in…but what I don’t understand is this fact : Why people in India are led to the abattoirs like tom sheep through their own will when there is a way out…….to jump away from a sinking boat!

      I think that is exactly what my ancestors did…they jumped the sinking boat. Today we, the descendants are quite well off and live in a more modern, liberal and cohesive society. We do not understand the concept of religious wars nor ethnic hatred ever!!!!! Isn’t that appreciable????

      Do Hindus realise that Idols have NO hearts??? Do they know that these Idols are handmade and can be kept under lock and key and locked up in a cupboard for up to … 1,… 10, …..100, …….1000, or……. over a trillion years without benefitting the owner of those Idols. An Idol is not a living thing. Do you know that an Idol can NEVER become a living thing even if Brahmins cheated you to do Aarti? What do you so much of a miss in an Idol… it’s incense??????

      Idiots you become intolerant when anybody speaks the truth about Brahmins : everything cannot be god as how would you worship a mosquito? Is that mosquito a re-incarnation of Vishnu or somebody???? Oh…my brain swoons!!

      Why practice and believe in barbaric illusory superstitions which are filled to the brim with lies, more lies and more and more lies that favour 100% one caste namely the Brahmins only?

      • Plum, I believe that insulting/criticizing a religion is a waste of time for us laymen. And what else! Do you now why I hate Christian missionaries? Because they try to propagate their creed by insulting others e.g. Islam’s a false religion and that’s why we must follow the Christ’s creed.

  5. WOMEN IN THE BIBLE & THE QURAN

    The infinite superiority of the Biblical God over that of the Quran is most evident in the teaching regarding the status of women, especially as it relates to marriage, divorce, and the world to come. A brief comparison between the two can be instructive. It will help us to see that, in spite of what the Papacy and Ecumenists say the Biblical God cannot be legitimately compared to Allah.

    The God of the Bible created woman out of man to be his counterpart (Genesis 2:18), corresponding to him mentally, physically, and spiritually, and making him a larger person than he would have been alone. The same holds true for man. He brings to his wife a perspective that enlarges her life, making her a more complete person than she could be without him. Thus, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman (I Corinthians 11:11).

    The Bible consistently teaches that marriage is a sacred and permanent covenant which God Himself witnesses and protects. For this reason, marriage is effectively used in the Old Testament to portray God’s relationship with Israel, and in the New Testament to represent Christ’s relationship with His Church.

    The high esteem that the Biblical God places on the role of women in the home and in the Church is foreign to the Quran. According to Allah, women exist primarily for the sexual gratification of men. To ensure this goal, the Quran allows an ordinary Muslim to marry four wives, though wealthy Muslims can fill their harems to the extent of their wealth and lust. The latter practice has been encouraged by the example of Muhammad himself, who did not follow the Quranic limitations of four wives.

    After the death of his first wife, Khadija, he married nine wives. One of them, Aisha, was only nine years old. She was the daughter of Abu Bakr As Siddiq, who was a close friend of the Prophet and in charge of his books. Muhammad was 53 years old when he insisted on marrying Aisha, a nine-year-old child, immature, and obviously ignorant of married life. This criminal act of child abuse alone, suffice to discredit Muhammad’s claim to be the greatest prophet sent by Allah, even greater than Jesus Christ Himself.
    Sahih Muslim

    Book 008, Number 3311:

    ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

    Aisha owned dolls (which as we know is NOT allowed in Islam (if you have reached puberty)

    Quote:

    Sahih Muslim

    Book 031, Number 5981:

    ‘A’isha reported that she used to play with dolls in the presence of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and when her playmates came to her they left (the house) because they felt shy of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), whereas Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent them to her.

    Quote:

    Book 41, Number 4914:

    Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:

    When the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) arrived after the expedition to Tabuk or Khaybar (the narrator is doubtful), the draught raised an end of a curtain which was hung in front of her store-room, revealing some dolls which belonged to her.

    He asked: What is this? She replied: My dolls. Among them he saw a horse with wings made of rags, and asked: What is this I see among them? She replied: A horse. He asked: What is this that it has on it? She replied: Two wings. He asked: A horse with two wings? She replied: Have you not heard that Solomon had horses with wings? She said: Thereupon the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) laughed so heartily that I could see his molar teeth.

    (This is where Muhammad got the idea for his flying donkey, Al-Buraq).
    It amazes me how Muslims can accept Muhammad as the greatest prophet who ever lived, in spite of the fact that he had full sexual intercourse with a nine-year-old girl. If the Quranic God sanctions the abuse of children for sexual gratification, then He should be exposed as a criminal God, rather than worshipped as a Holy Being. Perhaps the Papacy and Ecumenists are not distressed by the sexual misconduct of the Prophet, because of Christendom’s own share of sexual scandals.

    The fact that the Quranic God permits special people like Muhammad to do things forbidden to others, raises serious questions about His moral character and consistency. Muhammad claims that Allah gave him the permission to marry any other woman he fancied. Here is the relevant text from the Quran:

    “Oh Prophet, we have made lawful for thee thy wives whom thou hast given their wages and what thy right hand owns, spoils of war that God has given thee, and the daughter of thy uncles paternal and aunts paternal, thy uncles maternal and aunts maternal, who have emigrated with thee, and any woman believer, if she give herself to the Prophet and if the Prophet desire to take her in marriage, for thee exclusively”.
    Surah, The Confederates, vs. 49 ff.

    The special provision granted by the Quran to a man like Muhammad to take any woman as wife, even those captured in warfare, without any regard to the will of the women, clearly shows that Allah treats women as lambs to be led to the slaughter by the whims of men. After a man has obtained whatever he desires from a woman, he is free to keep or dismiss her without fear of injustice. This is clearly taught in the same Surah:

    “Thou mayest put off whom thou wilt of them, and whom thou wilt thou mayest take to thee; and if thou seekest any thou hast set aside there is no fault in thee.”
    Surah, The Confederates, v. 50.

    It is evident that Allah has no respect for a woman’s emotions and rights. He treats women as disposable objects. By contrast the Biblical God teaches that husbands should
    “love their wives as their own bodies” (Ephesians 5:28).

    “The wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own body, but the wife does” (I Corinthians 7:4).

    This mutual equality and complimentarily taught by the Biblical God, is foreign to the Quranic God. The polygamy and servile concubinage taught by the Quran, destroys the dignity of woman, the beauty of the home, besides discrediting the morality of Allah’s character.

    WOMEN IN THE AFTERLIFE

    A most compelling example of the glaring difference between the Biblical and Quranic Gods, is to be found in the teachings of the Koran regarding the role of women in the afterlife.

    It came to me as a shock to read in the Quran and the Hadith, the traditional teachings of Muhammad, that in the afterlife, most women are consigned to hellfire to suffer eternally. Only some chaste maidens, known as hur, will live in the garden of Paradise, in order to provide sexual gratification to faithful Muslims.

    The teaching that the majority of women will be consigned to hellfire is said to have come from a vision of the Prophet Muhammad. This vision is reported in several traditions (Hadith).

    According to one tradition, the Prophet related:

    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah’s Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o ‘Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you.

    A cautious sensible man could be led astray by you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” YES! He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence.

    Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” YES!.
    He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.” Bukhari (Book #6, Hadith #301)
    The same vision is reported with minor variations in other traditions (Hadith), which speak also of the sin of breaking of confidence. Frankly, I find it appalling that the Quranic God consigns most women to hellfire because allegedly they are all ungrateful and untrustworthy. This teaching is insulting not only to women in general, but to devout Muslim women in particular.

    A visit to any Christian church shows that women outnumber men in church attendance and religious piety. It is hard to believe that Muslim women are less religious and trustworthy than their Christian counterparts, and consequently they deserve to be consigned to hellfire.

    The problem is not the Muslim women, but the teaching of the Quran that treats women as mentally and morally deficient. The low esteem of women is especially evident by their absence at the worship service at the mosque in most Muslim countries.

    SEX AFTER FLOGGING:

    Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 132:
    Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Zam’a:

    The Prophet said, “None of you should flog his wife as he flogs a slave and then have sexual intercourse with her in the last part of the day.”
    Ideally when you flog one of your wives, let her recuperate that day and sleep with your other wives or your slave girls

    HOW TO BEAT YOUR WIFE TO AVOID BREAKING HER BONES

    Islamic way of beating or flogging wives is striking at their padded areas to avoid breaking any bones. Here is an example how considerate our prophet was when he beat his wives on their padded parts.

    Muslim Book 004, Number 2127:
    Ayesha narrated. “He struck me on the chest which caused me pain.”
    (However if your wife is breast feeding, prefer to strike on her buttocks

    CIRCUMCISION OF WOMEN:

    It was customary to cut the external female genitalia completely when circumcising women. The Prophet instructed to do cutting in moderation. That showed his kindness and concern for women’s pleasure in love making.

    Sunan Abu Dawud B 41, N5251:

    Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah:

    A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.

    ONE NIGHT SEX PERKS FOR PROPHET:

    33.50 Mohammed, any woman who offered herself to you is halal for you.
    Obligation to practice this aya made logistics a big problem for Muhammad who already had nine wives, his concubines, and a regular supply of captured women from jihadi raids. But Allah’s wishes had to be carried out.
    Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 62, Number 24:
    A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I have come to give you myself.

    Bukhari,V 7, B 62, N 48:
    Narrated Hisham’s father:
    Khaula bint Hakim was one of those ladies who presented themselves to the Prophet. ‘Aisha said, “Doesn’t a lady feel ashamed for presenting herself to a man?”
    Bukhari,V 7, B 62, N 53:
    Narrated Thabit Al-Banani:
    “A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and presented herself to him, saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle, have you any need for me?’ “Thereupon Anas’s daughter said, “What a shameless lady she was! Shame! Shame!” Anas said, “She was better than you; she had a liking for the Prophet.

    CHASTE MAIDENS TO DELIGHT FAITHFUL MUSLIMS IN PARADISE

    While most women are consigned to hellfire, some chaste maidens, known as houri, will live in the garden of Paradise to delight the faithful Muslim. The Quran refers four times to these chaste maidens whom no man has ever touched (Surah 52:20; 56:22; 55:72; 44:54). They are described in the Quran as chaste, with glancing eyes like pearls, lovely, virginal, and of the same age of male believers (about 30 years old) for whom they are intended as a reward. Later traditions offer a great deal of elaboration.

    QURAN

    The houri are mentioned in several places in the Quran, although in plural no specifics are given as to the number of houries available. Likewise it does not appear from the Quran that they are only women; both sexes are mentioned (although their descriptive qualities are feminine, as alluded to, by the hadiths). They are made available to all believers, not just martyrs.

    Thus shall it be. And We shall pair them with companions pure, most beautiful of eye.
    —Quran, sura 44 (Ad-Dukhan), ayah 54

    In these [gardens] will be mates of modest gaze, whom neither man nor invisible being will have touched ere then.
    —Quran, sura 55 (Ar-Rahman), ayah 56

    [There the blest will live with their] companions pure and modest, in pavilions [splendid]
    —Quran, sura 55, (Ar-Rahman), ayah 72

    reclining on couches [of happiness] ranged in rows!” And [in that paradise] We shall mate them with companions pure, most beautiful of eye
    —Quran, sura 52 (At-Tur), ayah 20

    And full-breasted [companions] of equal age
    —Quran, sura 78 (An-Naba’), ayah 33

    Here are verses that refer to one’s spouse recreated in the hereafter:
    And [with them will be their] spouses, raised high: for, behold, We shall have brought them into being in a life renewed, having resurrected them as virgins
    —Quran, sura 56 (Al-Waqiah), ayat 34-36

    And among His wonders is this: He creates for you mates out of your own kind so that you might incline towards them, and He engenders love and tenderness between you: in this, behold, there are messages indeed for people who think! … And He it is who creates [all life] in the first instance, and then brings it forth anew: and most easy is this for Him, since His is the essence of all that is most sublime in the heavens and on earth, and He alone is almighty, truly wise.
    —Quran, sura 30 (Ar-Rum), ayat 21…27

    There are also verses regarding both genders explicitly:
    Allah has promised the believers, both men and women, gardens through which running waters flow, therein to abide, and goodly dwellings in gardens of perpetual bliss: but Allah’s goodly acceptance is the greatest [bliss of all] -for this, this is the triumph supreme!
    —Quran, sura 9 (At-Taubah), ayah 72

    As for anyone – be it man or woman – who does righteous deeds, and is a believer withal – him shall We most certainly cause to live a good life, and most certainly shall We grant unto such as these their reward in accordance with the best that they ever did.
    —Quran, sura 16 (An-Nahl), ayah 97

    A verse regarding other companionship:
    And, O our Sustainer, bring them into the gardens of perpetual bliss which Thou hast promised them, together with the righteous from among their forebears, and their spouses, and their offspring – for, verily, Thou alone art almighty, truly wise
    —Quran, sura 40 (Ghafir), ayah 8

    HADITH
    The Islamic traditions (hadith) also mention the houris. The hadith are divided into several types by hadith scholars, and among them, there are groups that have been poorly documented and therefore, are not valid as a reference.
    Al-Bukhari
    Muhammad al-Bukhari (810 – 870) was a famous Sunni Islamic scholar most known for authoring the most authentic hadith collection named Sahih al-Bukhari
    “…everyone will have two wives from the houris, (who will be so beautiful, pure and transparent that) the marrow of the bones of their legs will be seen through the bones and the flesh.”
    —Muhammad al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Book 54 “The Beginning of Creation”, hadith 476)

    They will not urinate, relieve nature, spit, or have any nasal secretions. Their combs will be of gold, and their sweat will smell like musk. The aloes-wood will be used in their censers. Their wives will be houris. All of them will look alike and will resemble their father Adam (in stature), sixty cubits tall.
    —Muhammad al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Book 55 “Prophets”, hadith 544

    Muslim
    Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Nishapuri (821 – 875) was a famous Sunni Islamic scholar most known for authoring the authentic hadith collection named Sahih Muslim
    Muhammad reported that some (persons) stated with a sense of pride and some discussed whether there would be more men in Paradise or more women. It was upon this that Abu Huraira reported that Abu’l Qasim (the Holy Prophet) said: The (members) of the first group to get into Paradise would have their faces as bright as full moon during the night, and the next to this group would have their faces as bright as the shining stars in the sky, and every person would have two wives and the marrow of their shanks would glimmer beneath the flesh and there would be none without a wife in Paradise.
    —Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Nishapuri, Sahih Muslim, Book 40 “Pertaining to Paradise”, hadith 6793

    Jabir b. ‘Abdullah reported: I was shown Paradise and I saw the wife of Abu Talha (i. e. Umm Sulaim) and I heard the noise of steps before me and, lo, it was that of Bilal.
    —Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Nishapuri, Sahih Muslim, Book 31 “Pertaining to the Merits of the Companions”, hadith 6012

    FATWA NO. 10053

    – Basic Tenets of Faith » Belief » Belief in the Last Day and the Signs of the Hour » Paradise and Hell.

    Will men in Paradise have intercourse with al-hoor aliyn?
    I’m wondering will the men from amongst the human race that enters paradise, will they have sexual intercourse with the “HOURIS” women in the paradise.

    Praise be to Allaah.
    Allaah has prepared for His believing slaves in Paradise that which no eye has seen, no ear has heard and has never even crossed the minds of men, such that even the person who has the least blessings in Paradise will think that he is the most blessed among them. Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) said that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The lowest of people in status in Paradise will be a man whose face Allaah turns away from the Fire towards Paradise, and shows him a tree giving shade. He will say, ‘O Lord, bring me closer to that tree so that I may be in its shade… Then he will enter his house [in Paradise] and his two wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn will come in and will say to him, ‘Praise be to Allaah who brought you to life for us and brought us to life for you.’ Then he will say, ‘No one has been given what I have been given.’” (Narrated by Muslim, no. 275)
    Among the blessings that Allaah has prepared for His slaves are al-hoor al-‘iyn. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
    “So (it will be). And We shall marry them to Hoor (fair females) with wide lovely eyes”
    [al-Dhukhaan 44:54]
    “They will recline (with ease) on thrones arranged in ranks. And We shall marry them to Hoor (fair females) with wide lovely eyes
    [al-Toor 52:20]
    Al-hoor al-‘iyn are extremely beautiful, such that the marrow of their shins will be visible from beneath their garments. Every man who enters Paradise will have two wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn. Allaah says, describing them (interpretation of the meaning):
    “Therein (Gardens) will be Khayraatun Hisaan [fair (wives) good and beautiful];
    Then which of the Blessings of your Lord will you both (jinn and men) deny?
    Hoor (beautiful, fair females) guarded in pavilions;
    Then which of the Blessings of your Lord will you both (jinn and men) deny?
    With whom no man or jinni has had Tamth [opening their hymens with sexual intercourse] before them.
    Then which of the Blessings of your Lord will you both (jinn and men) deny?
    Reclining on green cushions and rich beautiful mattresses.”
    [al-Rahmaan 55:70-76]
    “And (there will be) Hoor (fair females) with wide lovely eyes (as wives for Al-Muttaqoon – the pious).
    Like unto preserved pearls”
    [al-Waaqi’ah 56:22-23]
    It was narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The first group will enter Paradise looking like the moon on the night when it is full, and those who follow them will be like the brightest shining star in the sky. Their hearts will be as one, and there will be no hatred or jealousy among them. Each man will have two wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn, the marrow of whose calves can be seen from beneath the bone and flesh.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, no. 3014)
    It was narrated that Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: ‘Going out and coming back for the sake of Allaah is better than this world and all that is in it. And a spot the size of the bow of one of you in Paradise – or a spot the size of his whip – is better than this world and all that is in it. If a woman from among the people of Paradise were to look at the people of this earth, she would light up all that is in between them and fill it with fragrance. The veil on her head is better than this world and all that is in it.’” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, no. 2587)
    A man will have intercourse in Paradise with his wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn and his wives from among the people of this world, if they enter Paradise with him. A man will be given the strength of a hundred men to eat, drink, feel desire and have sexual intercourse. It was narrated from Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The believer in Paradise will be given such and such strength for sexual intercourse.” He was asked, “O Messenger of Allaah, will he really be able to do that?” He said, “He will be given the strength of one hundred (men).” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, no. 2459. He said, (it is) saheeh ghareeb).
    It was narrated from Zayd ibn Arqam that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “A man among the people of Paradise will be given the strength of a hundred men for eating, drinking, desire and sexual intercourse. A man among the Jews said, ‘The one who eats or drinks needs to excrete!’ The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to him: ‘The excretion of any one of them will be in the form of sweat which comes out through his skin, then his stomach will reduce in size again.’” (Narrated by Ahmad, no. 18509; al-Daarimi, no. 2704)
    The mufassireen said concerning the phrase “busy in joyful things” (Yaa-Seen 36:55 – interpretation of the meaning):
    ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood and Ibn ‘Abbaas (mayAllaah be pleased with them both), and Sa’eed ibn al-Musayyib, ‘Ikrimah, al-Hasan, Qutaadah, al-A’mash, Sulaymaan al-Taymi and al-Oozaa’i said concerning the aayaah (interpretation of the meaning),
    “Verily, the dwellers of Paradise, that Day, will be busy in joyful things” [Yaa-Seen 36:55]
    they said, (it means) they will be busy deflowering virgins. Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said, according to a report narrated from him, that “busy in joyful things” means listening to stringed instruments. Abu Haatim said: he misheard the phrase iftidaad al-abkaar (deflowering virgins) and thought it was samaa’ al-awtaar (listening to stringed instruments). In fact the correct phrase is iftidaad al-abkaar (deflowering virgins). (Ibn Katheer, 3/564)
    With regard to children, the scholars differed as to whether children would be born as a result of this intercourse or not. Some said that there would be children if the man wants them, but the pregnancy and birth would take just one hour. Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If the believer wants a child in Paradise, the pregnancy and delivery will take only an hour, then the child will be the age that the man wants.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, no. 2487; al-Daarimi, no. 2712; Ahmad, no. 11339; Ibn Maajah, no. 4329). And Allaah knows best.
    We ask Allaah to admit us to Paradise and to keep us far away from the Fire. May He bless us with the highest Firdaws, for He is the One Who is Able to do that. Praise be to Allaah the Lord of the Worlds.

    Islam Q&A
    Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

    In the hadiths [traditions] details of their description differ, but they are generally said to be composed of saffron from the feet to the knees, musk from the knees to the breast, amber from the breast to the neck, and camphor from the neck to the head. Working often with multiples of seven, the traditionalists have described them as wearing seventy to 70,000 gowns, through which even the marrow of the bones can be seen because of the fineness of their flesh, reclining on seventy couches of red hyacinth encrusted with rubies and jewels, and the like. The houris [chaste maidens] do not sleep, do not get pregnant, do not menstruate, spit, or blow their noses, and are never sick. References to the increased sexual prowess of those male believers for whose pleasure the houris [chaste maidens] are intended are numerous; the reports make it clear that the houris are created specifically as a reward for males of the Muslim community who have been faithful to God.

    The sensual element that pollutes even the Quranic vision of Paradise, shows the immense difference that exists between the sexual obsession of Allah and the holiness and purity that characterizes YHWH.

    The foregoing comparison between the teaching of the Quran and that of the Bible, suffice to show that the Papacy’s and Ecumenists attempt to equate the God of Biblical revelation with that of the Quran, may be politically correct, but it is Biblically wrong. The two Gods differ like day from night in their nature, character, and plan for human life and destiny. The Biblical God offers salvation as a gift by grace; the Quranic God teaches that salvation is a human achievement.

    SIMILARITIES BETWEEN ISLAM AND ROMANISM

    In the light of the radical differences we have found between the Biblical and Quranic Gods, one wonders: How can the Papacy work toward a new partnership with Muslims by praising their faith as being the same faith of Abraham? Could it be that the Pope feels drawn to Islam more than to any other non-Christian religion, because there are significant similarities between Islam and Romanism? To test the validity of this assumption, let us take a brief look at some significant similarities between the two religions.

    AUTOCRATIC FORM OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT

    In the first place both Islam and Romanism have a similar autocratic form of church government where the seat of authority resides in one person: the Pope in Romanism and Muhammad in Islam. What the Pope is to Romanists, Muhammad is to the Muslims. Both of them are accepted as God’s representatives on earth. The Pope claims to be the vicar of Christ, and Muhammad proclaimed himself to be Allah’s greatest prophet, superseding Jesus Christ Himself. What this means is that both the Romanists and Muslims share the same admiration and veneration for a human leader who dictates their beliefs and practices.

    IMPORTANCE OF GOOD WORKS IN SALVATION

    A second striking similarity between Islam and Romanism is their respective understanding of the importance of good works to earn salvation. Both in Romanism and Islam salvation is the result of a combination of grace and works. In Romanism, God’s grace is infused into believers to enable them to do the necessary good works to merit salvation on the day of judgment.

    On a similar vein in Islam, salvation is a combination of Allah’s grace and Muslims’ works. On the Day of Judgment, if a Muslim’s good works outweigh their bad ones, and if Allah accepts their good works, then they may be forgiven of all their sins and enter into Paradise. Therefore, Islam is a religion of salvation by works because it combines man’s works with Allah’s grace.

    A few verses from the Quran suffice to exemplify the importance of works:
    “To those who believe and do deeds of righteous�ness hath Allah promised forgiveness and a great reward”
    (Surah 5:9).

    “Then those whose balance [of good deeds] is heavy, they will be successful. But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls; in hell will they abide”.
    (Surah 23:102-103).

    The Muslims understanding of good works is largely determined by the performance of the Five Pillars of Islam. These are:
    (1) the recitation of the creed that there is only one true God, Allah, and Muhammad his prophet;
    (2) Praying five times a day;
    (3) Fasting and abstaining from sexual relations during the daylight hours of the month of Ramadan;
    (4) Almsgiving to the poor;
    (5) Pilgrimage to Mecca, if possible, at least once in the lifetime.

    SIMILAR DEFINITION OF GOOD WORKS

    The Romanist understanding of good works is strikingly similar. Like the Muslims, the Romanist’s recite the Apostles Creed in their church service. The recitation of prayers is also an important part of their piety. I vividly recall my reciting the prayers in the evening. I held a rosary in my hand to count the number of Hail Marys and Our Father (Lord’s Prayer) I had recited.

    Fasting also is recommended in Romanism, especially as a form of penance to expiate sins confessed to a priest. Almsgiving is also an important aspect of piety. Alms are usually given in the form of charitable contributions to various religious organizations that minister to the orphans and the poor.

    Like the Muslims, Romanists are also encouraged to make a pilgrimage to Rome, especially during the Anno Santo, that is, the Holy Year, which is now celebrated every 25 years. During the last Jubilee (Holy) Year of the year 2000, it was estimated that over 40 million Catholics made their pilgrimage to Rome, seeking remission of their sins, and indulgences for their loved ones in Purgatory. An indulgence is the remission of the temporal punishment for sins on behalf of loved ones, that can be obtained through prayers, pilgrimages, and special masses. These can shorten the duration of the punishment experienced by loved ones in purgatory.

    It is evident that the methods of salvation in Islam and Romanism are strikingly similar. Unfortunately, both religious systems ignore that salvation is a divine gift of grace (Ephesians 2:8) and not a human achievement. Works of obedience are not the basis of our salvation, but a loving response to the gracious provision of salvation. It is because “the love of Christ compels us” (II Corinthians 5:14), that we observe His commandments (John 14:15).

    JOHN 14

    Jesus Promises to Send the Holy Spirit
    14 “Don’t be troubled. Believe in God, and believe in me. 2 My Father’s house has many rooms. If that were not true, would I have told you that I’m going to prepare a place for you? 3 If I go to prepare a place for you, I will come again. Then I will bring you into my presence so that you will be where I am. 4 You know the way to the place where I am going.”
    5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you’re going. So how can we know the way?”
    6 Jesus answered him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one goes to the Father except through me. 7 If you have known me, you will also know my Father. From now on you know him through me and have seen him in me.”
    8 Philip said to Jesus, “Lord, show us the Father, and that will satisfy us.”
    9 Jesus replied, “I have been with all of you for a long time. Don’t you know me yet, Philip? The person who has seen me has seen the Father. So how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? What I’m telling you doesn’t come from me. The Father, who lives in me, does what he wants. 11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and that the Father is in me. Otherwise, believe me because of the things I do.
    12 “I can guarantee this truth: Those who believe in me will do the things that I am doing. They will do even greater things because I am going to the Father. 13 I will do anything you ask the Father in my name so that the Father will be given glory because of the Son. 14 If you ask me to do something, I will do it.
    15 “If you love me, you will obey my commandments. 16 I will ask the Father, and he will give you another helper who will be with you forever. 17 That helper is the Spirit of Truth. The world cannot accept him, because it doesn’t see or know him. You know him, because he lives with you and will be in you.
    18 “I will not leave you all alone. I will come back to you. 19 In a little while the world will no longer see me, but you will see me. You will live because I live. 20 On that day you will know that I am in my Father and that you are in me and that I am in you. 21 Whoever knows and obeys my commandments is the person who loves me. Those who love me will have my Father’s love, and I, too, will love them and show myself to them.”
    22 Judas (not Iscariot) asked Jesus, “Lord, what has happened that you are going to reveal yourself to us and not to the world?”
    23 Jesus answered him, “Those who love me will do what I say. My Father will love them, and we will go to them and make our home with them. 24 A person who doesn’t love me doesn’t do what I say. I don’t make up what you hear me say. What I say comes from the Father who sent me.
    25 “I have told you this while I’m still with you. 26 However, the helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything. He will remind you of everything that I have ever told you.
    27 “I’m leaving you peace. I’m giving you my peace. I don’t give you the kind of peace that the world gives. So don’t be troubled or cowardly. 28 You heard me tell you, ‘I’m going away, but I’m coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I’m going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am.
    29 “I’m telling you this now before it happens. When it does happen, you will believe. 30 The ruler of this world has no power over me. But he’s coming, so I won’t talk with you much longer. 31 However, I want the world to know that I love the Father and that I am doing exactly what the Father has commanded me to do. Get up! We have to leave.”

    HUMAN INTERCESSORS

    A third striking doctrinal similarity between Romanism and Islam is the intercessory role of human agents. In Romanism, believers pray to Mary and the Saints to intercede with God on their behalf, or on behalf of their loved ones. In the new official Catechism of the Roman Church, it acknowledges that Muslims venerate Jesus as a prophet, his virgin Mother they also honor, and even at times devotedly invoke.
    For Muslims, the supreme intercessory role is reserved for Muhammad. On the final Day of Judgment, the Prophet will prostrate himself before God who, according to tradition, will say to him:

    “O Muhammad! raise up your head, and speak, it will be heard; and ask, it will be given; and intercede, and it will be approved.”
    A. N. Matthews, Translator, Mishcat-ul-Masabih, The Tibrizi Collection, (Calcutta, 1810), vol. 1, p. 607
    The text continues indicating that God will pull out of the hellfire those for whom Muhammad will intercede.

    The notion of human mediators interceding with God on behalf of others, is foreign to Scripture. The Bible teaches that
    “There is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”
    (I Timothy 2:5).
    “It is only Jesus Christ, who died, yes, who was raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us “
    (Romans 8:34).

    PURGATORY AND HELL

    The two doctrines of purgatory and hell are remarkably similar in both Romanism and Islam. Both religions believe that the souls of penitent sinners need to go through a purgation or purification process before they can be admitted to Paradise. In Roman teachings the suffering of purgatory is needed to pay for the temporal punishment of sins committed on this earth. In Islam the suffering is inflicted as punishment for sins of omission.

    In Islamic teaching the suffering of purgatory is needed, because despite all that the pious believer may have done according to the commandments of God while on earth, he still may have committed some transgressions, however slight, or failed to do certain things that he should have done. Many of the traditions suggest punishment for single sins of omission.

    ARAF

    Purgatory (Araf)
    Araf is the name given to the high castle and tower separating Paradise and Hell. In other words, Araf is a buffer zone between Paradise and Hell, separating them. There are some disputes over who will be the people of Araf; there are two views that became prominent.
    1. People who were not informed about the call of any prophets and children of polytheists who died very young.
    2. Believers whose good deeds and bad deeds are equal. They will have to wait between Paradise and Hell before they enter Paradise.
    The followings is stated in the Quranic verse about the people of Araf:
    “Between them shall be a veil, and on the Heights will be men who would know everyone by his marks: they will call out to the companions of the Garden “peace on you” they will not have entered, but they will have an assurance (thereof.) When their eyes shall be turned towards the companions of the Fire, they will say: “Our Lord! Send us not to the company of the wrong- doers.” (al-Araf 46-47.).
    However, Araf is not a place of permanent resident. After making the people of Araf wait there for a while temporarily, Allah will make a decision for them and send them to Paradise with his blessing.

    QUESTIONS ON ISLAM BLOG

    Who are the companions of Araf, which is mentioned in the Surah Al-Araf?

    Let us first give the interpretations of the verses about Araf and people entitled to Araf, which reads in the Surah Al-Araf before explaining Araf itself. There are some verses about Araf in the Holy Book Quran after the verses, which are made mention of the conversations between the companions of Hell and the companions of Paradise.

    And when their eyes are turned towards the companions of Hell, they say (in dread of that state): “Our Lord! Do not include us among the people of the wrongdoing!”

    The people of the Heights call out to some men (who were the leaders of unbelief in the world, and) whom they recognize by their marks (on their countenances), saying: “(Now you see that) neither your numbers and the wealth you amassed nor your growing arrogance and vanity have availed you!”

    (Pointing to the companions of Paradise, they continue): “Are those not the ones of whom you swore that God would not favor them with mercy?” (For now it is they who have been told:) “Enter Paradise; you will have no fear, nor will you grieve.” (Al-Araf Surah, 7:47-49)

    Araf is the plural form of the word Arf. There are so many explanations about Araf in the interpretations. However, the common conception mostly accepted by the annotators is Arafs being a curtain, a high wall, and a hill between Hell and Paradise. According to Ibni Abbas, it is a balcony (surrounding minaret) up on the Sirat Bridge (bridge, which is thin, straight, and sharp will be laid across Hell with Gods command).

    Hazrath Hasan Basri says;

    These are the people who were assigned by the command of God to allocate the companions of Hell and the companions of Paradise. I swear it is true, they might be among us today.

    The reason why the people in the Araf are called as Araf is their recognizing humans for their actions. And again as it is explained in the interpretations, when God balances good and evil deeds in the scale (Mizan) and distinguishes companions of paradise from companions of Hell, He will make those wait for quite some time whose good and evil deeds are equal. Those who are going to be next to the Sirat Bridge will know the companions of Hell and the companions of Paradise. When they will see the companions of Paradise, they will say, Gods peace and blessings be upon you. When theyll turn to the left side theyll see the companions of Hell and by seeking refuge in God will supplicate as, O God do not let us be among those atrocious. After done with companions of Hell and companions of Paradise, God will forgive them with His Mercy and will put them into the Paradise. (3)

    As a matter of fact when Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) once asked as who are the companions of Araf?:

    The Prophet said, “When the people of Paradise will enter Paradise and the people of Hell will go to Hell, rest will be told as, you are saved from Hell for your good deeds but did not deserve Paradise. But you are saved from Hell by My mercy, you may enter Paradise.

    Besides, there are some accounts, which reports that the companions of Araf are not humans but they are angels. All these explanations are in conformity with the conception and the interpretation of the verses.

    However, Ibrahim Hakki in his work Marifetname claims that insane and children of unbelievers who are not held responsible of religious duties are entitled to Araf. When they see people of Paradise just because they cannot reach those blessings, they are in sadness, but when they see people of Hell, they are thankful to the God for where they are and they stay there forever.

    Nevertheless, every explanation about Araf and People of Araf is only at the level of interpretation of the verse. Only God knows the truth.

    Sources:

    1. Surah Al-A`raf , 47-49.
    2. et-Tefsirul-Kebir, 14:87.
    3- (Taberi Tefsiri) 8:136-139.
    4. A. g. e.
    Author:
    Mehmet Paksu

    The notion of believers suffering in purgatory to pay for the punishment of their sins before they are admitted into Paradise negates the all sufficiency of Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice to pay the penalty of our sins. Scripture clearly teaches that
    “Christ has appeared once for all at the end of the age to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself”
    (Hebrews 9:26; cf. I Corinthians 15:3).

    The Good News of the Gospel is that God showed His love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us (Romans 5:8). There is no need for penitent sinners to suffer the punishment of their sins in this present life or the next, because Christ’s atoning sacrifice has paid the penalty for our sins.

    The Islamic vision of Hell is remarkably similar to the Roman one. In fact, some writers suggest that the seven stories Inferno of Dante Alighieri, was inspired by the Islamic hell with seven stories, each of which is for a distinct class of wicked.

    Hardly a cruder or more barbarous picture of hell could be conceived than that depicted in the Quran and Hadith. The fires of hell are seventy times the intensity of terrestrial fire. The wicked who will suffer in it throughout eternity, will forget that they ever enjoyed any pleasure on this earth. Their tongues will drag out and men will stamp upon them. They will suffer hunger and when given food it will stick in their throats. They will be given hot water served to them, with iron hooks; and when it comes near their faces it will scorch them, and when it goes into their bellies will tear every thing there into pieces.
    Scorpions as big as mules and snakes like camels torment them; stinking rivers full of vile creatures entrap them; the damned have black charred skins, huge long tongues, mouths vomiting pus and blood, entrails filled with fire; their bodies will be greatly enlarged so that they can more adequately experience the torture. All suffer by fire, although the degree of punishment differs according to one’s sins. The damned attempt to escape, but each time the guardians of the Fire seize them and throw them down again.

    The gruesome and barbarous description of hell, that is common to both Islam and Romanism, may serve the cause of promoting the worship of their awful God, a God to be feared rather than loved, but it defames the Biblical God.

    Galatians 6:8
    8 If you plant in the soil of your corrupt nature, you will harvest destruction. But if you plant in the soil of your spiritual nature, you will harvest everlasting life.

    2 Thessalonians 1:9
    9 They will pay the penalty by being destroyed forever, by being separated from the Lord’s presence and from his glorious power.

    1 Thessalonians 5:2-3
    2 You know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 When people say, “Everything is safe and sound!” destruction will suddenly strike them. It will be as sudden as labor pains come to a pregnant woman. They won’t be able to escape.

    CONCLUSION

    The preceding comparison of some of the beliefs shared in common by Romanism and Islam, helps us to understand why the Papacy is working toward a new partnership with Muslims by acknowledging the commonality between their respective faiths. We have seen that the basis for such partnership is not merely a generic view of God, but a similar autocratic form of church government, as well as similar beliefs in such areas as the role of good works in salvation, the intercessory role of human agents, the immortality of the soul, the coercive methods of evangelism, and the vision of purgatory and hell.

    • Lucky, you’re very unlucky about truth. Truth wanna give you a hug but you’re continuously hitting it off. OK, keep with your hatred.

      • ANGELIC MUSLIMS November 1989 – St. Louis – The FBI inadvertently tape-recorded the entire episode of a teenage girl being killed by her Palestinian father and Brazilian mother (the Feds were looking for evidence of terrorism, which they also found). Apparently their daughter had not lived according to their view of Islam. In a ghastly eight-minute sequence, Zein Isa stabbed his daughter Palestina thirteen times with a butcher’s knife as his wife held the girl down and responded to Palestina’s pleas for help with a brutal “Shut up!” The killing ends with Zein screaming; “Die! Die quickly! Die quickly! … Quiet, little one! … Die, my daughter, die!” By this time, she is dead. The 1989 killing in St. Louis was captured on a court-approved FBI telephone tap of a Palestinian, Zein Isa, who was suspected of supporting terrorist causes. Agents were not listening as the killing took place. The FBI ultimately handed over the tape, which was used to help convict the couple of murder. An egregious example of a family honor killing, permitted in some Islamic cultures, the murderous couple killed their daughter to insure she did not expose their terrorist plans and affiliations. The Associated Press – Nov. 7, 2002 – TEHRAN, Iran — A prominent reformist scholar has been sentenced to death on charges of insulting Islam’s prophet and questioning the hard-line clergy’s interpretation of Islam. A court in Hamedan in western Iran sentenced university professor Hashem Aghajari to death, Saleh Nikbakht told The Associated Press. Aghajari was detained in August after a closed hearing in Hamedan where he made a speech in June questioning the hard-line interpretations of the ruling clerics. Nikbakht said Aghajari, a top member of the reformist political party, Islamic Revolution Mujahedeen Organization, was also sentenced to 74 lashes, banned from teaching for 10 years and exiled to three remote Iranian cities for eight years. Iranian courts often impose such multiple sentences in cases where it wants to make an example of the accused. In cases where the death sentence is imposed, the others are not carried out. Nikbakht insisted his client had not said anything that insulted the Prophet Muhammad, as the charges alleged. “There has never been a word insulting the prophet in Aghajari’s speech. This verdict is nothing but a rule against Iran’s national interests,” Nikbakht said. In his speech, Aghajari had said clerics’ teachings on Islam were considered sacred simply because they were part of history, and he questioned why clerics were the only ones authorized to interpret Islam. Later, he was charged with insulting Islamic sanctities and the court described his speech as blasphemous. ITALY IS ROILED BY MURDER OF A PAKISTANI WOMAN & OTHER VIOLENCE INVOLVING “IMMIGRANTS” Extract August 23, 2006 New York Times On Aug. 11 of Hina Saleem, a 20-year-old woman whose family moved here from Pakistan was found buried with her throat slit. Hina had been killed because her traditionalist Muslim father objected to her Western lifestyle. “She smoked and wore revealing, low-slung jeans like many young women…News reports said she had been living with an Italian man.” Under Islam it’s death for a Muslim woman to have relations with a non-Muslim man, married or not. The body was found after her boyfriend reported her missing. Her father, uncle and two other men were involved, all Pakistani. “She was always happy,” said Multani Gurmail, her boss at the Antica India restaurant, where she had worked as a waitress. “I knew she had some problems. I didn’t realize how bad they were.” This killing along with others has opened a debate on what happens to the children of Muslim immigrants that want to be Italian, German, or American, and not Muslim like their parents want. Local Muslims and her mother claimed Islam had nothing to do with it. Her other crimes according to her mother, “She stayed out without explanation, we never knew where she was and with whom, she was simply a daughter who did not obey,” Within days a young Italian woman was found dead in a Brescia church. A Sri Lankan immigrant was arrested. On Aug. 21, a Morocco immigrant was arrested and charged with killing a notable painter, and a Pakistani man was knifed to death during what appears to have been a robbery. It hard to tell much from the news report because of the liberal stance and political correctness of the New York Times. To continue, “According to the Catholic charity Caritas, there are about 110,000 immigrants among the 1.1 million people living in the province of Brescia. Pakistani leaders estimate there are about 10,000 people of Pakistani origin in the area…Their children, on the other hand, grew up going to Italian schools and having Italian friends. More problems were imminent…most are just becoming teenagers now.” Their problem is they fled (her parents) the misery and poverty caused by their backward Islamic-tribal culture, then want to retain that very culture in the West. In the cause of political correctness, many public officials look the other way as women and girls often live in terror. PAKISTANI TELLS HOW HE KILLED 4 DAUGHTERS The laborer, 40, says he took their lives to save his family’s ‘honor’ Associated Press Dec. 28, 2005 Nazir Ahmed, 40, who killed his three young daughters and their adult stepsister, is processed in police detention in Gago Mandi near Multan, Pakistan. : AP MULTAN, PAKISTAN – Nazir Ahmed appears calm and unrepentant as he recounts how he slit the throats of his three young daughters and their 25-year old stepsister to salvage his family’s “honor” – a crime that shocked some in Pakistan. The 40-year old laborer, speaking to the Associated Press in police detention as he was being shifted to prison, said he had only one regret – that he didn’t kill the stepsister’s alleged lover too. Hundreds of girls and women are killed by male relatives each year in this conservative Islamic nation, and rights groups said Wednesday such “honor killings” will only stop when authorities get serious about punishing perpetrators. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said that in more than half of such cases that make it to court, most end with cash settlements paid by relatives to the victims’ families, although the minimum penalty is 10 years and the maximum is death by hanging. Ahmed’s killing spree – witnessed by his wife, Rehmat Bibi, as she cradled their 3-month-old baby son – happened Friday night at their home in eastern Punjab province. It is the latest of more than 260 such honor killings documented by the rights commission, mostly from media reports, during the first 11 months of 2005. Ahmed said he killed his stepdaughter because she had committed adultery, and his daughters because he didn’t want them to do the same when they grew up. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/3553084.html Hudood Laws in Pakistan that a woman must have four male witnesses to prove rape, or face a charge of adultery herself.The most well-known among Hudood cases is that concerning a rape victim, Zafran Bibi, who last year was charged with adultery and sentenced to be stoned to death According to Kanez Ayesha Munawwar, a member of Pakistan’s National Assembly who is against the repeal of Hudood, “These laws will make our society a moral one. I think (they) give the Pakistani woman protection. If these laws are implemented with all honesty, it will actually empower her.” MAINTAINING MUSLIM FAMILY HONOR by Al Skudsi bin Hookah, roving reporter and foreign correspondent for The Gaza Gajeera. Jan 20, 2003 I am very unhappy. Our way of life is under attack. And we are not fighting back. Deep down, we know that when a woman has disgraced her family, nothing will restore honor except by killing her. This is understood in Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Egypt, the Gaza strip and the West Bank. So why are we Arabs telling the Western press that honor killing is cultural, that it is not really part of Islam? Our way of life is based on maintaining our honor. And make no mistake about it: a woman does tarnish her family’s honor by engaging in pre-marital sex, or by getting herself raped, when she seeks divorce and when she marries against her family’s wishes. Why are we pussyfooting? Are we ashamed of what we do? Why are some of us trying to play it down? Like the people who say it’s the same as battering women in America. Come on, now. Sometimes, when we correct a wife’s behavior by a well-deserved beating, we can maybe go a little too far. But that’s different. Or there’s this guy, Mohammed Haz Yahya at the Hebrew University (wouldn’t you know it), who makes believe killing to protect our honor is like the western world’s crime of passion. Come on now. It’s not just religious leaders who know it’s the right thing to do. Many of the most progressive political leaders are the ones who defend the practice. To maintain the integrity of our society and our traditions, we must maintain our honor by any and every means. And keeping our women pure is a big part of our honor. So there’s no point saying honor killing isn’t really part of our religion. Our religion isn’t just what’s in the Koran. Honor killings fit into the cultural context of today’s Islamic teachings. Honor and Islam are inextricably bound; they are what give our life meaning. A strong religion demands we choose to maintain our honor. I am also annoyed that news reports focus on gory details instead of showing compassionate understanding of what motivated the men who act vigorously to maintain honor. They are the real victims. Their honor was violated, so killing the offending woman is self-defense. Instead, like in this story, reporters graphically describe the damage done by the ax — of course an ax is going to do damage. Listen to this: “Two months ago, when she tried to run away yet again, Kina grabbed a kitchen knife and an ax and stabbed and beat the girl [his daughter] until she lay dead in the blood-smeared bathroom of the family’s Istanbul apartment. He then commanded one of his daughters-in-law to clean up the mess. When his two sons came home from work 14 hours later, he ordered them to dispose of the 5-foot-3 corpse, which had been wrapped in a carpet and a blanket. The girl’s head had been so mutilated, police said, it was held together by a knotted cloth.” And this: Kifaya Husayn, a 16-year-old Jordanian girl, was lashed to a chair by her 32-year-old brother. He gave her a drink of water and told her to recite an Islamic prayer. Then he slashed her throat. Immediately afterward, he ran out into the street, waving the bloody knife and crying, ‘I have killed my sister to cleanse my honor.’ Kifaya’s crime? She was raped by another brother, a 21-year-old man. Her judge and jury? Her own uncles, who convinced her eldest brother that Kifaya was too much of a disgrace to the family’s honor to be allowed to live. The murderer was sentenced to fifteen years, but the sentence was subsequently reduced to seven and a half years, an extremely severe penalty by Jordanian standards.” This one is better. At least the reporter focused on why the brother had to kill his sister. A 25-year-old Palestinian who hanged his sister with a rope: “I did not kill her, but rather helped her to commit suicide and to carry out the death penalty she sentenced herself to. I did it to wash with her blood the family honor that was violated because of her and in response to the will of society that would not have had any mercy on me if I didn’t . . . Society taught us from childhood that blood is the only solution to wash the honor.” And here, at least, we can see it isn’t just some ignorant slobs who live in the boonies. “I would do what I have to do,’ said Bassam al-Hadid, a Jordanian with an American doctorate who spent 12 years as a hospital administrator in the United States, when asked whether he would kill a daughter who had sex outside marriage.” I have to say that I’m heartened to see that in families that respect themselves, women are as dedicated as men. “Samia Sarwar, 29, mother of two boys aged 4 and 8, was shot dead today in lawyer Hina Jillani’s office by a bearded man accompanying her mother and uncle. ‘He’s my helper, I can’t walk,’ said the mother, when Hina told the two men to get out. As the mother went to sit down in front of Hina’s desk, and Saima stood up from her chair, the bearded man whipped out a pistol from his waistcoat and shot Saima in the head, killing her instantly.” A European I know said he doesn’t understand why a girl who is raped has to die to protect her family’s honor. “After all,” he said, “it isn’t her fault”. Is it so hard to understand that when an unmarried woman is no longer sexually pure, the family is humiliated? Her lack of chastity brings shame to everyone in her family. How else can her family’s honor be cleansed except by her blood? What’s to understand? Actually, it’s important that you understand that her impure state can destabilize morality in our whole society. If you don’t understand that, you won’t understand that our honor demands that we must tolerate no impertinence. Everyone must know their place. Men must be in control of their families. Women and children must obey. Women must devote themselves to the care of their husband and children. Or things will spiral out of control. We could end up with a big bunch of Kola Boofs. And you know what a headache she is. She was born respectable but she was brought up in America. Maybe that has something to do with it. She poses bare-breasted on the cover of that disgusting book she wrote and she no longer considers herself a Muslim. It’s too bad her publisher had to be threatened before he stopped publishing her latest book. But he should have known better than to try to publish a book that is so disrespectful to the Arab Islamic communities in Europe and in Africa. Boof has made terrible accusations. Listen to this one: “As a black African woman, I cannot and will not be silent as black men in Arab nations are chained up like dogs to the back doors of Muslim households and fed, literally, from doggie bowls. I will not be silent as African women are raped, mutilated and mentally demeaned by sadistic human beings calling themselves children of Allah. I will not be silent as the number of little black boys who are sodomized by their Arab masters continues to soar, while even worse atrocities attend the lives of little black girls.” So maybe her disobedience started small. But, now, like the Shariah court in London’s Islamic community said: she is guilty of “deliberately and maliciously bearing false witness against religious sentiment and of willing treason against her Arab Muslim father’s people and against her nation, the Sudan.” And that’s why Sudan has a fatwa out on her. THE SEATTLE TIMES: he Seattle Times: “HONOR KILLING” SHAKES UP SWEDEN AFTER MAN SLAYS DAUGHTER WHO WOULDN’T WED By Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times BOTKYRKA, Sweden – When Fadime Sahindal told police her life had been threatened, they gave her an alarm system. When she approached politicians for help, they told her to make peace with her parents. And when she appealed in television interviews for aid in escaping a death sentence imposed by her father after she refused an arranged marriage, she provoked sympathy among Swedes – whose more liberal outlook she shared – but little willingness to get involved in a family matter. Now that she’s dead, shot in the head by her father, the 26-year-old victim of an “honor killing” is drawing attention to the cultural double standards she battled. Details of the killing were released from police records after her father, Rahmi, was charged yesterday with her murder. She was shot by her father as she left the apartment where she had secretly visited her mother and sisters in the quiet university town of Uppsala, 40 miles north of Stockholm, court officials said. Rahmi, who said he acted to save his family’s honor, has pleaded guilty to murder. Fadime had fled her family home because her father and other male relatives did not want her to mix with Swedes and were trying to arrange a marriage for her in Turkey. Her father threatened her when she dated a young Swede, prompting her to go into hiding. Fadime, who had spoken in Parliament and on TV about difficulties faced by young women from immigrant families, was gunned down in front of her mother and two younger sisters. The Sahindal family moved to Sweden from a rural village in Turkey more than 20 years ago. Sahindal has become a martyr among women who came to this liberal country from patriarchal cultures. No comprehensive statistics exist to show the extent of such honor killings here and elsewhere in Scandinavia, where whole communities of Kurds and other Muslim groups have found refuge. Sahindal’s death has exposed the region’s failure to integrate immigrants into these societies. Having long looked the other way when religious and cultural clashes came to public attention, Swedes are pondering what more they could and should have done. “The system isn’t working,” said Dilsa Demirbag-Sten, a former government adviser on integration affairs, who accuses authorities of acting as if certain rights and freedoms accorded Nordic residents, such as gender equality and protection from forced marriage, are not necessarily applicable to immigrants. Immigrants have been coming to Sweden in increasing numbers in the past decade to fill a persistent labor shortage. They also take advantage of the country’s liberal asylum policy. But institutional flaws – such as the two years on average it takes to get a decision on asylum requests – encourage those waiting for permanent refuge to band together in bleak housing projects in what amounts to self-imposed segregation. At least 15 percent of Sweden’s 9 million residents are non-Nordic and heavily concentrated in volatile ghettos of Somalis, Kurds, Bosnians and dozens of other groups. “There are places just outside of Stockholm where the entire population is foreign. These people aren’t living in Sweden at all,” said Keya Izol, head of the Federation of Kurdish Associations in Sweden, referring to towns and suburbs such as Botkyrka, a 30-minute drive from Stockholm. A 1995 reform of laws on refugees and immigration has worsened the situation, Izol said, by focusing training and jobs on the younger generation, causing strains within families as well as between immigrants and Swedes. “We have been too slow to integrate the older generation and too fast in integrating the younger ones,” former Danish Justice Minister Erling Olsen said. Nalin Pekgul, a Social Democratic legislator of Kurdish origin in Sweden, shares the revulsion over Sahindal’s killing but cautions against interpreting an act of criminal extremism as typical of fundamentalist immigrants. “Sweden has done a better job than most countries with integration, which is why this case has caused such strong reaction,” Pekgul said. As a figure of respect in Sweden’s 40,000-strong Kurdish community, Pekgul tried to intervene on Sahindal’s behalf. The young woman had given interviews to Swedish media about the death threats from her father and brother, Masud, a level of defiance that Pekgul feared was only enhancing the danger. The lawmaker negotiated a compromise in 1998 by which Sahindal agreed to stay away from Uppsala and her father promised not to stalk her outside their hometown while she was living in seclusion near Stockholm. In recent years, Sahindal had been pursuing a sociology degree and become an outspoken advocate of the opportunities Nordic immigration presented for women from fundamentalist backgrounds. WHEN FREEDOM GETS THE DEATH SENTENCE FOR HATIN SURUCU The murder of a Turkish woman Hatin Surucu and the applauding of the crime by some students have left Berlin shaken and officials pushing for ethics class. But how deep does the concept of honor run among some immigrant communities? The solemn vigil (at a bus stop where she was murdered) called not by the city’s Muslim community but a gay and lesbian organization — the image of the young woman in a headscarf, a baby in her arms, was familiar from newspapers and television. A few notes at the memorial read, “Hope you get a better deal in your next life,” and “Live a life on your own terms.” “It’s a scandal,” said Ali K, 33. “All Muslims in Berlin should take to the streets to protest.” Yasemin, 22, said, “It’s horrific. All Hatin was doing was leading her life the way she wanted.” No Muslim organization said anything in her behalf. But it was a choice she paid for with her life. On Feb. 7, 23-year-old Hatin Sürücü was gunned down at the aforementioned bus stop by three of her brothers. Investigators suspect it was a so-called “honor killing,” because her fundamentalist Turkish-Kurdish family strongly disapproved of her modern and “un-Islamic” life. She grew up in Berlin, was married off at 16 to a cousin in Istanbul, then a few years later returned to the German capital with her young son, moved into a home for single mothers, completed school and began to train as an electrician. She stopped wearing a headscarf. Living like a German got her killed. Some male students of Turkish origin at a high school near the scene of the crime reportedly downplayed the act. During a class discussion on the murder, one said, “She only had herself to blame,” while another remarked “She deserved what she got –the whore lived like a German.” While the incident has reopened debate on the integration of immigrants and the compatibility of Islamic values with Western ones, it’s the reaction of a small group of Turkish students to the murder that has rattled the German capital. Just the reaction of a few? Not according to some, “There isn’t a single school with a high foreign population where teachers haven’t heard kind of thing, where individual students sometimes regard murder as a just sentence. At Berlin’s Turkish-dominated neighborhood near Kottbusser Tor in the Kreuzberg district, 17-year-old Erkan, a high school student of Turkish origin, was divided about the issue. “I’m not saying you should murder, but Hatin’s lifestyle just didn’t fit the way traditional Muslims live.” Apoligists claim the problem isn’t purely “Islamic phenomenon,” but, statistics in Berlin show that murders meant to uphold the honor of the family are high among Muslims. An Afghan national at a nearby prison was 16 when he helped relatives kill a widowed aunt who had refused to marry her brother-in-law. Others said most of the murders are often carefully plotted in the family with the support of all, including women. “Usually the patriarch selects the youngest son to carry out the crime because he knows that judges in Germany don’t usually give the maximum sentence of 10 years to a minor for manslaughter…They don’t feel any regret for what they did though some even kill their favorite sister. Instead, they’re honored and feel like martyrs for having been chosen to carry out the crime.” Some say “the school can’t be the only place for learning democratic values. You have to begin with the family.” WOMEN’S RIGHT’S LAWYER QUITS; SAYS SHE FEELS THREATENED A prominent Berlin women’s rights lawyer and critic of Islam has closed her practice, saying her life is in danger and the state has failed to protect her. Seyran Ates has been a prominent figure in Germany on account of her books and public engagements reinforcing her fight against forced marriage, headscarves, so-called honor killings, domestic violence and the subjugation of women in many Turkish and Kurdish families. The 43-year-old German-Turkish lawyer, who was shot at by a Muslim man 20 years ago in Berlin’s Kreuzberg neighborhood, has received numerous prizes over the years. Last year, Ates was named Germany’s woman of the year for her unstinting battle for the rights of mainly Muslim women. Ates has riled up the Turkish community with her outspoken criticism The Muslim husband of one of her clients, whom Ates was representing in divorce proceedings, assaulted his wife and tried to attack Ates opposite the courtroom where the case was being heard, the paper wrote. “I’m withdrawing from professional life as a lawyer, my client is living in a women’s shelter, but the assailant is running around scot-free,” Ates told the paper, adding that “my life and that of my young daughter have priority.” The German-Turkish lawyer, a member of Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SPD) since 2004, has said that the SPD too hasn’t paid any heed to her concerns. “The SPD is still dominated by an immigration policy that plays things down,” Ates told the paper, saying that politicians always urged citizens to show more courage. “That is right, but then you also have to protect people.” The murder of Hatun Sürücü, a Turkish woman, by her brother made headlines last year. Ates’ outspoken criticism of the treatment of women in Turkish families in Germany has earned her the ire of both Turks as well as many left-wingers in favor of multicultural policies. Ates has consistently slammed politicians for turning a blind eye to problems within immigrant communities under the guise of tolerance and fostering diversity. Ates however has said that she will continue giving lectures and interviews to highlight the plight of women in Turkish and Kurdish communities in Germany. Ates’ announcement has sparked outrage among politicians, with many calling for expanding victim protection laws to include women who feel threatened. Berlin’s interior minister, Erhard Körting called it an “alarming sign” and said he had “high respect for Ates’ work.” ‘HONOUR KILLING SHOCKS GERMANY By Ray Furlong BBC News, Berlin An impromptu shrine has been created at the place where Hatun Surucu was gunned down. There are flowers, candles, messages of support and photographs of the 23-year-old Turkish woman, who died of multiple bullet wounds to the head and chest. The police have arrested her three brothers, in the belief that Mrs Surucu was the latest victim in a series of so-called “honour killings” that have taken place in Berlin in recent months. “She had no other enemies. This murder bears all the hallmarks of an honour killing,” says police psychologist Karl Mollenhauer. “In Islamic culture, the woman is the bearer of the family decency. She must maintain the honour of the family. Men must defend that honour.” If the police are right, Mrs Surucu was the sixth victim of honour killings among Berlin’s 200,000-strong Turkish community in as many months. She had been married to her cousin eight years before in an arranged marriage, but had then run away – taking her five-year-old son with her. “Women must make their own decisions,” read one of the banners at her shrine. Mrs Surucu’s killing has led to an unusually strong public reaction – with Turkish women taking to the streets to protest. “This tragedy has shaken us awake. We’ve been very surprised by the response,” says Eren Unsal from the Association of Secular Turks. “This is the first time that political decision-makers, NGOs, and so on have been ready to sit down at the same table together and think about what must be done. This has never happened before.” ‘BLIND EYE’ But not everyone shares the outrage. On a school playground, just yards from where the killing occurred, children were heard praising it. The victim, they said, had lived like a German. And it was not the only response of its kind. Our job is to explain Islam. That’s what has a permanent effect – clearing up certain false ideas about Islam in people’s minds. Huseyin Midik, Mosques’ association. “I heard a young Turkish lady said on a Turkish radio station ‘she deserved it because she took off her headscarf’. This is incredible,” says Ozcan Mutlu, one of the few Turks sitting on the Berlin city council. He says the problem has been exacerbated by the German authorities turning a blind eye to it. “For instance, when a Turkish man beat his wife, he didn’t get the same punishment as when a German did it. They tried to explain it with the culture, the traditions, and with the religion. “That’s stupid, you cannot do that. There is no cultural or religious excuse for beating women, and there can be no less punishment for honour killings. But in Germany it was the fact in the past years.” ‘FALSE IDEAS’ Muslim leaders in Berlin are at pains to stress that there is no basis for honour killings in the Koran. But they have also been criticised for not making a clear condemnation of them. “We have preached twice in the last year on human rights, saying that it is forbidden to kill, and so on,” says Huseyin Midik, a representative of Germany’s largest association of Mosques. Some were raped – by an uncle, cousin, even a father – and when they get married they worry someone will find out they’re not a virgin. Berlin social worker, “It’s natural that when something happens, people think we should respond. But it’s not always the right thing to hold special events at these times, and then for it all to stop again. Our job is to explain Islam. That’s what has a permanent effect – clearing up certain false ideas about Islam in people’s minds.” But the practise continues among Germany’s Turkish and Arab minorities. The police list 45 cases in the last eight years. One woman was drowned in her bath, another stabbed to death by her husband in front of their three-year-old daughter. Every year dozens of women and girls, some as young as 13, run away to avoid arranged marriages – some in fear for their lives. “Some were raped – by an uncle, by a cousin, even by the father – and when they should get married they are worried that someone will find out they’re not a virgin anymore. They are afraid that they will be murdered,” says a Berlin social worker who runs a centre for runaways. She asked to remain anonymous, and the centre is located at a secret address. Honour killings are, she says, just the most extreme form of repression faced by the people who come to her. “All these girls who come to us are locked in, in the house, by their families. They only go to school because they have to by law – otherwise they wouldn’t be allowed. They have to stay at home and cook, and care for the sisters and brothers. The parents don’t accept that the girl decides anything by herself.” CULTURE OF DEATH? PALESTINIAN GIRL’S MURDER HIGHLIGHTS GROWING NUMBER OF “HONOR KILLINGS” They kill their own, too. And the world expects “peace”? ABU QASH – Rofayda Qaoud – raped by her brothers and impregnated – refused to commit suicide, her mother recalls, even after she bought the unwed teenager a razor with which to slit her wrists. So Amira Abu Hanhan Qaoud says she did what she believes any good Palestinian parent would: restored her family’s “honor” through murder. Armed with a plastic bag, razor and wooden stick, Qaoud entered her sleeping daughter’s room last Jan. 27. “Tonight you die, Rofayda,” she told the girl, before wrapping the bag tightly around her head. Next, Qaoud sliced Rofayda’s wrists, ignoring her muffled pleas of “No, mother, no!” After her daughter went limp, Qaoud struck her in the head with the stick. Killing her sixth-born child took 20 minutes, Qaoud tells a visitor through a stream of tears and cigarettes that she smokes in rapid succession. “She killed me before I killed her,” says the 43-year-old mother of nine. “I had to protect my children. This is the only way I could protect my family’s honor.” The guilty brothers are in jail. Qaoud’s confessed crime, for which she must appear before a three-judge panel on Dec. 3, is one repeated almost weekly among Palestinians living in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Israel. Female virtue and virginity define a family’s reputation in Arab cultures, so it’s women who are punished if that reputation is perceived as sullied. Victims’ rights groups say the number of “honor crimes” appears to be climbing, but at the same time, getting little attention. Israelis and Palestinians are too busy with political and military issues to notice what they dismiss as domestic disputes, says Suad Abu-Dayyeh, who works for the Women’s Center for Legal Aid and Counseling in East Jerusalem. Police in Israel investigated at least 18 honor killings in the past three years. Palestinian police reported 31 cases in 2002 – up from five during the first half of 1999 – the last time such incidents were counted before the current Palestinian uprising began, according to the center’s study. But the number of killings is likely higher, given that Palestinian police investigate only crimes that have been reported, said Yousef Tarifi, the Ramallah prosecutor assigned to Qaoud’s case. Shalhoub-Kevorkian says her past research showed the likely number to be 15 times higher than the number of reported cases. According to court records, Rofayda was raped by her brothers, Fahdi, 22, and Ali, 20, in a bedroom they shared in the family’s three-room house. On Nov. 26, 2002, doctors at a nearby hospital who were treating Rofayda for an injured leg discovered she was eight months pregnant. Palestinian authorities whisked her off to a women’s shelter in Bethlehem, where she gave birth to a healthy boy on Dec. 23. He has since been adopted by another Palestinian family, court records show. Rofayda, meanwhile, wanted to return to her parents in the Ramallah suburb of Abu Qash. Ramallah Gov. Mustafa Isa called a meeting with the family and village elders, demanding they pledge in writing not to harm the girl. “He asked me if everyone in the family and the village would promise not to bother this girl, but I told him I couldn’t give him a guarantee,” Abu Qash Mayor Faik Shalout says. Rofayda returned home in late January without notifying the authorities. The shame was unbearable, Qaoud said. Relatives and friends refused to speak to her family. Her elder daughters’ husbands wouldn’t allow them to visit because Rofayda had returned home. On Jan. 27, Rofayda sent word that she was in danger to crisis counselors at Abu-Dayyeh’s center in East Jerusalem. They, in turn, called Palestinian police in Ramallah, who have jurisdiction over Abu Qash. Qaoud, meanwhile, sent her husband, who suffers from heart disease, to a doctor in the nearby village of Bir Zeit. Her three youngest children went to a cousin’s house. At 11:30 p.m. she killed Rofayda, court records show. Tarifi says he’s convinced Qaoud had an accomplice, but Qaoud insists she acted alone. Qaoud turned herself in and, after four months in jail, was released pending the resolution of her case. While honor killings committed in the heat of the moment – for example, by a husband who catches his wife in bed with another man – generally carry a six-month to one-year jail term, Qaoud will likely be sentenced to three to five years in prison, Tarifi says. The fact she is a mother who was trying to protect her family’s honor mitigates the crime of premeditated murder, which is punishable by death under Palestinian law, he adds. The brothers are serving minimum 10-year sentences in a Palestinian jail in the West Bank city of Jericho for statutory rape of a relative, Tarifi says. No trace of Rofayda or her brothers remains in the family home. Qaoud says she ripped up all of their photographs and burned their clothes. The bedroom in which she killed her daughter is now a storeroom. Erasing the memories is harder, she admits. She eases her pain by doting on her three children still living at home, especially the youngest, Fatima, 9, whom she lavishes with kisses. The children say they’ve forgiven Qaoud and return her affection. “My mother did this because she does not want us to be punished by people,” Fatima explains with a shy smile. Leaning into Qaoud’s arms, the little girl adds: “I love my mother much more now than before.” ************************ In the city of Multan in Pakistan, Ayub Masih (Christian), who had previously been accused of insulting the Prophet Muhammad under the “Blasphemy Law,” is being held in solitary confinement in a four-by-six foot cell. He also faces the death penalty. THE AMERICAN MUSLIM We now ask the question: ‘What about all the Muslims living with us here in America’? Of course, not all Muslims here are terrorists. Undoubtedly, the majority of Muslims living in America are nominal citizens living a devout personal piety but without the essential political dimension of orthodox Islam, and are certainly (or hopefully) not bent on terrorist actions. Many are content to continue to raise their families and prosper with the rest of us and do not want violence, being people with a better moral code than militants and their view (right or wrong) of what Muhammad expects today. They try to follow a path dictated by personal conscience as exemplified by Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian lawyer and human-rights fighter who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Ebadi insists that no one, least of all the mullahs, has the right to tell others how to live and practice their faith. “There are no priests and no church in Islam,” she repeats. “As Muslims we are alone responsible for our deeds and shall face Divine Judgment as individuals. Because we are not robots, no one could programme us with his version of religion. … All human beings are of equal worth simply by existing”. That, of course, is in direct opposition to the basic principles of Islam, which hold that humanity is divided according to the strict hierarchy of worth mentioned earlier. Ebadi is a woman and as such is regarded by Iran’s Khatami and other mullahs as, at best, half of a human being. In much of the world she represents more a fringe minority than a majority, and she and others so inclined continue to face mortal danger for such heretic views in opposition to true Islam and the example of their esteemed Prophet. While perhaps most Muslims are peace-loving people wanting to “live together in peace and harmony” with those of other beliefs, the question that must be answered is: Are these Muslims for peace because of Islam or in spite of Islam? The fact will remain that Muslims are saddled with a system that has a spiritual force behind it, with violence firmly planted as a systemic root. In the end it is inescapable that to be a Muslim is to be aligned with the same spirit that choked and influenced Muhammad in the cave that caused Muhammad to wage war and massacre those that rejected him, and that caused Muhammad to teach his followers to continue to do the same. To truly reject militant Islam is to reject Muhammad and much of what he taught. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but the fundamental, orthodox Muslims will continue to teach and pressure nominal Muslims towards obeying Muhammad’s commands to establish the rule of Islam, if necessary through the use of violence. Nominal Muslims only need to awaken to the actual call of the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira, to perhaps transform their faith and begin to use violence for Islam’s sake. It appears that more and more of them are awakening, as evidenced by the fact that their violence is increasing along with the number of Muslims involved in violent activities. Until -all- Muslims abandon the violent philosophy of Jihad and Islam, we must protect ourselves. We must seek and apply the rule of law, but it would also be wise to present alternate social, religious, and political options to good, kind-hearted Muslims who are still bound to what amounts to a totalitarianism system deliberately disguised as a religion of peace. That disguise is paper thin, as evidenced by the many actions of Islam with non-Muslims over time, and which is becoming more translucent daily. So, despite the fear and difficulties faced by those seeking to separate themselves from the ‘faith’, the difficult question must be posed to any and all true peace loving Muslims, “Why follow Muhammad? Why follow Muhammad in every respect – including his commands to do violence against those who reject him as a Prophet? If you truly disapprove of Muslim terrorist actions, why continue to tie yourself and your families eternal future to the man?” If you truly believe that the Muslim terrorists were and are wrong then why continue to follow Muhammad, for he taught and led a totalitarian movement enforced by the sword strikingly similar to the one led by Hitler or Stalin. Hitler justified heinous acts in his efforts to make the Third Reich the ‘only’ Reich, and Muhammad and militants today justify anything to make the entire world bow to Islam. A person who chooses to follow Muhammad and trust his eternal future to Muhammad’s word, by extension approves of Muhammad’s brutal teachings, …and all his brutal acts. The same will surely reap the same reward, but it will not be the 70 virgins and mansions so often spoken of and hoped for. There are already millions of ‘martyred’ Muslims on the other side of the veil separating life from death, who lament that fact today from their spirit prison. The dead cannot change their lives, only the living have the power to choose the acts they will be judged by. RECENT MUSLIM VIEWS ON ISLAM & TERRORISM Several Muslims have written about the reasons they are allowed to wage war. From “The Quranic Concept of War”, by Pakistani Brigadier S.K. Malik, it says, [in the preface] “But in Islam war is waged to establish supremacy of the Lord only when every other argument has failed to convince those who reject His Will and work against the every purpose of the creation of mankind.” “Many Western Scholars have pointed their accusing fingers at some of the above verses in the Qur’an to be able to contend that world of Islam is in a state of perpetual struggle against the non-Muslims. As to them it is a sufficient answer to make… that the defiance of God’s authority by one who is His slaves exposes that slave to the risk of being held guilty of treason and as such a one, in the perspective of Islamic law, is indeed to be treated as a sort of that cancerous growth on that organism of humanity…. It thus becomes necessary to remove the cancerous malformation even if it be by surgical means, in order to save the rest of humanity.” The Muslim writer states that those that reject Islam are viewed as a cancerous growth to be violently removed, i.e., murdered. And, note that the Muslim writer basically agrees with the “Western Scholars” that say that Islam is indeed “in a state of perpetual war”, with non-Muslims. But in viewing what has happened in Algeria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, etc. it appears that it is Islam which seems out of control causing more death and despair in the world than any other religious or political illness. REAL CASE: A CASE STUDY Joel-News-International: 21 June, 1998 Jakarta, INDONESIA – ‘CHINESE GIRLS RAPED’ Bill Hekman, a missionary to Indonesia, reported: Here I submit a victim’s account of being raped during the May riots here in Jakarta. Reference to Huaran Bulletin Board June 12, 1998. “My name is Vivian, and I am 18 years old. I have a little sister and brother. As a family we live in what is supposed to be a “secure” apartment. At 9.15 am, May 14th, 1998 a huge crowd had gathered around our apartment. They screamed, “Let’s butcher the Chinese!”, “Let’s eat pigs!”, “Let’s have a party!” We live of the 7th floor and we got a call from a family on the 3rd floor saying that the crowd had reached the 2nd floor. They even chased some occupants upstairs. We were all very frightened. In our fright we prayed and left everything in God’s hands. Afterward we left our room and went upstairs to the top floor, as it was impossible to go downstairs and escape. We got to the 15th floor and stayed with some friends. Not long afterwards we were surprised because some of the crowd coming out of the elevators right before we entered the room. We hurried into the room and locked the door tightly. At that time we heard them knock at the other rooms loudly and there were some screams from women and girls. Our room was filled with fear. We realized that they would come to us. So we spread throughout the room hiding in the corners. We could hear girls of 10 to 12 years old screaming, That time I didn’t know that these little girls were being raped. After about half an hour the noise diminished and we had some guts to go out and check. It was indescribable. A lot, some of them young girls, were lying on the floor. “Oh my God, what has happened?” Seeing all of this we screamed and my little sister Fenny, screamed hysterically and hugged her father. Tears started coming down from my eyes. With our friends, a newlywed couple, we started going downstairs. Reaching the 10th floor, we heard a scream for help. The scream was very clear and we decided to go down and see. But as we turned we saw a lot of people. I saw a woman in her 20s being raped by 4 men. She tried to fight back but she was held down tightly. Realizing the danger we ran as hard as we could. But unfortunately the mob caught Fenny. We tried to rescue her, but could not do anything. There were about 60 of them. They tied us up with ripped sheets, myself, my father, my mother Fenny, Donny, Uncle Dodi and my Aunt Vera. They led us to a room. Uncle Dodi asked what they wanted, but they did not reply. They looked evil and savage. One of them grabbed Fenny roughly and dragged her to a sofa. At that time I knew she was in great danger. I screamed loudly but one of the mob slapped me in my face. My father who also screamed was hit with a piece of wood and he fainted. My mother has fainted when Fenny was dragged to the sofa. I could only pray and pray that disaster would not befall us. Uncle Dodi kept trying to stop them by offering money. His efforts were fruitless. And in the end 5 people raped Fenny. Before beginning with the raping they always said “Allahu Akbar” (an Islamic phrase in Arabic meaning “God is great”). They were ferocious and brutal. Not long afterward, around 9 men came to the room and dragged me. I also saw them forcing and dragging my Aunt Vera. But at that time I passed out and everything went blank. I became conscious at around 5 or 6 pm. My head hurt and I realized I had no clothing on my body. I cried and realized my family was still there. My father was hugging my mother and little brother Doni. I also saw uncle Dodi lying on the floor and Aunt Vera was crying over his body. I felt so weak and fainted again. The next day I was in the Pluit hospital. My father and mother were beside me. With all the pains on my body I asked, “Mom, why Fenny. Mom?” I felt a stinging pain as I said these words. My cheeks were swollen. My mother cried again and couldn’t speak any words, while my father, holding back his tears, managed to smile at me. After 4 days in treatment, my condition has improved. With a sad look, my father told me then what had happened. After I fainted 7 people raped me. At that time my father still couldn’t see well after being hit with a piece of wood. They raped me repeatedly. Then my father said “Vivian, Fenny is gone…” I was confused and cried out, “Why Dad?” My father couldn’t answer. He told me to rest and went out of the room. I cried over and over again, feeling that my life had no meaning any more. A week ago, after I was released from the hospital I was told everything that had happened. When Fenny was raped she kept on fighting and so she was repeatedly slapped by her rapists. The last time she fought Fenny spitted on one of them. Offended, the man grabbed a knife and stabbed Fenny’s stomach over and over again. Finally she died with blood over her whole body. My father told me that uncle Dodi had the same fate watched by aunt Vera who was also raped. “God…why should all of this happen? Where are you God? Are you still alive?” My aunt Vera now stays with her parents. She is in shock. Her face is blank and she refuses to eat. Almost every hour my mother and I cry over all these happenings. I can never forget. These mobs of people are monsters.” Additional comments from Bill Hekman: This is one of many victims. Hundreds of women and children were raped, mutilated and killed by Muslim mobs. Some had their vaginas ripped apart, their bodies cut into pieces. Over 5000 of the Chinese Indonesian’s shops were looted and burned down. A few days ago another 63 shops were burned in Tegal, Central Java. The city of Solo was burned down too. There is no protection and no justice in this country any more. Yesterday, I was in the Kelapa Gading area and that area was spared from destruction. The police and military had guarded all the entry roads. The people there had collected large sums of money from door to door and paid for their protection. A similar situation took place in the Pondok Indah area. For the people who cannot pay millions to the armed forces there is no protection. Right now the hundreds of thousands of thugs, robbers, rapists, and killers live all around us. They are our neighbours. There is no punishment for the criminals and no justice for the victims. Yet, all Indonesians call themselves believers in God almighty. Some Christians are putting signs on their shops “Owned by Muslim.” The next article attempts to describe the indescribable. It delves into the spirit and mentality and family support structure that is the force behind homicide bombers. All involved are completely void of empathy, a key characteristic of a certain personality dysfunction better known by its technical term ‘narcissistic personality disorder’. The killing mantra (Washington Post 6/21/2002) by Diana West And Palestinian mothers? … The sickening fact is, the strongest desire of certain Palestinian parents is for their children to die, killing as many Jews as possible, from infants to old people, in the process. Take Mariam Farhat. When she got word her 19-year-old son, Mohammed, had been shot dead after murdering five Israeli teens and wounding 23 others, she told the Saudi-owned daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat: “I began to cry, ‘Allah is the greatest,’ and prayed and thanked Allah for the success of the operation. I began to utter cries of joy and we declared that we were happy. . . . I encouraged all my sons to die a martyr’s death.” (Translation by Middle East Media Research Institute.) The maternal death wish may seem freakish, but Mrs. Farhat is not alone. “May every bullet hit its target and may God give you martyrdom,” Naima el Abed tells her son, Mahmoud, on a video released by Hamas that records the 23-year-old college student’s preparations for a rampage against Israel. “This,” she says, “is the best day of my life.” Almost as good, no doubt, as the day of her son’s funeral. This came after Mrs. el Abed’s little terrorist was shot dead attempting to infiltrate a Jewish community, killing two Israeli soldiers. Consider the Palestinian scene of bereavement that followed: “All around her were women, clapping and celebrating his death, while his father Hassan quietly received congratulations,” the Associated Press reported. “Several of their nine other children handed out candy to visitors. ‘I wish all my children would be like him and carry out operations like that,’ Naima el Abed said.” Chances are excellent that they will —and not just to please mom. The Palestinian Authority may blindly blame Israel for creating a generation of suicidal maniacs, but it is the PA itself that has helped nurture—if such a word applies—such taboo-breaking evil through its relentless propaganda machine. Yet, though the future looks strewn with trial and sacrifice, and until the day the struggle begins on a large scale, opportunities abound to put our arms around clear-thinking good-hearted Muslims to bring them out from the frenzy. There are many very intelligent families in the Arab/Asian world with good values that can recognize and reject political Islam and racism when presented with the facts and given alternate opportunities to escape and exist peacefully. They are those who will actually flinch when reading the following publication: The Importance of Jihad as a Means of Destroying ‘Infidel Countries’ August 24, 2002, http://www.jehad.net. Article in issue #16 of the online magazine Al-Ansar (affiliated with Al-Qa’ida), a columnist identified as Seif Al-Din Al-Ansari discussed the Koranic verse “Allah Will Torture Them [the Infidels] At Your Hands”: The Annihilation of the Infidels is a Divine Decree “Regardless of the norms of ‘humanist’ belief, which sees destroying the infidel countries as a tragedy requiring us to show some conscientious empathy and… an atmosphere of sadness for the loss that is to be caused to human civilization – an approach that does not distinguish between believer and infidel… – I would like to stress that annihilating the infidels is an inarguable fact, as this is the [divine] decree of fate…” “When the Koran places these tortures [to be inflicted on the infidels] in the solid framework of reward and punishment… it seeks to root this predestined fact in the consciousness of the Muslim group, asserting that the infidels will be annihilated, so as to open a window of hope to the Muslim group…” “Nevertheless, [this divine decree] has become, for some, a tranquilizing pill… When the enemy launches operations of colonialism and destruction, we find that a few [of the Muslims] refrain from entering the battlefield claiming that the elements of the collapse of Western civilization are proliferating [in any event].” “Their conclusion is indeed true, but the way in which it is presented is misleading, and it is aimed at removing responsibility [to fight the infidels] from the Muslim, with the claim that Allah has already promised to take care of the infidels’ annihilation.” Muslims Must Not Wait Passively for the Divine Decree to Just Happen “…I would like to point out the danger of this analysis, because it… [may] make the Muslims passive and turn [them] into one who does not act to carry out [the commandments] of the religion or to dispel falsehood, but lives always in an atmosphere of passive waiting, that is cloaked – always – by a call to trust in the ability of Allah!!” “When Allah told us of the certainty of the annihilation of the infidels, He did not do so using ambiguous concepts. He clarified that this would be achieved in one of two ways: by means of a direct act of Allah… or by means of the Muslim group, which would, in accordance with the Islamic commandment, serve as an implement for carrying out [the divine decree], as it is said: ‘…Allah will torture them [the infidels] Himself or at our hands (Koran 9:52).’” “Yes, perhaps it is predetermined that the infidel country will be annihilated. But [if the believers do not act] this kind of annihilation will never be in favour of the Islamic state. The infidel country will be annihilated in favour of an infidel country like it or even worse than it…” “Therefore, the belief in ‘annihilating the country of heresy’ [only] opens up for us a window of hope, and sets for us a goal that is in the realm of the possible – but it does not annihilate the infidel country for us, nor does it even affect it!!” “This is merely a belief, which, if unaccompanied by the words ‘at your hands’ that appear in the Koranic verse [9:14, ‘Fight them and Allah will torture them at your hands’] – it will remain in the wonderful realm of ideas that float in the theoretical universe, and is like beautiful dreams that arouse conscientious emotions – yet, when we awake, we find that the infidel country still exists, falsehood is not destroyed [by itself] in favour of the truth, [except when] the truth goes into action…” “The importance of the human effort to annihilate the infidels… is what Allah sought to teach the Muslims at the Battle of Uhud [625]. Then, there were [Muslims] who thought that because they were right they would most certainly defeat the enemy. The [Muslims] paid a high price for this…” “By Means of Jihad – Allah Tortures [the Infidels] with Killing” “The question now on the agenda is, how is the torture Allah wants done at our hands to be carried out?… This torture will not, in any way, be carried out by means of preaching [Da’wa], because preaching is activity of exposure, aimed at clarifying the truth in a way that makes it more easily acceptable. Preaching has nothing to do with torture; Jihad is the way of torturing [the infidels] at our hands.” “By means of Jihad, Allah tortures them with killing; by means of Jihad, Allah tortures them with injury; by means of Jihad, Allah tortures them with loss of property; by means of Jihad, Allah tortures them with loss of ruling. Allah tortures them by means of Jihad – that is, with heated war that draws its fire from the military front…” “The Tortures Will Bring the Infidels to the Path of Righteousness” “Material power is [to be] confronted with material power, and ideological power is [to be] confronted with ideological power… It would be idiocy to rely on the power of the truth in the face of F-16s. Allah is capable of destroying His enemy without anyone’s mediation and without anyone’s help, as His capability is absolute and unsurpassed. In spite of all the characteristics of power at their command, these infidel states are no more than a handful of creatures on the speck of dust called Planet Earth… [But] Jihad serves as a trial by suffering for the Muslims by means of the infidels, and for the infidels by means of the Muslims.” “The Muslims’ trial by suffering is manifested in Jihad’s being the instrument by which it is possible to differentiate between the believers and the hypocrites… The infidels’ trial by suffering is manifested in Jihad being an exemplary lesson in values, delivered by a group of the pioneers of the Islamic nation, in a practical presentation” “Many of the infidels will be shocked; their emotional entity will be shaken; and perhaps some of them will repent and learn their lesson. In addition, Jihad is a means of defeating them, and perhaps by means of this victory… the tortures will bring them back to the path of righteousness…” REFERENCES: [1] http://answering-islam.org/Silas/ [2] Mir, Mustansir, “Dictionary of Qur’anic Terms and Concepts”, Garland, New York, NY, 1987. [3] Jeffery, Arthur, “Islam: Muhammad and His Religion”, Bobs Merril [4] “Encyclopaedia of Islam”, published by Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands. [5] http://answering-islam.org/Silas/mo-death.htm [6] Kassis, Hanna, “Concordance of the Qur’an”, University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1983. [7] “Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam”, edited by H.A.R. Gibb, published by Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands. [8] Ibn Kathir, “Tafsir of Ibn Kathir” published by Al-Firdous, New York, NY, 2000. [9] “Reliance of the Traveler”, (A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law), by Ahmad al-Misri, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, published by Amana publications, Beltsville, Maryland, USA 1991 [10] Muslim, Abu’l-Husain, “Sahih Muslim”, translated by A. Siddiqi, International Islamic Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1971. [nternet version is available at http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim [11] al-Tabari, “Ta’rikh al-rusul wa’l-muluk”, (The History of al-Tabari), volume 8, State University of New York Press, 1997. [12] Ibn Ishaq, (d.782), “Sirat Rasulallah”, compiled by A. Guillaume as “The Life of Muhammad”, Oxford, London, 1955 [13] Sell, Canon, “The Historical Development of the Qur’an”, published by People International. [14] Bukhari, Muhammad, “Sahih Bukhari”, Kitab Bhavan, New Delhi, India, 1987, translated by M. Khan [Internet version is available at http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim [15] “The Nobel Qur’an”, translated by Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, published by Maktaba Dar-us-Salam, PO Box 21441, Riyadh 11475, Saudi Arabia, 1994. [Internet version is available at http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/ ] [16] Dawood, N. J., “The Koran”, Penguin, London, England, 1995 [17] Watt, W. M., “Muhammad at Mecca”, Oxford University Press, London 1952. [18] Gatje, Helmut, “The Qur’an and its Exegesis”, Oneworld, Oxford, England, 1997 [19] Rodwell, J. M., “The Koran”, by, published by Everyman, London, England [20] Ibn Sa’d, (d. 852 A.D.), “Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir”, (Book of the Major Classes), translated by S. Moinul Haq, Pakistan Historical Society [21] Dashti, Ali, “23 Years: A Study in the Prophetic Career of Mohammad”, Mazda, Costa Mesa, CA, 1994. Translated by F.R.C. Bagley [24] Wensinck, A., “Muhammad and the Jews of Medina”, pub. by K. S. V. [25] http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Muir/Life3/chap13.htm [26] Abu Dawud, Suliman, “Sunan”, al-Madina, New Delhi, 1985, translated by A. Hasan. [Internet version is available at http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/abudawud/ [27] Ayoub, Mahmoud, “The Qur’an and Its Interpreters” vol. II – The House of Imran, Albany, N.Y.; State University of New York Press, 1992 [28] Ali, Yusef, “The Holy Qur’an”, published by Amana, Beltsville, Maryland, USA, 1989 [Internet version is available at http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/%5D [29] Asad, Muhammad , “The Message of the Qur’an”, Dar Al-Andaulus, Gibraltar, 1980 [32] Payne, Robert, “The History of Islam”, Dorset Press, New York, 1990 [33] Fregosi, Paul, “Jihad”, Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, 1998 [35] Rehman, Afzal, “Subject Index of the Holy Qur’an”, published by Classical Printers, Delhi, India, 1987
    • Lucky, again you are at it!!! Refer to both the Bible and the Quran :

      1 Timothy 2:12 (NKJV)

      And I do NOT permit a woman to teach or to have authority OVER a man, but to be in SILENCE.

      Next : 1 Samuel 15:3: “This is what the Lord Almighty says … ‘Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.”

      Another one : Psalm 137, which celebrates this terrible revenge: “Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us / He who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.”

      And : Romans 1:27 “In the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men…”.

      Also : Ephesians 5:22 (NKJV)

      22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.(treat your husbands as God even if he is a gambler, fornicator/adulterer, etc.,!!!!!)

      One more finally : 1 Peter 2:18: “Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel.”

      Now compare that with Quran : 4:19

      Yusuf Ali: O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may Take away part of the dower ye have given them,-except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and Allah brings about through it a great deal of good.

      Which is better????????

      • SATAN COULDN’T TOUCH JESUS, BUT HE FINGER F–KED MOHAMMED!

        WHY ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

        Satan Attends Every Muslim Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant

        Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)

        Whenever a Muslim child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)

        Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

        ARABIC POETRY GLORIFIES SODOMY

        O THE JOY OF SODOMY

        So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
        Turn not away from it–
        therein is wondrous pleasure.
        Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
        twisting on his temple
        and ride as he stands like some gazelle
        standing to her mate.
        A lad whom all can see girt with sword
        and belt not like your whore who has
        to go veiled.
        Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
        very best to mount them, for women are
        the mounts of the devils

        ARAB POET Abu Nuwas:

        ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER F–KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

        In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

        EVEN MOHAMMED & HIS COMPANIONS WERE FINGER F–KED

        ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

        You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
        In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.
        TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

        “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

        For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

        CLERIC YASSER HABIB EXPOSES UMAR

        It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
        A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

        The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
        One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.
        If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

        Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

        When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

        Hey, all you gays-lesbians-bisexuals-trannies and “liberated” women of the “Progressive” Left!According to a cleric of the religion you so vehemently defend, you had all been butt-f*cked by the devil at birth!

    • Lucky, See how Christians, Muslims and hindus are to pray :

      Luke 11:2-4
      2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed
      be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.
      3 Give us day by day our daily bread.
      4 And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.

      But they do NOT pray like that…do they? Why????

      Now, see how Muslims pray : In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.
      Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds
      The Beneficent, the Merciful
      Master of the Day of Judgment
      Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help
      Show us the straight way
      The path of those whom Thou hast favoured; Not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray. Yet some go the wrong way. Why??????

      In Hinduism : Lead us from Untruth to Truth, from Darkness to Light, from Death to Immortality. Om peace, peace, peace… or

      Let all be happy. Let all be free from disease. Let all see the Truth. May no one experience suffering.

      Then why do they have caste system where the poor “untouchables” suffer the most when they say “May no one experience suffering”?

      “…. those who, renouncing all actions in Me, and regarding Me as the Supreme, worship Me… of those whose thoughts have entered into Me, I am soon the deliverer from the ocean of death and transmigration, Arjuna. Keep your mind on Me alone, your intellect on Me. Thus you shall dwell in Me hereafter.” (B.G., Chapter 12, Verses 6-8)-s:wiki.

      Then why do they worship so many Idols individually and do Arghya where Water is offered so the deity may wash its mouth?!??? And Foods such as cooked rice, fruit, clarified butter, sugar, and betel leaf are offered. Why?

      Do those idols have a heart???????????

      • DUMB PLUM BOWS DOWN TO BLACK STONE IN KAABA

        Meteorites in Cult and Religion

        Throughout the ages, meteorites have been venerated as sacred objects by different cultures and ancient civilizations. The spectacular fall of a meteorite, accompanied by light and sound phenomena, seeking as falling stars, lightning, thunder, and sonic booms, has always kindled the human imagination, evoking fear and awe in every witness of an event search. For obvious reasons, the remnants of these incidents, the actual meteorites, were often kept as sacred stones or objects of power that were worshiped and used in the respective religious context.

        From Dawn of Time to Ancient Egypt

        Actually, several Native American tribes venerated the pieces and fragments of the Canyon Diabolo meteorite, a giant iron meteorite that excavated Arizona’s famous Meteor Crater impact upon its 50.000 years ago. Archeological finds throughout the United States and Mexico proved that Canyon Diabolo fragments have been traded briskly centuries before Columbus reached the shores of the New World. The tribes of the Clackamas in Oregon claim that they once worshiped the giant Willamette meteorite, one of the largest irons known, weighing about 15 tons. Prior to hunting, the Clackamas dipped the heads of their arrows and lances into the water that had gathered in the large cavities of the iron – they were convinced that this ritual would harden their weapons and grant them success in their hunt. – The Winona meteorite the type specimen and namesake of the rare class of winonaites – was found in a stone cist in the prehistoric Elden Pueblo, Arizona, in 1928. The circumstances of this unusual place suggest that the builders of the pueblo kept the meteorite as a sacred object after they had actually seen it fall, and that they finally burried the meteorite in the stone cist where it has been found. Native tribes throughout the world venerated meteorites, and similar stories have been told from Greenland, Tibet, India, Mongolia, and Australia. Pure iron has always been rare and so it is little wonder that especially iron meteorites were coveted by ancient civilizations as raw material for cultic knives and weapons in times prior to the Iron Age. It’s certainly more than just a coincidence that nowadays iron meteorites are rarely found in regions that are known for their flourishing prehistoric metallurgic industries, but more often in regions and countries where metallurgy played just a minor role. search knives and daggers have been recovered from the tombs of Egyptian Pharaohs, as examined from the most legendary tomb of King Tutankhamen, from Mesopotamian sanctuaries, and the graves of the leaders of the Aztecs, Maya, and Inca in both Americas. Similar cultic weapons and daggers called “tombaks” (often referred by so as to “kris” or “keris”) are also known from Certain tribes in Indonesia, and they are quietly being used in their respective cultic context and rituals, up to this day

        Since prehistoric times, meteorites have been worshiped and venerated by countless tribes and cultures as the epitome of the sacred. The ancient civilizations of the occident make no exception, and there are several examples of the worship of meteorites into the Greco-Roman tradition. The cult black stones were called “bethyls” or “baitylia” by the ancient Greek – a word that is derived from the Hebrew language, where “Bethel” (or “beth-el”) stands for the “Residence, or House of God “.

        From Ancient Greece to Rome

        Mircea Eliade, a renowned expert for religious history, claims that, eg, the Palladion of Troy, the Artemis of Ephesus, as well as the Cone of Elagabalus fall in Emesa were actually meteorites, stones that had from the sky – objects from heaven, Believed to contain supernatural powers. Many of these ancient bethyls have been depicted on contemporary coins, examined as on the one shown to the right. The front of the coin, minted at Emesa, shows a laureate bust of Emperor Antoninus Pius, who ruled in 138-161 AD, and the reverse shows an eagle standing on the famous Black Stone of Emesa, the original cone of Elagabalus. In his book “Rocks from Space”, Richard O. Norton mentions the sacred stone in the temple of Apollo at Delphi, Greece, a rock that was said having been thrown to Earth by the Supreme Being, Kronos, marking the “omphalos”, the navel of the world. And the Roman historian Livy, recalls the story of the meteorite of Pessinunt, Phrygia, a conical object also known as “The Needle of Cybele,” the Phrygian Goddess of fertility. After the Romans had conquered Phrygia the meteorite which Conveyed in a gigantic procession to Rome, where it was worshiped for at least another 500 years. Unfortunately, none of these have been preserved ancient bethyls up to this day, making it hard to prove that they meteorites were actually – with one remarkable exception, the Black Stone of Paphos, Cyprus, a rock that has been venerated as the Goddess Aphrodite since aniconical representation of at least 1.300 BC. This stone, depicted on many classical coins, examined as Trajan, Vespasian, Drusus, and Caracalla, which recovered during excavations at the temple site more than one-hundred years ago. The huge stone that was locked away in the cellar of the National museum of Nicosia for more than a century, is now on exhibition at the small local museum of Paphos, Cyprus, the historic Palaeo-Paphos, and the original site of the famous Sanctuary of Aphrodite Goddess. I visited Cyprus and the Black Stone in early 2006, just to find out that it is no real meteorite but a large terrestrial andesitic rock (see my detailed report in IMCA Insights for more information). What seemed to be fusion crust on first sight proved to be the sticky remnants of centuries of libations with honey, and all kinds of love fluids.

        Even in the monotheistic religions of Judaeo-Christian tradition, we find traces of ancient meteorite cult. In the Bible we find a story where Jacob, the ancestor of the Israelites, beds his head on a Bethyl-stone in the desert. In his sleep he has a rather impressive vision of a stairway to heaven leading directly to the Throne of God. The story says that Jacob was full of awe when he awoke, and that he built a temple around that stone afterwards. However, nothing of this temple has been preserved up to this day.

        From the Holy Land to Mecca

        There is another famous example from the Arabian Peninsula but there is some dispute about whether the object of veneration actually is a real meteorite or not. We are referring to the “Hajar al Aswad,” the sacred “black stone” of Islam, to which all Mohammedans pay homage on their “Hajj”, their pilgrimage to Mecca and the most important sanctuary of the Islam, the Kaaba. Each male Mohammedan has the duty to make this pilgrimage at least once in his lifetime, to visit Mecca, and to walk around the Kaaba – a large cubic building – several times. Then he has to pause at the south-east corner of the Kaaba to complete the ritual, touching or kissing the Hajar, also known as “Yamin Allah”, meaning “the right hand of God.” Tradition says that this stone is a true Bethyl, a meteorite that was given to Abraham by the archangel Gabriel. That stone so played a most important role in the life of Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam, who personally immured it into the wall of the Kaaba. The Hajj is a rather strange ritual since the Islam Prohibits the worship and veneration of all objects, and it seems that this tradition is much older than Islam itself. The Hajar al Aswad might be a true Bethyl, a genuine meteorite, since it is said to have a black (fusion?) crust and a light-gray interior. However, it might also represent a rather large Wabar pearl, a meteorite related impact glass that is found at an iron meteorite impact crater in central Saudi Arabia, not that far away from Mecca. It’s a real pity that modern scientists are not allowed to solve the mystery surrounding this famous sacred stone for religious reasons. Would not it be great to know that there is at least one of the ancient bethyls left, and that it is quietly venerated after perhaps more than 2.000 years?

        There is little evidence of the cultic veneration of meteorites in Europe during the last 1,500 years. The guiding influence of Christianity condemned all pagan rituals and beliefs during the Middle Ages, leaving only traces of vorhergehenden religions and customs. Even today meteors are regarded as omens in some rural regions in Germany, France, and Italy. Some people believe, for example, that seeing a shooting star is a good omen – they literally wish upon a star, and they are convinced that this wish comes true if they do not voice it loud.

        The Middle Ages, and the Fall of Ensisheim

        It is thus reported that meteors, meteorites were often regarded as bad omens and signs during the Middle Ages, and that most people made the sign of the cross, saying, “Amen”, “God guide it”, or something similar to avert bad luck. Obviously, meteors and meteorites were – like all other so-called “supernatural phenomena.” –

        Met with mixed feelings in the Middle Ages

        This ambiguity is well-documented for one of the most famous European case. On November 7, 1492 – the very year when Christopher Columbus reached the shores of the New World – a huge triangular stone landed with much noise in a wheat field outside the small town of Ensisheim, Alsace then, still belonging to Germany, and the Holy Roman Empire. A young boy who had witnessed the fall led a crowd of curious people to the place where a black stone lay in a meter-deep hole. After they had pulled it out, people started chipping off pieces of the rock as good-luck talismans, until they were stopped by the town magistrate. Immediately, he had the unusual stone transported to his residence in a effort to protect it and his careless citizens. The whole affair attracted very much public attention, causing Emperor Maximilian to visit Ensisheim 15 days after the event to hold court over the “Thunder Stone of Ensisheim “and to determine the meaning of the occurrence. After some consideration, he decided to take the case as a good omen in his ongoing wars with France and the Turks. However, he ordered that the stone had to be preserved in the local church -. Fixed to the wall with iron chains to either prevent it from wandering around at night or departing in the same violent manner by which it had arrived. Today, the remaining main mass of this most historic meteorite falling can be seen stopped in the Regency Palace of Ensisheim. It resides in a small museum there, and it regularly serves as the centerpiece of the annual Ensisheim Meteorite Show, which is organized by the Confraternity of the St. Georges Ensisheim Meteorite Guardians. If you ever come to attend the Ensisheim meteorites show, be sure to pay a visit to the so famous “Stone of Thunder Ensisheim” – you will not regret it. After all those years it is still as fresh as if it just fell yesterday.

        The Meteorite That Became a God

        In recent years the city of Homs in Syria has become known as a war-torn victim of internal conflict. But in ancient times, when it was called Emesa, it was famous as the centre of a cult centred around a large meteorite and an effeminate emperor.

        There are a few sacred stones said to have fallen from the sky. Historians and archaeologists are not sure about the exact origin of the Black Stone of Emesa. Probably no-one ever will because (if it still exists) its buried under a mosque. But archaeologists often refer to it as a meteorite. Legend says it fell from the sky directly from the sun god El-Gabal. Considering its size (from depictions on ancient coins it was about the size of the average refrigerator) it must have made a spectacular entrance through the atmosphere. No wonder the locals thought it came from the sun god.

        It’s not unusual for such a large object to smash into Earth. The Black Stone of Emesa may have been one of the Apollo asteroids I mentioned in November. A recently as 2008 a similar sized asteroid weighing 80 tons crashed into the Nubian desert.

        The Bedouin nomads worshipped the El-Gabal stone and settled in Emesa where they built a shrine around it – they probably got tired of carting it around with them because it was so heavy! The leaders of the tribe became the hereditary kings and high priests of El-Gabal.

        The ancient Roman writer Herodian describes this shrine as housed in a huge temple decorated with gold, silver and precious gems. All the neighbouring kingdoms paid tribute to the meteorite every year. He describes the meteorite as a big black stone in a rough conical shape with various markings on its surface (probably ritual carvings made by the early nomads who worshipped it).

        This temple housed the meteorite until 218 when it was transferred to Rome by the emperor Bassianus. This teenager was the hereditary high priest of El-Gabal and the meteorite, and he is better known to us by a name taken from his god – Elagabalus. Over a year ago I featured Elagabalus in my Extraordinary Lives series, so I won’t go over it all again here. More appropriately for the Ology of the Month we’ll look at his special relationship with the meteorite.

        It wasn’t long after becoming emperor that Elagabalus decided to bring the stone from Homs/Emesa to Rome. In doing so he decided to make El-Gabal superior to the Roman gods. He even married it to a statue of the goddess Astarte.

        Just as the El-Gabal meteorite was housed in a luxurious temple in Homs/Emesa, so Elagabalus built one for it in Rome. All of the sacred Roman relics were brought from their own temples. He created a special festival in its honor during which free food was distributed. Another ancient writer, Cassius Dio, also says that boys were sacrificed at this festival.

        The first entry of the meteorite into its new temple was a splendidly over-the-top occasion. The stone was placed onto a chariot and pulled by four pure white horses bedecked in gold fittings and ornaments. Elagabalus himself led the horses by the reins, walking backwards in front of them. Following this chariot was a procession of cavalry and guards carrying all the other scared Roman statues, with offerings and imperial insignia. And alongside the procession were the Roman citizens carrying torches and throwing flowers and bouquets at the meteorite as it passed. Beside the emperor were bodyguards to ensure that he didn’t fall over, and he could see his route by the gold dust scattered on the road.

        At the new temple Elagabalus climbed up inside the towers and threw gold, silver, rich cloths and clothing wildly to the crowds below. The scramble to grab all these riches caused many citizens to be trampled on or crushed and many lost their lives.

        It wasn’t long before the Romans got tired of Elagabalus and his extravagant lifestyle. His worship of the meteorite above the gods of Rome was unpopular, and his general behaviour was that of a spoilt brat. In the end the military got fed up with his effeminate behaviour – dressing in extravagant robes (when he dressed at all) and wearing make up, giving all-male parties, and “marrying” a particularly well-endowed charioteer.

        In the end Elagabalus was beheaded whilst trying to escape his own execution. He was just 20 years old.

        As for the meteorite – as soon as Elagabalus was out of the way it was shipped back to its temple in Homs. No-one knows where it is now. It may have been smashed up when the temple became a Christian church, or buried underneath the mosque which occupies the site today. But for a couple of years it was the chief deity of the whole of the Roman Empire from Spain to Turkey and from the Atlas mountains to the northern boundary of the Roman Empire marked by the wall built by that other gay emperor, Hadrian.

        BLACK STONE WORSHIPER

        ‘Elagabalus’
        Varius Avitus Bassianus
        (AD 204 – AD 222)

        Elagabalus was born Varius Avitus Bassianus in AD 203 or 204 at Emesa in Syria. He was the son of the Syrian Sextus Varius Marcellus, who had become senator during the reign of Caracalla and Julia Soaemias.

        It was though his mother that Elagabalus should enjoy astounding connections. For his maternal grandmother was Julia Maesa, widow to the consul Julius Avitus. She was the younger sister of Julia Domna, widow of Septimius Severus and mother of Geta and Caracalla.

        Elagabalus held the hereditary rank of high priest to the Syrian sun god El-Gabal (or Baal).

        The ascension to the throne by Elgabalus was entirely due to his grandmother’s will to see the downfall of Macrinus. Julia Maesa clearly held emperor Macrinus responsible for her sister’s death and now sought revenge.

        With Macrinus losing support with his peace deeply unpopular settlement with the Parthians, the time seemed for an attempt of overthrowing him.
        A rumour now was spread by Julia Soaemias herself, that Elagabalus had actually been fathered by Caracalla. If the memory of Caracalla was much cherished in the army, then support for his ‘son’ Elagabalus was now easily found.

        All along a mysterious figure called Gannys seems to have masterminded the plot against emperor Macrinus. He appears to have been either a eunuch servant of Julia Maesa, or in fact the lover of Julia Soaemias.

        Then, on the night of 15 May AD 218, the fateful moment arrived for Julia Maesa to let her plot unfold. Elagabalus, who was only fourteen years old, was secretly taken to the camp of the Legio III ‘Gallica’ at Raphaneae and at the dawn of 16 May AD 218 he was presented to the troops by their commander Publius Valerius Comazon.

        Had the troops been bribed by a substantial sum paid for by the wealthy Julia Maesa, Elagabalus was hailed emperor and assumed the name Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. Nonetheless, he should become known as ‘Elagabalus’, the Romanized name of his god.
        Remarkably, it was now Gannys who assumed command of the army which marched against Macrinus. As he advanced, his forces gathered strength, with more and more units of Macrinus’ changing sides. Finally, on 8 June AD 218 the two forces met outside Antioch. Gannys was victorious and Macrinus was executed shortly after and Elagabalus was thereafter recognized as ruler throughout the empire.

        The senate responded by acknowledging him as emperor, confirming him the son of Caracalla, as well as deifying his ‘father’ Caracalla.

        What is also noteworthy is that Elagabalus was not the only person to be elevated by the senate. His all-important grandmother Julia Maesa and his mother Julia Soaemias were each proclaimed Augusta, – empress. There was no doubt with whom real power resided. It was definitely through these two women that now the empire should be governed.
        Gannys now fell by the wayside. If at first there appeared to have been the intention of making him Caesar marrying to Julia Soaemias, then he was executed at Nicomedia.
        Already before the imperial entourage reached Rome things began to sour. The very unit which had first bestowed imperial honours on Elagabalus, revolted and instead proclaimed its new commander Verus emperor (AD 218). However, the revolt was quickly suppressed.

        The arrival of the new emperor and his two empresses at Rome in the autumn of AD 219 left the entire capital aghast. Among his imperial entourage Elagabalus had brought with him many low-born Syrians, who were now granted positions in high office. Foremost among these Syrians was the very commander who had proclaimed Elagabalus emperor at Raphaneae, Publius Valerius Comazon. He was given the post of Praetorian prefect (and later city prefect of Rome) and became the most influential figure in government, aside from Julia Maesa.

        But the greatest shock by far to the Romans came when they learnt that Elagabalus had in fact brought the ‘Black Stone’ with him from Emesa. This stone was in fact the most holy object of the cult of the Syrian god El-Gabal and had always resided in its temple at Emesa. With it coming to Rome it was made obvious to everyone that the new emperor intended to continue his duties as a priest of El-Gabal while residing at Rome. This was unimaginable.

        Though in spite of such public outrage it did happen. A great temple was built on the Palatine hill, the so-called Elagaballium – better known as the ‘Temple of Elagabalus’, to hold the holy stone.

        Having got off to such a bad start, the new emperor desperately needed to somehow improve his standing in the eyes of his Roman subjects. And so, already in AD 219 his grandmother organized a marriage between him and Julia Cornelia Paula, a lady of noble birth.

        Any attempts to enhance Elagabalus’ standing with this marriage were however soon undone, by the ardour with which he undertook the worship of his god El-Gabal. Cattle and sheep were sacrificed in great numbers every day at dawn. High ranking Romans, even senators, had to attend these rites.
        There are reports of severed human genitalia and small boys being sacrificed to the sun god. Although the truthfulness of these claims is very doubtful.

        In AD 220 the emperor’s plans became known, that he intended to make his god El-Gabal the first and foremost god (and master of all other gods!) of the Roman state cult. As if this was not enough, it was also decided that El-Gabal was to marry. In order to achieve symbolical step, Elagabalus had the ancient statue of Minerva from the Temple of Vesta taken to the Elagaballium where it was to be married to the Black Stone. As part of this marriage of gods, Elagabalus also divorced his wife and married one of the Vestal Virgins, Julia Aquilia Severa (AD 220). Had in earlier days sexual relations with a Vestal Virgins meant the immediate death penalty for both her and her lover, then this marriage of the emperor only further enraged public opinion.

        Although the marriage between Elagabalus and Aquilia Severa went ahead, the emperor’s religious aspirations for El-Gabal had to be abandoned, for fear of the public’s reaction.
        Instead the god El-Gabal, by now known to the Romans as Elagabalus – the same name used for their emperor, – was ‘married’ to the less controversial moon goddess Urania.
        If he had married the Vestal Severa in AD 220, then he already divorced her again in AD 221. In July of that year he married Annia Faustina, who had among her ancestors no lesser than emperor Marcus Aurelius. More alarmingly though her husband had only been executed on Elagabalus’ orders a short while before the marriage. This marriage although was only to last a very brief time, before Elagabalus abandoned it and instead declared he had never truly divorced Aquilia Severa and instead lived with her again.
        But this should apparently not be the end of Elagabalus’ marital adventures. According to one account he had no less than five wives during his brief reign.

        The Ellagabalium was not sufficient for the glory of El-Gabal, the emperor appears to have decided at some point. And so a huge temple of the sun was built outside Rome, where to the black stone was taken each year at midsummer in a triumphal procession. The emperor himself running backwards ahead of the chariot, whilst holding the reigns of the six white horses which pulled it, thereby fulfilling his duty never to turn his back on his god.

        Though Elagabalus should not only achieve notoriety with his religious fanaticism. He should also shock Roman society with his sexual practices.

        Were the Romans quite used to learning of their emperors – among them even the mighty Trajan -having a liking for young boys, then they had evidently never had an emperor such as Elagabalus.

        It appears most likely that Elagabalus was homosexual, for his interests lay clearly with men, and he seemed to have shown little desire for any of his wives. Further to this, Elagabalus seemed to bear the desire in him to be a woman. He had the hairs plucked from his body in order to appear more female, and delighted in appearing in public wearing make-up.
        And he is said to have promised his physicians large sums of money if they would find away to operate on him and turn him into a woman.

        More so, at court a blond Carian slave named Hierocles acted as the emperor’s ‘husband’.
        Accounts also point to Elagabalus enjoying to pretend being a prostitute, offering himself naked to passers by in the palace, or even prostituting himself in the taverns and brothels of Rome. Meanwhile he would often arrange it to be caught by Hierocles, who would then be expected to punish him for his behaviour with a severe beating.

        It was perhaps little surprising that within the ranks of the army Elagabalus did not carry undivided support. Had the revolt of the III ‘Gallica’ in Syria been an early warning, then since there had been revolts by the fourth legion, parts of the fleet, and a certain Seleucius.

        Such sexual antics, combined with his religious activities, made Elagabalus an ever more unbearable emperor for the Roman state. Julia Maesa alas decided that the young emperor and his mother Julia Soaemias, who increasingly encouraged his religious fervour, were truly out of control and would have to go. And so she turned to her younger daughter Julia Avita Mamaea, who had a thirteen year old son, Alexianus.

        The two women managed to persuade Elagabalus to adopt Alexianus as Caesar and heir. They explained to him that this would allow him to spend more time with his religious duties, while Alexianus would take care of other ceremonial obligations. And so Alexianus was adopted as Caesar under the name of Alexander Severus.
        Soon afterwards however, in late AD 221, though Elagabalus changed his mind and tried to have Alexander assassinated. Perhaps by then he had realized what his grandmother intended.

        In any case, Julia Maesa and Julia Mamaea managed to foil these attempts. Then they bribed the praetorian guards to rid the empire of its Syrian prince.

        On 11 March AD 222, when visiting the praetorian camp, the emperor and his mother Soaemias were set upon by the troops and killed.

        They were beheaded and their bodies were then dragged through the streets of Rome and, alas, thrown into the Tiber. A large number of Elagabalus’ henchmen subsequently also met with a violent death.

        The black stone of god El-Gabal was sent back to its true home at the city of Emesa.

        • Lucky, why are you so stupid to believe that the Black Stone- in one of the corners of Kaaba -is a part of a fallen meteorite? And who told your dumbass that Muslims worship the Black stone?

          Do not call Muslims Mohammadans as the concept of Islam is not equal to “Hindus”- the borrowed word from the Persian language.

          See how Brahma ran away from the devils that he had created because they wanted to have sex with him! They were HOMOSexuals!! They wanted to penetrate Brahma’s bots…hehee :
          Within the Srimad Bhagavatam there are a few lines (Canto 3, Ch.20 Text 23, 24 & 26) that describe Brahma’s creation of a group of demons that became obsessed with sex and demanded sex from him, but then he became frightened and ran away from them.
          (http://www.religionfacts.com/homosexuality/hinduism.htm)

          As Mahant Ram Puri remarked, “We do not have a rule book in Hinduism. We have a hundred million authorities.”

          Sri Sri Ravi Shankar (born 1956), founder of the international movement, Art of Living, said,
          “Every individual has both male and female in them. Sometimes one dominates, sometimes other, it is all fluid.”
          (maybe after seeing tits on his chest!)

          Medieval texts narrate how the God Ayyappa was born of intercourse between the God Shiva and Vishnu when the latter temporarily took a female form. A number of fourteenth-century texts in Sanskrit and Bengali (including the Krittivasa Ramayana, a devotional text still extremely popular today) narrate how hero-king Bhagiratha, who brought the sacred river Ganga from heaven to earth, was miraculously born to and raised by two co-widows, who made love together with divine blessing. These texts explain his name Bhagiratha from the word bhaga (vulva) because he was born of two vulvas.

          In today’s India the transgendered Hijras have sex with men In Hindu thought a man who penetrates a Hijra is not defined as gay. And in the Kama Sutra sex acts involving homosexuality are regarded permissible, by some castes!)
          (http://www.galva108.org/hinduism.html)

          Lucky have you ever done a Hijra???

  6. MOHAMMED’S CHARACTER IS CLEARLY IN THIS SERMON AS A FALSE PROPHET:

    THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT

    Matthew ch 5 to Matthew ch 7

    The Beatitudes

    1And seeing the multitudes, He went up on a mountain, and when He was seated His disciples came to Him. 2Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying:

    3″Blessed are the poor in spirit,
    For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
    4Blessed are those who mourn,
    For they shall be comforted.
    5Blessed are the meek,
    For they shall inherit the earth.

    6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
    For they shall be filled.
    7Blessed are the merciful,
    For they shall obtain mercy.
    8Blessed are the pure in heart,
    For they shall see God.
    9Blessed are the peacemakers,
    For they shall be called sons of God.
    10Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake,
    For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
    11″Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. 12Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

    Believers Are Salt and Light
    13 “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men.
    14″You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. 15Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.

    Christ Fulfills the Law
    17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

    Murder Begins in the Heart
    21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, “You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ 22But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, “Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, “You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire. 23Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 25Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
    26Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till you have paid the last penny.

    Adultery in the Heart
    27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, “You shall not commit adultery.’
    28But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

    Marriage Is Sacred and Binding
    31 “Furthermore it has been said, “Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.

    Jesus Forbids Oaths
    33 “Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, “You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’ 34But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 36Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. 37But let your “Yes’ be “Yes,’ and your “No,’ “No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.

    Go the Second Mile
    38 “You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ 39But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. 40If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. 41And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. 42Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.

    Love Your Enemies
    43 “You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
    44But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

    Matthew 6

    Do Good to Please God
    1″Take heed that you do not do your charitable deeds before men, to be seen by them. Otherwise you have no reward from your Father in heaven. 2Therefore, when you do a charitable deed, do not sound a trumpet before you as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory from men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward. 3But when you do a charitable deed, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4that your charitable deed may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will Himself reward you openly.

    The Model Prayer
    5″And when you pray, you shall not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward. 6But you, when you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly. 7And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words.
    8″Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him. 9In this manner, therefore, pray:

    Our Father in heaven,
    Hallowed be Your name.
    10Your kingdom come.
    Your will be done
    On earth as it is in heaven.
    11Give us this day our daily bread.
    12And forgive us our debts,
    As we forgive our debtors.
    13And do not lead us into temptation,
    But deliver us from the evil one.
    For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.

    14″For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

    Fasting to Be Seen Only by God
    16 “Moreover, when you fast, do not be like the hypocrites, with a sad countenance. For they disfigure their faces that they may appear to men to be fasting. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward. 17But you, when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, 18so that you do not appear to men to be fasting, but to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly.

    Lay Up Treasures in Heaven
    19 “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; 20but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

    The Lamp of the Body
    22 “The lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore your eye is good, your whole body will be full of light. 23But if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is that darkness!

    You Cannot Serve God and Riches
    24 “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.

    Do Not Worry
    25 “Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? 26Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?
    27Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature?
    28″So why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; 29and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?
    31″Therefore do not worry, saying, “What shall we eat?’ or “What shall we drink?’ or “What shall we wear?’ 32For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. 33But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you. 34Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.

    Matthew 7

    Do Not Judge
    1 “Judge not, that you be not judged. 2For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. 3And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?
    4Or how can you say to your brother, “Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye? 5Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
    6″Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.

    Keep Asking, Seeking, Knocking
    7 “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 8For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. 9Or what man is there among you who, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10Or if he asks for a fish, will he give him a serpent? 11If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him! 12Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

    The Narrow Way
    13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 14Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.

    You Will Know Them by Their Fruits
    15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.
    19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Therefore by their fruits you will know them.

    I Never Knew You
    21 “Not everyone who says to Me, “Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22Many will say to Me in that day, “Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23And then I will declare to them, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

    Build on the Rock
    24 “Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: 25and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.
    26″But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand: 27and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it fell. And great was its fall.”
    28And so it was, when Jesus had ended these sayings, that the people were astonished at His teaching, 29for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

    • Lucky oh noooo…another bull from you!! Let us waste our precious time analysing briefly what ye said :

      The poorest always mourn, they are meek, they are poor, hungry thirsty, persecuted, their women raped, segregated in education…..poor in spirit because they are not allowed to read the scriptures. Who is Jesus speaking about, when he was seated on top of a mountain shouting to multitudes without a mike??

      He meant the “untouchables” of India who have been relegated to positions worse than slaves even now in India by the Brahmins!! All of them will receive Kingdom come…but what about you and I?

      “Blessed are the peacemakers, For they shall be called sons of God”. That is correct as Islam is the religion of Peace…don’t Muslims say “asalamwaleikum” ..meaning Peace on you? Which other religion says “Peace on you”? Here jesus confirms that all muslims are blessed!

      “You are the salt of the earth and the light of the world”. That is what the believers in Quran are told : Pickthall: Ye are the best community(believers) that hath been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency; and ye believe in Allah. And if the People of the Scripture had believed it had been better for them. Some of them are believers; but most of them are evil-livers.

      Jesus BROKE the Law!!

      Exodus 20:8-10 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates.

      John 5:8 8 Jesus said to him, “Rise, take up your bed and walk.” 9 And immediately the man was made well, took up his bed, and walked….And that day was the Sabbath!!!!

      “whoever says, “You fool!’ shall be in danger of hellfire…should give himself up to the enemy…who should put him in jail”. What a nonsense…explain!!!

      “,,he who does the will of My Father in heaven..”….will get the Kingdom come.

      That IS what the Quran says…to believe in Allah only and do what He commands in the Quran!!

      24:3 Pickthall: The adulterer shall not marry save an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress none shall marry save an adulterer or an idolater. All that is forbidden unto believers.

      5:82 Yusuf Ali: Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, “We are Christians”: because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant.

      How do those Bible verses confirm Mohammed as a false Prophet…in fact they do agree with the teachings of Quran!!

      • SATAN COULDN’T TOUCH JESUS, BUT HE FINGER F–KED MOHAMMED!

        WHY ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

        Satan Attends Every Muslim Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant

        Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)

        Whenever a Muslim child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)

        Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

        ARABIC POETRY GLORIFIES SODOMY

        O THE JOY OF SODOMY

        So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
        Turn not away from it–
        therein is wondrous pleasure.
        Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
        twisting on his temple
        and ride as he stands like some gazelle
        standing to her mate.
        A lad whom all can see girt with sword
        and belt not like your whore who has
        to go veiled.
        Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
        very best to mount them, for women are
        the mounts of the devils

        ARAB POET Abu Nuwas:

        ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER F–KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

        In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

        EVEN MOHAMMED & HIS COMPANIONS WERE FINGER F–KED

        ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

        You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
        In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.
        TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

        “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

        For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

        CLERIC YASSER HABIB EXPOSES UMAR

        It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
        A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

        The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
        One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.
        If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

        Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

        When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

        Hey, all you gays-lesbians-bisexuals-trannies and “liberated” women of the “Progressive” Left!According to a cleric of the religion you so vehemently defend, you had all been butt-f*cked by the devil at birth!

        • Muslims like fingering those who abuse the creator of the worlds and His Messenger!!

          Remain behind the veil of the internet lest thou is fingered too!!

  7. THIS ARTICLE WILL HELP PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT ISLAM & THE PAPACY ARE THE 2 LEGS OF ANTICHRIST:

    ISLAM & THE PAPACY IN PROPHECY

    The prophetic connection between the Papacy and Islam has long been recognized by Christian thinkers. Thus, what I am proposing in this essay is by no means my own original interpretation of the antichrist. Bible students have for centuries seen the prophetic connection between Islam and the Papacy.

    For example, Jonathan Edwards, the first President of Princeton University and one of the most respected American theologians, wrote in his book, A History of the Work of Redemption:

    “The two great works of the devil which he wrought against the Kingdom of Christ are . . his anti-Christian [Romish or Papal] and Mahometan [Muslim or Islamic] kingdoms, which have been, and still are, two kingdoms of great extent and strength. Both together swallow up the Ancient Roman Empire; the [Papal] kingdom of the antichrist swallowing up the Western Empire; and Satan’s Mahometan kingdom the Eastern Empire . . . In the Book of Revelation (chapters 16-20) . . . it is in the destruction of these that the glorious victory of Christ at the introduction of the glorious times of the Church, will mainly consist.”
    “This is one (the Papal Antichrist – ed.) of those two great kingdoms which the devil in this period erected in opposition to the kingdom of Christ, and was the greatest and chief I come now, (2.) To speak of the other, the second, which is in many respects like unto it, viz. his Mahometan (Islamic – ed.) kingdom, which is another great kingdom of mighty power and vast extent, set up by Satan against the kingdom of Jesus Christ: he set this up in the Eastern empire, as he did that of Antichrist (the Papacy – ed.) in the Western.

    Mahomet was born in the year of Christ, 570, in Arabia. When he was about forty years of age, he began to give forth that he was the great prophet of God, and began to teach his new invented religion, of which he was to be worshiped as the head next under God. He published his Alcoran, which he pretended he received from the angel Gabriel; and being a subtle, crafty man, and possessed of considerable wealth, and living among a people who were very ignorant, and greatly divided in their opinions of religious matters, by subtlety, and fair promises of a sensual paradise, he gained a number to be his followers, and set up for their prince, and propagated his religion by the sword, and made it meritorious of paradise to fight for him. By which means his party grew, and went on fighting until they conquered and brought over the neighboring countries; and so his party gradually grew until they overran a great part of the world. First, the Saracens, who were some of his followers, and were a people of the country of Arabia, where Mahomet lived, about the year 700, began dreadfully to waste the Roman empire. They overran a great many countries belonging to the empire, and continued their conquests for a long time. These are supposed to be meant by the’ locusts’ that we read of in the 9th chapter of Revelation.

    And then after this the Turks, who were originally another people, different from the Saracens, but were followers of Mahomet, conquered all the Eastern Empire. They began their empire about the year of Christ 1296, and began to invade Europe 1300, and took Constantinople, and so became masters of all the Eastern Empire in the year 1453, which is near three hundred years ago. And thus all those cities and countries where were those famous churches of old, that we read of in the New Testament, as Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, &c. now all became subject to the Turks. And they took possession of Constantinople, which was named after Constantine the Great, being made by him the head city of the Roman empire, whereas Rome had been until then. These are supposed to be prophesied of by the’ horsemen’ in the 9th chapter of Revelation, beginning with the 15th verse.”

    Edwards view that the prophetic activities of the antichrist have been manifested through Christian history through the Papacy in the Western Roman empire and Islam in the Eastern part of the empire, was ably defended already in the sixteenth century by the two Reformers Luther and Calvin. I am indebted to Dr. Francis Nigel Lee, Professor of Theology and Church History at the Queensland Presbyterian Theological Seminary, in Brisbane, Australia, for two informative essays:

    Luther on Islam and the Papacy, and Calvin on Islam.
    Francis Nigel Lee, Luther on Islam and the Papacy, (Lamp Trimmers, El Paso, Texas, 2000); Francis Nigel Lee, Calvin on Islam, (Lamp Trimmers, Texas, 2000).

    These two lengthy essays of about 60 pages, provide a valuable collection of statements on Islam and the Papacy from the two Reformers.

    The interest of the Reformers in Islam and the Papacy stems from the fact that they lived at a time when the Papacy had corrupted the Western Church, and while Islam was swallowing up much of what was left of the Eastern Church. In many ways the Muslim threat was as real in Luther and Calvin’s days, as the threat of Muslim terrorists is today.
    After the Turks became Muslims in their homeland of Turkmenistan, most of them embarked on a war of conquest, exporting Islam to many countries. In 1453, they brought to an end the Eastern Roman Empire by capturing Constantinople. Then they subjugated Greece, Bulgaria, Ukraine.

    They continued their steady advance by subduing Albania in 1500, Moldavia in 1512, Romania in 1516, Montenegro in 1517, Serbia in 1521, Bosnia in 1527, and reached Vienna by 1529. By the time Luther died in 1546, the Muslims controlled even Hungary and Moldovia. This means that the two Reformers lived at a time when the Muslim threat was as deeply felt as it is today.

    LUTHER ON ISLAM AND THE PAPACY

    Luther saw both the Papacy and Islam predicted in such places as Daniel; Revelation; Matthew 24; II Thessalonians 2; I John; I Peter 3. For the sake of brevity we shall refer only to a few of his comments. He interpreted the two legs of the statue of Daniel 2, as representing the division of the fourth kingdom. The left leg became the Western Roman Empire, under the Papacy in Rome. The right leg, the Eastern Roman Empire, with its capital Constantinople, later succumbed to Islam.

    Luther believed that the wrath of God had brought Muhammad and the Pope into the world to punish Eastern and Western Christians for abandoning the pure teachings of the Bible. When the Greeks despised His Word, He took it away and gave them [over to] the Turk and Muhammad. To the Germans and to the Italians, he gave them the Pope and with him all sorts of horrible things.

    In Daniel 7, Luther saw the work of the Papacy and Islam represented by the emergence of the Little Horn from the ten horns of the fourth beast, which symbolizes the Roman Empire. In his Preface on Daniel, he wrote:

    “He also indicates that one small horn shall knock off three among the top ten horns � meaning Mohammad or the Turk who now holds Egypt, Asia, and Greece. . . . This same little horn will fight the saints and blaspheme Christ something that we are all experiencing and seeing before our very eyes.”

    In a sermon on Matthew 24:15-28, Luther expresses his views that Islam and the Papacy are but two different legs of the same antichrist. What unites the two together in Luther’s view, is the fact that both persecute Christians and promote false teachings. The difference is that Islam persecutes Christianity from outside, while the Papacy does it from inside.

    In Revelation, Luther found several prophetic allusions to Islam. Commenting on Revelation 9:12-13, he wrote:

    “The second woe is . . . the shameful Muhammad with his companions the Saracens, who inflicted a great plague on the Church with their doctrines and with the sword.”
    For Luther, the central message of Revelation is the final victory of the Church over Islam and the Papacy. He concludes his treatment of the book saying:

    “We can profit by this Book. . . . We can know that neither force nor lies, neither wisdom nor holiness, neither tribulation nor suffering, shall suppress the Church. But it will gain the victory, and overcome at last. . . . Great and perilous and manifold offences come upon the Church . . . This has happened before now, under the Papacy and Muhammad.”

    Luther attempted in several ways to clarify the relationship of Islam and the Papacy to the antichrist. In 1532, he made one of the clearest statements:

    “I am entirely of the opinion that the Papacy is the antichrist. But if anyone wants to add the Turk then the Pope is the spirit of antichrist, and the Turk is the flesh of antichrist. They help each other in their murderous work. The latter slaughters bodily by the sword; and the former spiritually by doctrine”.

    Before commenting on Luther’s view of Islam and the Papacy as being two manifestations of the antichrist, let us see what Calvin has to say.

    CALVIN ON ISLAM AND THE PAPACY

    Calvin’s views on the prophetic role of Islam and the Papacy are strikingly similar to those of Luther. Calvin’s comments were largely inspired by his concern over the threat posed by the Muslim Turks, who had invaded Romania, Hungary, and besieged even Nice in France.

    In 1543, Calvin in Switzerland wrote to Philip Melanthon in Germany, saying:

    “It is not without the bitterest grief that I hear of the sad condition of your Germany! Nor are the evils which I dread, of a less serious kind than those which I bewail. . . . The Turk again prepares to wage war with a larger force. Who will stand up to oppose his marching throughout the length and breadth of the land, at his mere will and pleasure”?
    In the tract on “The Necessity of Reform�ing the Church,” which Calvin presented in 1544 to the Most Invincible Emperor Charles V, he urged the emperor to delay the task of reforming the church in order to give priority to the Muslim problem, if he wanted to leave his posterity some empire. (J. Calvin: Tracts and Treatises, (Grand Rapids, 1958 rep.,), I:121-23.)

    Calvin explains:

    “Why do I speak of posterity? Because even now, while your own eyes behold it is half-bent, and totters to its final ruin!” (J. Calvin: Tracts and Treatises)
    The so-called German Holy Roman Empire was fast disintegrating.

    In the light of the Muslim threat to the survival of Western Europe, Calvin acknowledges that Islam and the Papacy are two manifestations of the antichrist power that will attempt to subvert the truth and destroy God’s Church. In his “Sermons on Deuteronomy” (18:15 and 33:2), Calvin explains:

    “As Mahomet says that his Al-Coran is the sovereign wisdom, so says the Pope of his own decrees. For they be the two horns of antichrist”.

    (J. Calvin, Sermons on Deuteronomy [1555f], (Edinburgh, 1987 rep.), p. 666.)

    For Calvin, the common denominator between the two powers, is their appeal to higher revelations that supercede the Scripture:

    “Muhammad and the Pope have this religious principle in common � that Scripture does not contain the perfection of doctrine, but that something higher has been revealed to them.”
    (J. Calvin, The Gospel according to St. John, (Grand Rapids, 1961 rep.), II:82.)

    In his “Commentaries on Daniel,” Calvin explains that the fourth empire represented by the iron legs of the statue of Daniel 2, is the Roman Empire which was later divided into the Western-Roman Papal and the contemporaneous Eastern-Roman Islamic Empire.
    (See Francis Nigel Lee, Calvin on Islam, (Lamp Trimmers, Texas, 2000), p. 5.)

    As noted earlier, Calvin calls them “the two horns of the antichrist.”
    “The Turks have spread far and wide, and the world is filled with impious despisers of God”.
    (J. Calvin, Commentaries on the Book of the Prophet Daniel [1561], (Grand Rapids,1948 rep.), I:167,182)

    In his commentary on Daniel 7, Calvin explains that the Fourth Beast represents the Roman Empire. Calvin notes that the Little Horn that sprung up from the Fourth Beast is interpreted by some to refer to the papacy and by others to the Turkish kingdom. He prefers to adopt a more inclusive interpretation.

    Calvin wrote:

    “I have no doubt that in this vision [of the Fourth Beast], the Prophet was shown the figure of the Roman Empire. . . . The Prophet simply means that the Roman Empire was complex. . . . Some twist this to mean the Pope, and others the Turk. . . . I have no doubt that the little horn� relates to Julius Caesar and the other Caesars who succeeded him. . . . Some take this prophecy to relate to the kingdom of Turkey; others to the tyranny of the Pope of Rome.” (Lee n 10).

    Calvin advocates a more inclusive view of the antichrist, which allows for the manifestation of both powers: the Papacy and Islam. In his “Commentary on Second Thessalonians,” Calvin clearly identifies the rising of the “Man of Sin” mentioned by Paul in II Thessalonians 2:3, with the Papacy. However, Calvin saw in the unprecedented apostasy predicted in the same text (II Thessalonians 2:3), the outcome of the Muslim invasion of Christian countries.

    Calvin wrote:

    “The minds of ancients were so bewitched that they believed that Nero would be antichrist! However, Paul is not speaking of one individual, but of a kingdom that was to be seized by Satan, for the purpose of setting up a seat of abomination in the midst of God’s Temple. This we see accomplished in Popery”
    .
    (J. Calvin, Commentaries on the Book of the Prophet Daniel [1561], (Grand Rapids,1948 rep.),vol. 2, p. 21)

    Paul predicted, however, not only the emergence of the Man of Sin, but also an unprecedented apostasy (II Thessalonians 2:3). Calvin rightly explains that
    When the word apostasy is used without any addition, it cannot be confined to a few individuals. Now the word apostates can be understood only of those who have previously enlisted in the service of Christ and His Gospel. Paul, then, is predicting a general defection on the part of the Visible Church. As if he were saying, The Church must be reduced to a ghastly and horrifying state of ruin, before its full restoration is achieved”
    (Lee n 24).

    Calvin saw the fulfillment of the general defection predicted by Paul, in the massive apostasies caused by the Muslim invasion of Christian countries.

    “The defection has indeed spread more widely! For, since Muhammad was an apostate, he turned his followers, the Turks, from Christ . . . . The sect of Muhammad was like a raging overflow, which in its violence tore away about half of the Church. It remained for [the Papal] antichrist to infect with his poison the part which was left.”
    (J. Calvin’s Commentary on Second Thessalonians in his The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians, (Grand Rapids, 1961 rep.) p. 400.)

    Calvin died in 1564 at the age of 55, before he could write a commentary on the last book of the Bible. Yet on the basis of what he wrote on the Papacy and Islam in his commentaries on Daniel, Second Thessalonians, and First John, we can safely conclude that his understanding of these two powers as being the two horns of the antichrist, would have been reflected in his interpretation of Revelation.

    ISLAM AND THE PAPACY 2 MANIFESTATIONS OF THE ANTICHRIST

    Were Luther and Calvin correct in viewing the papacy and Islam as two manifestations of the prophetic antichrist? Were their views based on a correct interpretation of the relevant Bible texts, or were they influenced by the Muslim threat to the survival of Western Europe? Can we today legitimately embrace the Reformers view of the antichrist as including both the power of the Papacy and of Islam?

    We shall attempt to answer these questions by examining what the Bible has to say about the nature and work of the antichrist. Our procedure will be simple. First we will define the major prophetic characteristics of the antichrist, and then we shall ask if the Papacy and Islam equally fulfill these characteristics.

    DEFINITION OF THE ANTICHRIST

    The term antichrist appears in the Bible only in two of John’s letters. He refers four times specifically to the antichrist (I John 2:18, 22, 4:3; II John 7). It is noteworthy that by the time of John’s writing (A. D. 90-100), Christians had coined a specific term, the antichrist, to designate the expected appearance of false Christs and false prophets. Presumably such a term was yet unknown a few decades earlier, since Paul uses other designations: the man of lawlessness, the son of perdition (II Thessalonians 2:3).

    Linguistically, the term antichrist can denote a substitute or an opponent of Christ since the Greek preposition anti can mean either “in the place of” or “against.” In John the term is used primarily in the latter sense. The antichrist is not a Messianic pretender, but one who opposes Christ by denying His incarnation and Messiahship.

    “Who is the liar, but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son” (I John 2:22).

    “Every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist”. (I John 4:2-3).

    The genuine incarnation of Christ was denied in John’s time by Gnostic sects. In their view matter was altogether evil, and consequently they taught that Christ could never have assumed human flesh. His body was not genuinely human but only had a human appearance.

    In John’s view this teaching was a deadly heresy because it undermined the validity of Christ’s atonement. Thus he identifies the propagators of this heresy with the antichrist:
    “For many deceivers have gone out into the world, men who will not acknowledge the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh; such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist” (II John 7).

    In this passage, the antichrist is singular and specific (preceded by the article ho antichristos), but it is used to describe not one specific false teacher, but the many deceivers who were misleading the believers. In fact, in I John 2:18 the plural form is used (Now many antichrists have come) to describe these false teachers. This indicates that John sees the antichrist as a principle of hostility and opposition to God, manifested especially by those who denied the incarnation of Christ. This principle is designated by John as the spirit of antichrist (I John 4:3).

    John’s definition of the antichrist fits perfectly Islam’s denial of the divinity, incarnation, and crucifixion of Christ. The Quran teaches that Jesus, called Isa, was simply a human being, born to a virgin called Mariam, who was the sister of Aaron and Moses (Surah 19:28). While still a virgin (Surah 6:12; 19:19-21), Mariam gave birth to Isa alone in a desolate place under a date palm tree (Surah 19:22ff). Christ was not killed or crucified, and those who said he was crucified lied (Surah 4:157). Isa [Jesus] did not die, but ascended to Allah. (Surah 4:158).

    Muhammad adopted these teachings from Gnostic and Arian sects that had been exiled to Saudi Arabia. In other words, the very teaching condemned by John as “the Spirit of the antichrists,” eventually influenced Muhammad to adopt a Unitarian view of God and a strict human view of Christ that discredited His divine nature and redemptive mission.
    The term “antichrist” can also be applied to the Papacy, not in the sense of John’s definition of the denial of the incarnation, but in the meaning of taking the place of Christ. This is a legitimate use of the term, which fits the historical claims of the Pope to be the Vicar of Christ and God’s representative on earth.

    ANTICHRIST AS THE LITTLE HORN OF DANIAL 7

    A fuller description of the nature and work of the antichrist, is found in Daniel 7. This chapter contains the well-known vision of the four beasts, representing the succession of four empires: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Out of the Fourth Beast emerges the Little Horn a power which has been rightly associated with the work of the antichrist. Much of the discussion of the prophetic outworking of the antichrist derives and depends upon Daniel’s vision of the Little Horn. Therefore, let us look at some of the identifying marks of the antichrist Little Horn of Daniel 7 to see if they equally apply to the Papacy and Islam.

    A SMALL BEGINNING

    The name “Little Horn” (Daniel 7:3) suggests a power that had a small beginning. Its roots existed prior to the Fall of the Roman Empire, because it uproots three existing horns or kingdoms. Gradually this small power was to become a dominant despot that “shall wear out the saints of the Most High” (Daniel 7:25).

    This distinguishing mark of the Little Horn fits well both the Papacy and Islam. The beginning of the Papacy was small. Initially the Bishop of Rome was regarded as “unus inter pares,” that is, “one bishop among equals.” But gradually, geographical and political factors contributed to the development of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome. With the election of Gregory I in 590, (known as the first medieval pope), the papacy became a dominant religious and political power that exercised enormous influence during the Middle Ages.

    Like the Papacy, Islam also had a small beginning. When Muhammad began preaching Islam in 610 in Mecca, he faced considerable opposition and was forced to flee with his band of followers to Medina in 622. But gradually he consolidated his power and systematically subdued all the tribes living in Saudi Arabia.

    During the first century of Islam’s expansion from 632 to 732, Muhammad’s successors subdued Egypt, Palestine, Syria, part of Turkey, and all the countries of northern Africa. In 711 they crossed from Africa to Spain and crossed the Pyrenees into southern France, until they were stopped in 732 by the Frankish ruler Charles Martel. The expansion continued for the next thousand years. Truly, the description of the Little Horn as a power that began small but became exceedingly powerful and fits well not only the Papacy, but also Islam.

    A DIFFERENT KINGDOM

    The Little Horn shall be different from the former ones (Daniel 7:24). The difference is suggested by its political and religious agenda.
    “He shall speaks words against the Most High and shall wear out the saints of the Most High” (Daniel 7:25).

    It would be a kingdom, but its rulers would be both political and religious leaders.
    Again, this distinguishing mark fits well both the Papacy and Islam. Both powers claim the right to control people’s souls as well as their bodies. They have been different from all previous kingdoms, because they have exercised political power to promote their religious agenda. To this very day, leaders of fundamental Muslim countries like Iran, act as both political and religious leaders of their people.

    UPROOTS 3 OF THE 10 HORNS

    The Little Horn power would come into prominence after the breaking up of the Roman Empire. The aggressive thrust of the newcomer shall put down three kings (Daniel 7:24). The text says that three of the first horns were plucked by the roots.
    Muhammad’s successors, known as the Caliphs, who like him, combined the priestly and kingly dignity, within ten years of the Prophet’s death, ruthlessly subdued Egypt, Palestine, and Syria three major centers of primitive Christianity and of the Roman Empire. Their wars of conquest continued within and without the boundaries of the empire, extending their territories all the way to India and Afghanistan.

    ARROGANT APPEARANCE AND BLASPHEMOUS SPEECH

    Another distinguishing characteristic of the Little Horn is his arrogant appearance and blasphemous speech:

    “The horn which had eyes and a mouth that spoke great things, and which seemed greater than its fellows” (Daniel 7:20).

    “He shall speak words against the Most High” (Daniel 7:25).

    This identifying mark of the Little Horn, fits well both the Papacy and Islam. The classical example of the arrogance of the Papacy is Pope Gregory VII�s humiliation of the Emperor Henry IV at the castle of Canossa. The emperor was kept in the outer court of the castle for three days with uncovered head and naked feet during unusually cold winter weather. When the Emperor was practically frozen, the door of the castle was open and the Pope accepted his confession and granted him a pardon.

    The Little Horn “shall speak words against the Most High” (Daniel 7:25). Later parallels (Daniel 8:25, 11:36; II Thessalonians 2:3, 4), suggest that the Little Horn would magnify himself by claiming the place of God. History records many examples of such bold claims by the Papacy. At the Fifth Lateran Council in 1512, Pope Julius II, who distinguished himself as a military leader, a pope in arms, was acknowledged, not only as Shepherd, Physician, and Governor, but also as “another God on earth.”

    Similar blasphemous claims have been made by popes in more recent times. For example, on June 20, 1894, Pope Leo VII asserted in his Pastoral Letter, “The Reunion of Christendom,” that “we [the popes] hold on this earth the place of God Almighty”.
    The arrogant and blasphemous nature of Islam is self-evident. Islam is arrogant in accusing Christians of blasphemy for teaching that God is a triune Being and that Christ is His Son.

    “They do blaspheme who say: God is one of three in a Trinity, for there is no God except One God.” (Surah 5:76).

    Islam is arrogant in claiming that Muhammad is the greatest prophet sent by God, superseding even Jesus Christ Himself. It is arrogant in boasting that the Quran is the absolute and uncorrupted word of God, replacing the earlier revelations of the Old and New Testaments.

    Islam is arrogant especially in commanding Muslims to slay the people who do not accept their faith:

    “Fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem [of war]. But if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity [become Muslim], then open the way for them” (Surah 9:5).

    A PERSECUTING POWER

    A significant distinctive mark of the Little Horn is his persecution of believers:
    “He shall wear out the saints of the Most High” (Daniel 7:25).

    During the course of its history, the antichrist power represented by the Little Horn, was to become known for persecuting God’s people.

    This identifying mark of the Little Horn as a persecuting power has been historically fulfilled by both the Papacy and Islam. Regarding the persecuting power of the Papacy, it is significant that recently the Pope himself has apologized for the atrocities committed by the Roman Church against Jews, Muslims, and dissenting Christians. Unfortunately, his apology does not undo the suffering and loss of countless innocent lives.

    The persecuting power of the Roman Church has been manifested in the extirpation of the Albigenses by means of a crusade, the establishment of the Inquisition, the cruel attempt to suppress the Waldenses, the bloody wars to exterminate the Bohemians, the burning of Hus and Jerome, and the countless other Christians executed before the Reformation. After the Reformation, ferocious cruelties were practiced by the Roman Church in England during Queen Mary’s reign; in France at the massacre of Bartholomew and the persecution of the Huguenots; in Spain, Italy, and Poland, in the attempts to suppress by the sword those who had embraced the Protestant faith.
    Compared to the Papacy, Islam has persecuted Christians far more intensively and extensively. During the first century of Islam’s existence, Muslim armies, inspired by intense fanaticism, conquered the Eastern part of the Roman Empire, extending their control all the way from North Africa, to Egypt, Palestine, Syria, and part of Turkey. They succeeded in practically uprooting the Christian presence in these countries by means of the sword and forced conversions.

    The persecuting nature of Islam is inspired by the example and teachings of its Founder, Muhammad. He fought all the pagans, Jews, and Christians in Saudi Arabia, until he subdued them, forcing them to accept Islam. For him, fighting was a way to practice his religion:

    “My livelihood is under the shade of my spear, and he who disobeys my orders will be humiliated by paying Jizya [tribute]” (Hadith 4:162b).

    Muhammad’s example was followed by his fanatical followers who systematically exterminated Christians or reduced them to a condition of virtual servitude.

    A LAWLESS POWER

    Another distinctive characteristic of the Little Horn is his disrespect for God’s sacred times and laws.

    “He shall think to change the times and the law” (Daniel 7:25).
    Rebellion against God is manifested in disobedience to His commandments. (II Thessalonians 2:3).

    In I Kings 12:25-33, we find an interesting example. King Jeroboam of Israel was determined to wean his people away from the worship of God at the Jerusalem Temple. To accomplish this he built two altars, one in Bethel and the other in Dan (I Kings 12:29) and he appointed a feast for the people to attend on the fifteenth day of the eighth month. The date suggests that he wanted to lead the people away from the worship of the true God, by changing the annual feast of Tabernacles, which was the most important gathering of God’s people, from the fifteenth day of the seventh month, to the fifteenth day of the eighth month. By changing the time and the place of worship, Jeroboam led the Israelites into apostasy.

    The most sacred time appointed by God to worship Him as Creator, Redeemer, and Restorer, is the weekly Sabbath. In the Scriptures, great blessings and curses are associated with its observance or nonobservance (Ezekiel 20:12, 20, 22:26-31; Isaiah 58:13, 14; Jeremiah 17:19-27).

    CONCLUSION

    The tentative conclusion that emerges at this point is that the claim of two Great Reformers, Luther and Calvin that the Papacy and Islam are the two legs or the two horns of the antichrist deserves serious consideration. We have found that both powers fulfill the prophetic identifying marks of the antichrist. Both powers emerged out of the divided territories of the Roman Empire, both promoted false worship, both persecuted God’s people, both attempted to change the sacred Sabbath time of worship, and both are to last until the fulfillment of the prophetic three-and-a-half years. We began this study by reflecting upon the new partnership that the Pope is determined to build with the Muslims. In the light of the prophetic role these two powers have played in promoting the false worship of God and the persecution God’s people, we can legitimately assume that this new partnership will play a major role in bringing about the final showdown that will usher in Christ’s glorious Return.

    • Lucky/Raj, why did you quote this verse- only a part of it?

      (Daniel 7:20)
      “The horn which had eyes and a mouth that spoke great things, and which seemed greater than its fellows” (Daniel 7:20). Shall we Quote the complete verse for you?

      Daniel 7:20 (NKJV 20) : “and the ten horns that were on its head, and the other horn which came up, before which three fell, namely, that horn which had eyes and a mouth which spoke pompous words, whose appearance was greater than his fellows”, correct?

      Now explain what this means in the above verse : “before which three fell”, and also 10+1-3=8 horns remaining, okay?

      Next you quoted :
      “He shall speak words against the Most High” (Daniel 7:25). This also is a half verse as the complete one says : Daniel 7:25 (NKJV)

      25 He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, Shall persecute the saints of the Most High, And shall intend to change times and law.Then the saints shall be given into his hand For a time and times and half a time.
      Please explain : “For a time and times and half a time”… Tx1/2T=Total Saints!!!

      See the honour Allah gives to Jesus : Qur’an 3:45

      Behold! the angels said “O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Jesus (Issah), the son of Mariam held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of those nearest to Allah.

      5:46 …and We gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous.

      2:253 …And We gave Jesus, the Son of Mary, clear proofs, and We supported him with the Pure Spirit.

      Is that indication of “anti-Christ”?

      And finally through desperation do not “assume” as you said : “we can legitimately assume”.

      Islam has never worked with the fake teachings of Paul nor his Church!!!

      • Daniel 7

        Daniel’s Vision about Four Animals

        7 In Belshazzar’s first year as king of Babylon, Daniel had a dream. He saw a vision while he was asleep. He wrote down the main parts of the dream.

        2 In my visions at night I, Daniel, saw the four winds of heaven stirring up the Mediterranean Sea. 3 Four large animals, each one different from the others, came out of the sea.

        4 The first animal was like a lion, but it had wings like an eagle. I watched until its wings were plucked off and it was lifted off the ground. It was made to stand on two feet like a human and was given a human mind.

        5 I saw a second animal. It looked like a bear. It was raised on one side and had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. It was told, “Get up, and eat as much meat as you want.”

        6 After this, I saw another animal. It looked like a leopard. On its back it had four wings, like the wings of a bird. The animal also had four heads. It was given power to rule.

        7 After this, I saw a fourth animal in my vision during the night. It was terrifying, dreadful, extraordinarily strong, and had large iron teeth. It devoured and crushed its victims and trampled whatever was left. It acted differently from all the other animals that I had seen before. It had ten horns. 8 While I was thinking about the horns, another horn, a little horn, came up among them. It uprooted three of the other horns. This horn had eyes like human eyes and a mouth that spoke impressive things.

        9 I watched until thrones were set up
        and the Ancient One, who has lived for endless years, sat down.
        His clothes were as white as snow
        and the hair on his head was like pure wool.
        His throne was fiery flames,
        and its wheels were burning fire.
        10 A river of fire flowed.
        It came from him.
        Thousands and thousands served him.
        Ten thousand times ten thousand were stationed in front of him.
        The court convened,
        and the books were opened.

        11 I continued to watch because of the impressive words that the horn was speaking. I watched until the animal was killed. Its body was destroyed and put into a raging fire. 12 The power of the rest of the animals was taken away, but they were allowed to live for a period of time.

        13 In my visions during the night, I saw among the clouds in heaven someone like the Son of Man.[a] He came to the Ancient One, who has lived for endless years, and was presented to him. 14 He was given power, honor, and a kingdom. People from every province, nation, and language were to serve him. His power is an eternal power that will not be taken away. His kingdom will never be destroyed.

        15 I, Daniel, was deeply troubled, and my visions frightened me. 16 I went to someone who was standing there and asked him to tell me the truth about all this. So he told me what all this meant. 17 He said, “These four large animals are four kingdoms that will rise to power on the earth. 18 But the holy people of the Most High will take possession of the kingdom and keep it forever and ever.”

        19 Then I wanted to know the truth about the fourth animal, which was so different from all the others. It was very terrifying and had iron teeth and bronze claws. It devoured and crushed its victims, and trampled whatever was left. 20 I also wanted to know about the ten horns on its head and about the other horn that had come up and made three of the horns fall out. That horn had eyes and a mouth that spoke impressive things. It appeared to be bigger than the others. 21 I saw that horn making war against the holy people and defeating them. 22 It did this until the Ancient One, who has lived for endless years, came and judged in favor of the holy people of the Most High. The time came when the holy people took possession of the kingdom.

        23 He said, “The fourth animal will be the fourth of these kingdoms on earth. It will be different from all other kingdoms. It will devour, trample, and crush the whole world. 24 The ten horns are ten kings that will rise to power from that kingdom. Another king will rise to power after them. He will be different from the kings who came before him, and he will humble three kings. 25 He will speak against the Most High God, oppress the holy people of the Most High, and plan to change the appointed times and laws. The holy people will be handed over to him for a time, times, and half of a time. 26 But judgment will be handed down, his power will be taken away, and he will be completely and permanently destroyed. 27 The kingdom, along with the power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven, will be given to the holy people of the Most High. Their kingdom is eternal. All other powers will serve and obey them.”

        28 Here is the end of the matter. I, Daniel, was terrified by my thoughts, and I turned pale. I kept this to myself.
        Footnotes:

        Daniel 7:13 Or “like a human.”

        • Lucky, hehe…..”I, Daniel, was terrified by my thoughts, and I turned pale. I kept this to myself’….hehe…after relating his funniest dream to the world(which should be posted on Youtube)…he turned pale!!! “I kept this to myself”… Heehee…he got frightened of his own thoughts!!!!

          Is this dream of Daniel the word of God???? So let us say “Ameen”!!

          Also -I got a dream last night seeing that you were being torn apart by the lion-eagle-bear-leopard combined beast……but I laughed it off as this was a kids tale!!!!

          • I laughed it off as this was a kids tale!!!!

            ROCKET MAN
            &
            HIS FLYING MACHINE

            Sahih Bukhari 5:58:227 “…Then a white animal which was smaller than a mule and bigger than a donkey was brought to me.” … “The animal’s step (was so wide that it) reached the farthest point within the reach of the animal’s sight. …”

            AIR MECCA

            COME FLY WITH US TO THE MOON & BACK, THE SAME DAY, ON OUR 1 HORSE-POWERED BURAQ, THE GREATEST FLYING MACHINE IN THE WORLD.

            WE MAKE NASA LOOK LIKE THE FLINTSTONES!
            Yabba-Dabba-Doo & AWAY SHE FLEW

            Al-Burāq (Arabic: البُراق‎ al-Burāq “lightning”) is a mythological steed, described as a creature from the heavens which transported the prophets. The most commonly told story is how in the 7th century, Al-Buraq carried the Islamic prophet Muhammad fromMecca to Jerusalem and back during the Isra and Mi’raj or “Night Journey”, which is the title of one of the chapters (sura), Al-Isra, of the Quran.

            THE JOURNEY TO 7TH HEAVEN
            The Night Journey took place 12 years after Mohammad became a prophet, during the 7th century

            MOHAMMED WITH UNLIMITED BURAQ HORSEPOWER

            It’s called a buraq, and the myth comes from the hadith, a supplement to the Koran.
            Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Hadith Number 227

            “I was brought by the Buraq, Which is an animal white and long, larger than a donkey but smaller than a mule, who would place its hoof at a distance equal to the range of vision.”

            OPEN HEART SURGERY, 1400 YEARS AGO
            The angel cut open Muhammad’s chest, took out his heart, and purified it with the holy water of the nearby Zam-zam well. The angel then restored the heart to Muhammad’s chest, leaving no wound. After this, the Buraq arrived. Muhammad mounted the beast, and in the company of Gabriel, they traveled to the “farthest mosque”. The location of this mosque was not explicitly stated, but is generally accepted to mean Jerusalem.
            At this location, Muhammad dismounted from the Buraq, prayed, and then once again mounted the Buraq and was taken to the various heavens, to meet Allah. Muhammad was instructed to tell his followers how many times per day that they were to offer prayers. The Buraq then transported Muhammad back to Mecca.
            Volume 5, Book 58, Number 227:
            Narrated Abbas bin Malik:
            Malik bin Sasaa said that Allah’s Apostle described to them his Night Journey saying, “While I was lying in Al-Hatim or Al-Hijr, suddenly someone came to me and cut my body open from here to here.” I asked Al-Jarud who was by my side, “What does he mean?” He said, “It means from his throat to his pubic area,” or said, “From the top of the chest.” The Prophet further said, “He then took out my heart. Then a gold tray of Belief was brought to me and my heart was washed and was filled (with Belief) and then returned to its original place. Then a white animal which was smaller than a mule and bigger than a donkey was brought to me.” (On this Al-Jarud asked, “Was it the Buraq, O Abu Hamza?” I (i.e. Anas) replied in the affirmative). The Prophet said, “The animal’s step (was so wide that it) reached the farthest point within the reach of the animal’s sight. I was carried on it, and Gabriel set out with me till we reached the nearest heaven.
            When he asked for the gate to be opened, it was asked, ‘Who is it?’ Gabriel answered, ‘Gabriel.’ It was asked, ‘Who is accompanying you?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Muhammad.’ It was asked, ‘Has Muhammad been called?’ Gabriel replied in the affirmative. Then it was said, ‘He is welcomed. What an excellent visit his is!’ The gate was opened, and when I went over the first heaven, I saw Adam there. Gabriel said (to me). ‘This is your father, Adam; pay him your greetings.’ So I greeted him and he returned the greeting to me and said, ‘You are welcomed, O pious son and pious Prophet.’ Then Gabriel ascended with me till we reached the second heaven. Gabriel asked for the gate to be opened. It was asked, ‘Who is it?’ Gabriel answered, ‘Gabriel.’ It was asked, ‘Who is accompanying you?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Muhammad.’ It was asked, ‘Has he been called?’ Gabriel answered in the affirmative. Then it was said, ‘He is welcomed. What an excellent visit his is!’ The gate was opened.
            When I went over the second heaven, there I saw Yahya (i.e. John) and ‘Isa (i.e. Jesus) who were cousins of each other. Gabriel said (to me), ‘These are John and Jesus; pay them your greetings.’ So I greeted them and both of them returned my greetings to me and said, ‘You are welcomed, O pious brother and pious Prophet.’ Then Gabriel ascended with me to the third heaven and asked for its gate to be opened. It was asked, ‘Who is it?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Gabriel.’ It was asked, ‘Who is accompanying you?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Muhammad.’ It was asked, ‘Has he been called?’ Gabriel replied in the affirmative. Then it was said, ‘He is welcomed, what an excellent visit his is!’ The gate was opened, and when I went over the third heaven there I saw Joseph. Gabriel said (to me), ‘This is Joseph; pay him your greetings.’ So I greeted him and he returned the greeting to me and said, ‘You are welcomed, O pious brother and pious Prophet.’ Then Gabriel ascended with me to the fourth heaven and asked for its gate to be opened. It was asked, ‘Who is it?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Gabriel’ It was asked, ‘Who is accompanying you?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Muhammad.’ It was asked, ‘Has he been called?’ Gabriel replied in the affirmative. Then it was said, ‘He is welcomed, what an excel lent visit his is!’
            The gate was opened, and when I went over the fourth heaven, there I saw Idris. Gabriel said (to me), ‘This is Idris; pay him your greetings.’ So I greeted him and he returned the greeting to me and said, ‘You are welcomed, O pious brother and pious Prophet.’ Then Gabriel ascended with me to the fifth heaven and asked for its gate to be opened. It was asked, ‘Who is it?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Gabriel.’ It was asked. ‘Who is accompanying you?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Muhammad.’ It was asked, ‘Has he been called?’ Gabriel replied in the affirmative. Then it was said He is welcomed, what an excellent visit his is! So when I went over the fifth heaven, there I saw Harun (i.e. Aaron), Gabriel said, (to me). This is Aaron; pay him your greetings.’ I greeted him and he returned the greeting to me and said, ‘You are welcomed, O pious brother and pious Prophet.’ Then Gabriel ascended with me to the sixth heaven and asked for its gate to be opened. It was asked. ‘Who is it?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Gabriel.’ It was asked, ‘Who is accompanying you?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Muhammad.’ It was asked, ‘Has he been called?’ Gabriel replied in the affirmative. It was said, ‘He is welcomed. What an excellent visit his is!’
            When I went (over the sixth heaven), there I saw Moses. Gabriel said (to me),’ This is Moses; pay him your greeting. So I greeted him and he returned the greetings to me and said, ‘You are welcomed, O pious brother and pious Prophet.’ When I left him (i.e. Moses) he wept. Someone asked him, ‘What makes you weep?’ Moses said, ‘I weep because after me there has been sent (as Prophet) a young man whose followers will enter Paradise in greater numbers than my followers.’ Then Gabriel ascended with me to the seventh heaven and asked for its gate to be opened. It was asked, ‘Who is it?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Gabriel.’ It was asked,’ Who is accompanying you?’ Gabriel replied, ‘Muhammad.’ It was asked, ‘Has he been called?’ Gabriel replied in the affirmative. Then it was said, ‘He is welcomed. What an excellent visit his is!’
            So when I went (over the seventh heaven), there I saw Abraham. Gabriel said (to me), ‘This is your father; pay your greetings to him.’ So I greeted him and he returned the greetings to me and said, ‘You are welcomed, O pious son and pious Prophet.’ Then I was made to ascend to Sidrat-ul-Muntaha (i.e. the Lote Tree of the utmost boundary) Behold! Its fruits were like the jars of Hajr (i.e. a place near Medina) and its leaves were as big as the ears of elephants. Gabriel said, ‘This is the Lote Tree of the utmost boundary) . Behold ! There ran four rivers, two were hidden and two were visible, I asked, ‘What are these two kinds of rivers, O Gabriel?’ He replied,’ As for the hidden rivers, they are two rivers in Paradise and the visible rivers are the Nile and the Euphrates.’
            Then Al-Bait-ul-Ma’mur (i.e. the Sacred House) was shown to me and a container full of wine and another full of milk and a third full of honey were brought to me. I took the milk. Gabriel remarked, ‘This is the Islamic religion which you and your followers are following.’ Then the prayers were enjoined on me: They were fifty prayers a day. When I returned, I passed by Moses who asked (me), ‘What have you been ordered to do?’ I replied, ‘I have been ordered to offer fifty prayers a day.’ Moses said, ‘Your followers cannot bear fifty prayers a day, and by Allah, I have tested people before you, and I have tried my level best with Bani Israel (in vain). Go back to your Lord and ask for reduction to lessen your followers’ burden.’ So I went back, and Allah reduced ten prayers for me. Then again I came to Moses, but he repeated the same as he had said before. Then again I went back to Allah and He reduced ten more prayers. When I came back to Moses he said the same, I went back to Allah and He ordered me to observe ten prayers a day. When I came back to Moses, he repeated the same advice, so I went back to Allah and was ordered to observe five prayers a day.
            When I came back to Moses, he said, ‘What have you been ordered?’ I replied, ‘I have been ordered to observe five prayers a day.’ He said, ‘Your followers cannot bear five prayers a day, and no doubt, I have got an experience of the people before you, and I have tried my level best with Bani Israel, so go back to your Lord and ask for reduction to lessen your follower’s burden.’ I said, ‘I have requested so much of my Lord that I feel ashamed, but I am satisfied now and surrender to Allah’s Order.’ When I left, I heard a voice saying, ‘I have passed My Order and have lessened the burden of My Worshipers.”
            BUKHARI
            Volume 5, Book 58, Number 228:
            Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:
            Regarding the Statement of Allah”
            “And We granted the vision (Ascension to the heavens) which We made you see (as an actual eye witness) was only made as a trial for the people.” (17.60)
            Ibn Abbas added: The sights which Allah’s Apostle was shown on the Night Journey when he was taken to Bait-ulMaqdis (i.e. Jerusalem) were actual sights, (not dreams). And the Cursed Tree (mentioned) in the Quran is the tree of Zaqqum (itself) .
            You have to feel for people in countries that don’t have a good infrastructure. No bus routes or train lines, no underground subway. I sometimes think back to when I had to cycle eight miles a day to get to and from work. I am so grateful that I now have a car.
            Back in the 7th Century, travel was much more of an issue, but thankfully there was one special way to get about in no time at all. This form of travel didn’t have alloy wheels and carbon brakes, a large exhaust pipe and a turbocharger engine. Nor did it have a v12 engine with 2000hp. This was a completely different kind of horsepower.
            It was a flying horse.
            That’s right. A horse that could fly. It’s a popular story for Muslims. They tell the tale of how 12 years after becoming a prophet, Muhammad had a lot of travelling to do. He had been in his home city, Mecca, visiting his cousin when Buraq appeared (with an angel). Muhammad saddled up and flew on it to Jerusalem, which is about 766 miles. He got down, said a prayer and then they were off again, apparently to visit the various heavens.
            Now that’s fast. 766 miles in one night, on a horse. Then back.
            Buraq also appeared to Abraham who made regular use of such a magnificent beast. He lived in Syria with one of his wives but would often travel via super-horse to Mecca in order to visit his other wife, Hagar, and his son Ishmael. After a nice meal and a catch up, Buraq would take him back in the evening.
            Muhammad, by the way, was apparently instructed at this time that people should pray 50 times a day to God. No wonder! With travel being so convenient, you’d have time to pray 50 times a day!
            Muhammad’s claims to Jerusalem is a Myth
            Strange as it may seem, there are many myths that continue to be perpetuated today as fact when they are clearly myths. As there are people who consider what I have posted unsuitable for adult reading I will attempt once more from a different slant. Muslims claim rights to Jerusalem because they claim that Muhammad set foot in Jerusalem, but this could not have happened because:
            “Where does Islam’s claim to Jerusalem come from? Where did it all start?

            “Muhammad’s ‘night’-journey (isra) to ‘the farthest mosque’ (al-masjid al-aqsa)”
            [The Isra and Mi’raj (Arabic: الإسراء والمعراج‎, transl. al-ʾIsrāʾ wa l-Miʿrāğ), are the two parts of a Night Journey that, according to Islamic tradition, the Islamic prophet Muhammad took during a single night around the year 621. It has been described as both a physical and spiritual journey.

            The Isra begins with Muhammad praying in the Kaaba in Mecca, when the archangel Jibral (Gabriel) comes to him, and brings him the steed Buraq, the traditional “heavenly steed” of the prophets. Buraq carries Muhammad to the Masjid Al Aqsa the “Farthest Mosque”, which Muslims believe is “the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem.”

            ( If you can believe that a flying horse could transport a man from Mecca to Jerusalem and back in one night then anything is possible. This mosque did not exist before Muhammad’s death. The distance between Mecca and Jerusalem is 755.1 miles. To complete this feat in one night would have meant that Buraq must have been jet propelled in the 7th Century. Hence it’s a myth.)

            Muhammad alights, tethers Buraq to the Western Wall and leads other prophets including Adem (Adam), Musa (Moses), and `Īsā (Jesus) in prayer. In the second part of the journey, the Mi’raj (an Arabic word that literally means “ladder”), Buraq takes him to the heavens, where he tours the circles of heaven, and speaks with the earlier prophets such as Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. He is then taken by the angel Jibril to meet God.

            This interpretation was advanced even by the earliest biographer of Muhammad—Ibn Ishaq—and is supported by numerous aḥādīth. The term used for mosque, “masjid”, literally means “place of prostration”, and includes monotheistic places of worship but does not exclusively lend itself to physical structures but a location, as the prophet Muhammad stated ‘the earth has been made a masjid for me and my followers…’ (bukhari volume 1, Book 7, Number 331).

            When Caliph Umar conquered Jerusalem after Muhammad’s death, a prayer house was built on the site. The structure was expanded by the Ummayad caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan and finished by his son al-Walid in 705 CE. The building was repeatedly destroyed by earthquakes and rebuilt, until the reconstruction in 1033 by the Fatimid caliph Ali az-Zahir, and that version of the structure is what can be seen in the present day.

            Many Western historians, such as Heribert Busse and Neal Robinson, agree that Jerusalem is the originally intended interpretation of the Qu’ran. Muslims used to pray towards Jerusalem, but Muhammad changed this direction, the Qibla, to instead direct Muslims to face towards the Kaaba in Mecca on the basis of having received divine intervention.]

            Jerusalem is never mentioned by name in the Qur’an, being mentioned 823 times in the Bible, and Zion (which usually means Jerusalem, and sometimes ‘the Land of Israel’), appears 161 times.
            Of the 823 mentions of Jerusalem by name in the Bible, 669 of them are in the Old Testament, and 154 times in the New Testament.

            The Qur’an refers to Muhammad’s “night journey” (isra) as follows:-
            “Glory to (Allah) Who did take His servant for a journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the farthest mosque……………………(Subhana allathee asra biAAbdihi laylan mina almasjidi alharami ila almasjidi al-aqsa allathee barakna hawlahu linuriyahu min ayatina innahu huwa alssameeAAalbaseeruu)
            Surah 17:001

            When this Surah was revealed ~621 AD, the Sacred Mosque already existed in Mecca, but where was “the farthest mosque?” It was apparently identified with places inside Arabia; either Medina, or a town called Ji’rana, about ten miles from Mecca, which Muhammad visited in 630 AD.
            Palestine had not yet been conquered by Muslim armies, and contained not a single mosque. “

            Obviously, those who believe in Muhammad’s claim to have traveled to Jerusalem either in body or in spirit rely on blind faith rather than common sense. Even if he had never traveled there before, it is highly unlikely that he could not have heard descriptions of the city from others who had, particularly since he was known to seek out story tellers on his business trips.

            There is simply no compelling reason to believe that Muhammad’s dream was anything other than that.

          • Lucky, you have re-told the kids tale with fantastic imaginations from Bukhari!

            Well Quran 53 : 5-18 >> Let us analyse from my point of view :

            “Which one of mighty powers hath taught him. One vigorous; and he grew clear to view. When he was on the uppermost horizon. Then he drew nigh and came down. Till he was two bows’ length or even nearer, And he revealed to His Servant what he revealed. The heart lied not (in seeing) what it saw. So will you dispute with him over what he saw? And verily he saw him yet another time. By the lote-tree of the utmost boundary, Nigh unto which is the Garden of Abode. When that which shroudeth did enshroud the lote-tree. his eye swerved not; nor swept astray. For truly did he see, of the Signs of his Lord”.

            The above verses do NOT mention Mohammed by name…. nor do they mention anything about travelling or the mode of transport used or whether physically or spiritually.

            “One of mighty powers” and “one vigorous” refers to one of Allah’s Angels through whom He sent the messages. “Uppermost horizon” and “utmost boundary” :
            maybe furthest distance on Earth and Heaven. That Angel came down to a distance of “two bows’ length” even nearer to the Servant of Allah and revealed that was required of him(angel) to reveal… the Signs of his Lord.
            Since Allah ‘Himself ‘says’ that the Servant did see >then nobody should dispute on what he saw. Very clear order to the BELIEVERS.
            Garden of Abode is where Adam, his mate and satan came from…and there is a Lote-Tree next to it.

            At least the above verses are NOT as confusing as the “churning of the oceans” or Gods fighting devils and necklaces made of human and devils’ heads with blood dripping or ten horned beast turning into Lion…Leopard…Eagle….etc!!!

            My reply to your comment continues….next!

          • PROPHETS’ PEDOPHILIA

            Aisha said, “The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old.” (The narrator Sulaiman said: “Or six years.”). “He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old. (Sunan Abu Dawud)
            Pedophilia in the Qur’an (65:4, the ugliest surah)
            The exact translation of this portion of Qur’an 65:4
            is “Not menstruated yet”
            (لَمْ يَحِضْنَ “Wallaee Lam yahidhna”)

            AIN’T GONNA FOLLOW NO CHILD MOLESTER

            They try to tell me my religion is wrong

            They try to tell me to follow Islam

            They said their prophet was a righteous dude

            But I found out none of their words were true

            I read the Quran and I read the hadith

            And the sickness of Muhammad was apparent to me

            He justified perversion in the name of Allah

            When he married a girl too young for a bra

            II

            She was playing with dolls when the prophet came

            Her childhood was stolen in Allah’s name

            Aisha was nine when he took her to bed

            Don’t tell me that fool’s not sick in the head

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester,

            Islam is not for me.

            Islam is not for me.

            III

            The sickness of the Islamic mind

            Has caused the Mullahs to be blind

            To justify their prophet they would justify sin

            So the sins of the prophet are repeated again

            All over the world in Islamic states

            9 year old girls suffer cruel fate

            Sold into marriage to twisted men

            And Aisha’s sad story is repeated again

            IV

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester,

            Islam is not for me.

            Islam is not for me.

            Do you care about women all over the world?

            Do you care about those little girls?

            Then stand up and fight for human rights

            Speak out against the laws of Islam

            V

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.

            Ain’t gonna follow no child molester,

            Islam is not for me.

            Islam is not for me.

            Islam is not for me.

            REMEMBER Lama al-Ghamdi, the 5 year old Saudi child who was RAPED & MURDERED by her MUSLIM PREACHER father. He paid BLOOD MONEY & WALKED FREE.

            MUSLIM WOMEN ARE SPECIAL

            Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah’s Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o ‘Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle ?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you.

            A cautious sensible man could be led astray by you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” YES! He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence.
            Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” YES!.
            He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.” Bukhari (Book #6, Hadith #301)

            MUSLIM WOMEN ARE DOGS, PIGS,

            Allah hated women with a passion. He despised all female homo sapiens both Muslim and infidel women. With such a deep hatred and loathing I don’t even know why he bothered to create Eve. Being God, why didn’t he just create man with both a penis and vagina and reproductive organs. Following are the immoral, depraved, insane, despicable LAWS of an immoral, depraved, despicable insane GOD.
            No rational, normal person can believe in such a God of hate.
            Muhammad described women as “unclean” creatures. Muhammad says, “3 things corrupt prayer: Women, dogs, and donkeys.” There are several other sayings in which Muhammad reduced women to the level of an animal. “Woman is a vile beast,” and “I think that women were created for nothing but evil.”

            The right to be treated as a dog, a pig, a monkey, or an ass
            Sahih Bukhari – 1.9.490, 493, 498 Sahih Muslim – 4.1039;
            Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2155; Mishkat ul-Masabih – vol 2, p.114, Hadis no. 789
            The right of ordinary women to be treated as crows
            Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34

            BABY TILTHS:

            65.4 You can marry little girls who have not yet reached menstruation age.

            Muhammad married Ayesha at age 6 to comply with this aya. He had to restrict himself to thighing before age of 9.

            Thighing is defined by Islamic scholar Khomeini in “Tahrirolvasyleh” fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990 as follows:

            “Thighing is a means for an adult male to enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.”

            The following is from a committee of muslim ulema answering the question:
            “the Prophet, the peace of Allah be upon him, practiced “thighing” of Aisha – the mother of believers – may Allah be pleased with her.”

            SEX AFTER FLOGGING:

            Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 132:
            Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Zam’a:

            The Prophet said, “None of you should flog his wife as he flogs a slave and then have sexual intercourse with her in the last part of the day.”
            Ideally when you flog one of your wives, let her recuperate that day and sleep with your other wives or your slave girls

            HOW TO BEAT YOUR WIFE TO AVOID BREAKING HER BONES

            Islamic way of beating or flogging wives is striking at their padded areas to avoid breaking any bones. Here is an example how considerate our prophet was when he beat his wives on their padded parts.

            Muslim Book 004, Number 2127:
            Ayesha narrated. “He struck me on the chest which caused me pain.”
            (However if your wife is breast feeding, prefer to strike on her buttocks

            CIRCUMCISION OF WOMEN:

            It was customary to cut the external female genitalia completely when circumcising women. The Prophet instructed to do cutting in moderation. That showed his kindness and concern for women’s pleasure in love making.

            Sunan Abu Dawud B 41, N5251:

            Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah:

            A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.

            ONE NIGHT SEX PERKS FOR PROPHET:

            33.50 Mohammed, any woman who offered herself to you is halal for you.
            Obligation to practice this aya made logistics a big problem for Muhammad who already had nine wives, his concubines, and a regular supply of captured women from jihadi raids. But Allah’s wishes had to be carried out.
            Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 62, Number 24:
            A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I have come to give you myself.

            Bukhari,V 7, B 62, N 48:
            Narrated Hisham’s father:
            Khaula bint Hakim was one of those ladies who presented themselves to the Prophet. ‘Aisha said, “Doesn’t a lady feel ashamed for presenting herself to a man?”

            Bukhari,V 7, B 62, N 53:
            Narrated Thabit Al-Banani:
            “A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and presented herself to him, saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle, have you any need for me?’ “Thereupon Anas’s daughter said, “What a shameless lady she was! Shame! Shame!” Anas said, “She was better than you; she had a liking for the Prophet.

            ISLAM & THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN

            These are called in Islam the “golden rights and provisions for all Muslim women:”
            The right to be treated as diseased and as sex toys
            The Qur’an – 2:222; Sahahi Bukhari -3.31.172
            The right to be used as a sowing field
            The Qur’an – 2:223
            The right to enjoy another husband after the third divorce from the previous husband (hilla marriage)
            The Qur’an – 2:230; Sahih Bukhari – 8.73.107; Sahih Bukhari – 7.63.187
            The right to engage in Islamic prostitution through Mut’a marriage
            The Qur’an – 4:24;Sahih Bukhari – 8.3246, 3247, 3248;
            Sahih Muslim – 8:3252, 8:3253, 8:3258
            The right to be treated as impure or as a drunkard
            The Qur’an – 4:32; The Qur’an – 16:92
            To uphold the inalienable superiority of men over women and the right to be beaten by husbands—no questions asked
            The Qur’an – 16:92; Sunaan Abu Dawad – 11.2142; Abdur Rahman – 1 DOI, the recognized authority on Sharia in his book, Women in Society”
            To uphold the right of the husband to have four wives at any time and any number sex-slaves for all times; in case of objection by any wife, the husband can beat her
            The Qur’an – 4:3; Sunan Abu Dawad – 30.2.13; The Qur’an – 23:5-6, 70:29-30
            The right to be treated as a dog, a pig, a monkey, or an ass
            Sahih Bukhari – 1.9.490, 493, 498 Sahih Muslim – 4.1039;
            Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2155; Mishkat ul-Masabih – vol 2, p.114, Hadis no. 789
            The right of a Muslimah to be stupid and to become a servant
            Sahih Bukhari – 1.6.301; Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34
            Muslim women forfeit their right to travel alone
            Sahih Bukhari – 2.20.192, 193; Sahih Bukhari – 3.29.85, 4.52.250

            Women must keep their sexual organs ready at all times for the husband to enjoy them unhindered at any time—night or day
            Sahih Bukhari – 4.54.460, 7.62.81; Sahih Muslim – 8.3367, 3368;
            Ghazali – vol 2, p. 43
            Women have the right to breast-feed an unrelated bearded man to make him haram (forbidden to her in marriage)
            Sahih Muslim – 8.3424, 3425, 3426, 3427, 3428
            Women are slaves (prisoners) and men are their masters (owners)
            Ghazali – vol 2, p. 33; Hedaya – p. 47
            Islamic marriage is about sex for money (prostitution)
            Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2105, 2.11,2106; Milik’s Muwatta – 28.4.12;
            Sunaan Abu Dawud – 11.2126; Hedaya – p. 44
            If a woman wishes to get rid of her tyrannical husband she must refund the ‘sex money’ (Mahr) she received from him during marriage
            Sahih Muslim – 7.63.197, 198, 199; Sunaan Abu Dawud – 12,2220;
            Malik’s Muwatta – 29.10.32
            Women have the right to undergo female circumcision (FGM)
            Sunaan Abu Dawud – 41.5251
            Women are slaves and infidels—they are not fit to join the moral police force
            Ghazali – vol 2, p.186
            A husband has the right to have sex with his wife by force (the right to rape)
            Hedaya – p. 141
            Women are cheap—you can have sex with a woman by simply teaching her how to recite a few verses from the Qur’an
            Sahih Buhkari – 6.61.547, 548; Ghazali – vol 2, 31
            Barren women should be confined at home—they are fit only to be in the house-prison
            Ghazali – vol 2, p. 24; Sunaan Abu Dawud – 3.29.3911
            A woman has no say when her husband decides to add more wives in his harem; she can’t even ask her husband to divorce her
            Sahih Bukhari – p. 141
            A wife has the right to decorate her husband when he goes out to have sex with his other wives
            Sahih Bukhari – 1.5.270
            A woman should never be selected or elected as a ruler
            Sahih Bukhari – 5.59.709; Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34
            Muslim women uphold the right of Islamic Jihadists to rape captive women right in front of their vanquished husbands
            The Qur’an – 4:24; Sahih Muslim – 8.3371, 3373, 3374, 3377;
            Sunaan Abu Dawud – 2.11.2150, 8.77.598
            Women are devils; they are as dirty and filthy as private parts are
            Sahih Muslim – 8.3240, 3242; Ghazali – vol 2, p. 26, vol 2, p. 43
            Fear the company of women—they bring bad luck
            Sahih Bukhari – 7.62.30, 31; Bukhari – 4.52.110, 111;
            Malik’s Muwatta – 54.821, 22; Sahih Muslim – 36.6603. 6604;
            Ghazali – vol 3, p. 86, 87
            Women have very little intelligence—their own testimony is inadmissible in rape cases; in other matters their testimony is half to that of a man
            The Qur’an – 4:14, 2:282; Sunaan Abu Dawud – 3.40.4662
            Women are less human—they get one-third of blood money, no booty (for Jihad) for them
            Malik’s Muwatta – 43.64b; Sahih Muslim – 19.4458
            Women are worse than dead persons—they cannot follow a bier
            Sahih Muslim – 4.2039
            Men should always oppose women
            Ghazali – vol 2, p. 34
            Women are easily expendable—a divorced woman gets no maintenance or alimony from her ex-husband
            Sahih Muslim – 9.3519, 3522
            A woman has the right to stay at home solely to provide sex to her husband
            Hedaya – p. 54
            A woman becomes a harlot when she wears perfume
            Mishkat al-Masabih – vol 2, p. 255

            ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS MUSLIM MEN REALLY ARE SODOMITES

            You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.

            ‘PERFUMED GARDEN’

            by Abu Nuwas:

            O THE JOY OF SODOMY

            So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
            Turn not away from it–
            therein is wondrous pleasure.
            Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
            twisting on his temple
            and ride as he stands like some gazelle
            standing to her mate.
            A lad whom all can see girt with sword
            and belt not like your whore who has
            to go veiled.
            Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
            very best to mount them, for women are
            the mounts of the devils

            THIS IS REAL MOHAMMEDANISM:

            Surah 8:69: “But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good.” (Yusuf Ali)

            ISLAMIC QUESTION & ANSWER, ONLINE WITH MUFTI EBRAHIM DESAI, SOUTH AFRICA, ASK THE IMAM:

            “It may, superficially, appear distasteful to copulate with a woman who is not a man’s legal wife, but once Shariah makes something lawful, we have to accept it as lawful, whether it appeals to our taste, or not; and whether we know its underlying wisdom or not.”

            ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

            Satan Attends Every Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant
            Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)
            Whenever a child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)
            Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503
            ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER FC-KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH
            In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.
            EVEN MUTT & HIS COMPANIONS

            Islamic cleric confirms Muslim men really are sodomites
            You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
            In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.
            TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:
            “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

            For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

            Cleric Yasser Habib.

            It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
            A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

            The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
            One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.
            If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

            Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

            When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”
            Hey, all you gays-lesbians-bisexuals-trannies and “liberated” women of the “Progressive” Left! According to a cleric of the religion you so vehemently defend, you had all been butt-f*cked by the devil at birth!
            SEAL OF THE PROPHETS
            Sunan of Abu Dawud
            Narrated Qurrah ibn Iyas al-Muzani:
            I came to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) with a company of Muzaynah and we swore allegiance to him. The buttons of his shirt were open. I swore allegiance to him and I put my hand inside the collar of his shirt and felt the seal… (Book 32, Number 4071)
            I HAVE A HAIRY CYST ON MY BACK, JUST LIKE MUHAMMAD’S!
            SHOULD I DECLARE, ” I HAVE THE SEAL OF THE PROPHETS” OR HAVE IT SURGICALLY REMOVED?

            MOHAMMEDANISM

            In my opinion, Mohammedanism is a violent totalitarian political movement cloaked as a religion and thus preys on democracy and it’s protection of religion. Mohammedanism needs to be declared a political party and the religious protections removed. Then, let those who truly want peace, reform it without the violence and political aspirations. We then could be at peace with Mohammedanism.

            Let me tell you how we learn what Islam means:
            When we hear bombs, we hear Islam.
            When we see women dressed in black sacks, we see Islam.
            When we learn of amputations and stonings, we learn about Islam.
            When we read about sexism and homophobia, we read about Islam.
            When we face savagery, anger and greed for power, we face Islam.
            When we smell death, we smell Islam.
            When we hear Muslims say peace, we know they mean war.
            Islam is just one big F-ALLAH-CY!

            The religion of Mohammedanism cannot survive an open & honest discussion of its convoluted & foolish scriptures, its sexually perverted terrorist prophet, or its deceitful & demented god. When Western leaders become unified & resolute in their hostility to Islam’s violent & ungodly beginnings, Mohammedans will flee the religion because they will be horrified by its endorsement of terrorism, mass murder, slave trading, plunder, kidnapping, & rape.

            If Muslims & their apologists really want to cure “Islamophobia,” here is an easy way. Focus their indignation on Muslims committing violent acts in the name of Islam, not on non-Muslims reporting on those acts.

            Bukhari:V4B52N268 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘War is deceit.'”

            In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. – George Orwell

            TAQIYAH: LYING IN ISLAM:
            The “best” type of Taqiyah according to some Muslim authorities is Tawriah. In Tawriah, a kind of Delphic practice, the speaker makes the “mark” believe that they are agreeing with them through ambiguity, whereas in fact they may be saying the opposite. For example, the slogan “Islam is the religion of peace” has an ambiguous meaning, since for Muslims, the peace is to be found only through surrender to Allah.

            The word ISLAM means SUBMISSION.
            The word MOHAMMEDANISM means followers of MOHAMMED.
            MOHAMMEDANS are NOT submissive to GOD nor MAN!
            They act like a PACK OF HYENAS!
            Their god is their PRICK and they worship the VAGINA (the Black Stone is its depiction).
            You would be better off discussing THEOLOGY with a mangy she camel in Mecca, than trying to get through the lobotomized brains of Mohammedans.

            Islam is:

            IGNORANCE COMPOUNDED BY ARROGANCE!

            OK?

            Qur’an (33:37) “When Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife, Muslim (8:3309) Muhammad consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was only nine. Bukhari (5:268) “The Prophet visit all his wives during the day n night and they were eleven in number.” I asked Anas, ‘Had the Prophet the strength for it?’ Anas replied, Prophet was given the strength of thirty men.’ ”

            Quran (8:12) “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore Strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”

            Bukhari (52:220) Allah’s Apostle said ‘I have been made victorious with terror’

            THE SHIIA SAY: Abu Bakr, Umar, Aisha & Hafsa poisoned Mohammad. (Quran Translation by Shia Scholar, Maqbool H. Dehlevi, Chap. 28, p. 894) Aisha and Hafsa were hypocrite and infidel women. (Hayat-ul-Quloob, Vol. No. 2, p. 900)
            6. Aisha was a hypocrite. (Hayat-ul-Quloob, p. 867)

            TAQIYAH: LYING IN ISLAM:
            The “best” type of Taqiyah according to some Muslim authorities is Tawriah. In Tawriah, a kind of Delphic practice, the speaker makes the “mark” believe that they are agreeing with them through ambiguity, whereas in fact they may be saying the opposite. For example, the slogan “Islam is the religion of peace” has an ambiguous meaning, since for Muslims, the peace is to be found only through surrender to Allah.
            TRUTH

            Truth is not necessarily what you believe, i.e., cannot be conformed to your opinion. Truth exists outside your knowledge and opinion and is a consistent pattern of facts. Without consistent truth you have nothing to rely upon. You can be told ninety-nine truths, but then be told one lie with the intent to deceive you. Anything said with the intent to lie… is a pattern of deception.

            “Allah ordered me to kill all people until they tesitfy that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah” Sahih Bukhari 1:2:24 – “He who kill`s for Allah`s cause is superior” Sahih Muslim 20:4684/5/6/7 Sahih Bukhari 4:52:65 / 9:93:550 – “If Jihad is in
            your cause, HE will admit you to paradise” Sahih Bukhari 4:53:352/9:93:549/9:93:555
            – “Know that paradise is under the shade of swords (killing/jihad)” Sahih Bukhari4:52:73/4:45:210/Sahih Muslim20:4681 – Clearly can see the violent islam agenda

            KAABA

            Mecca is the historical & geographical epicenter of Islam. Muslims, everywhere in the world, prostrate themselves toward the Kaaba 5 times a day. Every Muslim is obliged to travel to Mecca, & perform the Islamic ritual of the Hajj at least once in their lifetime, Islamic tradition holds that the Kaaba was built by Adam & later rebuilt by Abraham and Ishmael.

            There is no historical or archaeological evidence that suggests that Mecca ever existed before the 4th century A.D.

            BLACK STONE
            The black stone of Islam has no connection to Abraham

            The black stone is encased in metal to hold it together (it is broken) and is to be circled seven times by Muslims without underwear during their pilgrimage to Mecca. If they are able to get close enough to it, they may put their heads into the hole and kiss it. If they are not able to get close enough, they are to stretch out their hand towards it and say “Allahu Akbar,” meaning “Allah is greater.”

            Islam is nothing other than a lie. Islam has no connection to Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus as Muslims claim. The facts reveal that Islam’s god “Allah” is not the God of Abraham and his descendants, not through Sarah’s servant Hagar, not through his son Ishmael and not through the culture of idolatry that has gripped the Arabian Peninsula for thousands of years. In fact “Allah” is the moon god that along with many other idols was worshipped by Arabians before Mohammad was born.

            NOTE: Muslims will tell you that Allah is the Arabic word for God, but in fact the Arabic language has been totally conformed to Islam and “Allah” is the name of the Arabian moon god (idol) adopted by Islam.
            http://ofthehighest.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/this-is-my-name/

            Warning No. 1:
            The Quran and Muslims claim that Abraham and his son Ishmael went to Mecca, that the people of the Arabian Peninsula are the direct descendants of Abraham and Ishmael, that Abraham and Ishmael’s God was “Allah,” and that Abraham and Ishmael put the black stone at the Kaaba in Mecca.

            The reason many Muslims claim that Abraham and Ishmael put the black stone at the Kaaba in Mecca is because they attempt to justify it being at the Kaaba, circling around the stone seven times and kissing it. If they are unable to get close enough to kiss it… they are to direct their hand toward the stone and say in Arabic “Allahu Akbar,” meaning “Allah is greater.”

            Why do Muslims attempt to justify the black stone? The answer is that the black stone is known to have been the focus of sexual orgies, where Meccans would run around the stone naked having sex at the Kaaba and throughout the city. Muslims today who claim that Abraham and Ishmael put the stone at the Kaaba claim that the stone had at one time been sacred, that the Meccans then forsook Abraham’s god and started using the stone as a sexual object—desecrating it, but that Mohammad then cleansed the stone. Muslims claim today that they may kiss the stone, because it is said that Mohammad was seen kissing the stone.

            NOTE: Muslims seen circling the stone today do so completely naked under their garments, i.e., without wearing any underwear.
            First, there is no historically documented or archeological evidence to prove that Abraham and Ishmael were ever on the Arabian Peninsula, or that they put the black stone in Mecca, none whatsoever.

            Second, despite what Muslims are taught and believe, (i.e., taught that Mecca was established in Abraham’s time), Mecca has actually only existed since the 3rd or 4th century AD. There is no historically documented or archeological evidence to prove that Mecca existed before this time. If Mecca had existed at the time of Abraham, who were its trading partners? (No evidence exists). None of the Greek and Roman historians and geographers, and others living in the area, (e.g., Nabataeans), who visited the area between the time of Abraham and the 3rd/4th century AD ever mentioned such a place which, had it existed would have been the most well-known and most thriving city on the continent. Muslims insist otherwise. However, Muslims have not yet produced any historical or archealogical evidence. As for the Quran, it cannot be used as documented evidence, because it was not written by anyone living through or within the period/events discussed. The Quran was written in the 7th/8th century AD.
            Third, there was no reason for Abraham and Ishmael to wander far south onto the Arabian Peninsula. Abraham and Ishmael were already living in a much greener area where their flocks of sheep had green pastures.

            Fourth, Abraham and Ishmael were not known to be missionaries and they would not have wanted their children (descendants) to marry into the culture of idolatry on the Arabian Peninsula.

            Fifth, Ishmael’s mother, Hagar, was an Egyptian woman, not at all from the Arabian Peninsula. And Abraham, she and Ishmael spoke Hebrew, not Arabic. There was no reason for Abraham and Ishmael to go to the Arabian Peninsula where the language and culture was totally foreign to them.

            Sixth, there is a historical account in the Bible (Genesis 17: 3-8) where God promised in his covenant to Abraham to give Abraham’s descendents the land of Canaan, where Abraham was. There would have been no reason for Abraham to leave Canaan to go to the Arabian Peninsula. God had not promised to give him the Arabian Peninsula, but the land of Canaan.

            Seventh, there is also a historical account in the Bible (Genesis 15: 18) which says very clearly that Ishmael’s sons “settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the border to Egypt, as you go toward Asshur,” not on the Arabian Peninsula. And none of them spoke Arabic. It is only reasonable to expect that Hagar, her son Ishmael and her grandsons and their families would settle between Canaan and Egypt as the Book of Genesis says. There was no reason for Abraham or Ishmael to immerse themselves and their families into a foreign culture and language on the Arabian Peninsula
            VENTRILOQUISM

            A ventriloquist is someone who can make their voice seem to come from elsewhere.
            Mohammed was a ventriloquist & Allah was his dummy!
            Mohammed said: “When I pray to Allah, it’s like as if I’m talking to myself!
            “Allah always answers my prayers & gives me what I want”!
            “Allah sanctioned killing, raping, child molesting, slavery & robbery”!

            PERFECTION

            And surely thou hast sublime morals
            (Surat Al-Qalam 68:4).

            Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah an
            excellent exemplar (Surat Al-Ahzab 33:21).

            Mohammed was the Perfect Muslim!

            He was an Epileptic, Schizophrenic, Sociopath!
            He was a serial Killer!
            He was a serial Adulterer!
            He was a serial Thief!
            He was a serial Liar!
            He was a serial Plagiarizer!
            He was a Bisexual Child Molester!

            RESPECT!

            Let’s all become Mohammedans; the man’s religion!

            The best positions for women are Missionary and Doggie!

            The Doggie position is good for praying and f–king!

            Women are ready to be f–ked at 9 years of age!

            Women must be ready for sex at all times!

            Women must be disciplined, when disobedient!

            Women will be stoned if they “mess-around”!

            Women will be circumcised!

            Women will wear “Bin-bags”, when they go shopping!

            We Mohammedans have respect for women!

            THERE IS NO LOVE IN MOHAMMEDANISM!
            JUST PURE HATE!
            WHEN A CHRISTIAN MURDERS AN NON BELIEVER, HE ACTS CONTRARY TO WHAT JESUS TAUGHT!
            WHEN A MOHAMMEDAN KILLS AN NON BELIEVER, HE ACTS JUST LIKE MOHAMMED ACTED!
            DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

          • LuckybinRaj, , my reply to your comment continues…

            Now we come to the actual verse that you based your comments on :

            17:1 Pickthall: Glorified be He Who carried His servant by night from the Inviolable Place of Worship to the Far distant place of worship the neighbourhood whereof We have blessed, that We might show him of Our tokens!

            It would have been very difficult for me to understand this verse(17:1) had I not known the verses 53 : 5-18. That is why I took trouble to explain you that first.

            Remember we have already met the words like 😦 “One of mighty powers” and “one vigorous” refers to one of Allah’s Angels through whom He sent the messages. “Uppermost horizon” and “utmost boundary” :
            maybe furthest distance from Earth to Heaven. That Angel came down to a distance of “two bows’ length” even nearer to the Servant of Allah and revealed that was required of him(angel) to reveal… the Signs of his Lord.
            Since Allah ‘Himself ‘says’ that the Servant did see >then nobody should dispute on what he saw. Very clear order to the BELIEVERS.
            Garden of Abode is where Adam, his mate and satan came from…and there is a Lote-Tree next to it).

            81:23 And without doubt he saw him(Jibrael) in the clear horizon

            So let us analyse 17:1 : His Servant was carried…how? ..(physically or spiritually-not mentioned).. .at night (time note mentioned)….Inviolable Place of Worship (Mecca)….Far distant place of worship (in heaven)…neighbourhood whereof We have blessed (Garden of Abode)… show him of Our tokens (to reveal… the Signs of his Lord).

            My understanding : The Servant was taken to the far distant place in heaven, near a Lote tree …spiritually and NOT physically. The narrations of Bukhari have been so profound that the truth will be difficult to establish though Aisha said that the Messenger never went in physical form, if that hadith is to go by.

            Allah knows the secret in the heavens and the earth (Qur’an 25: 6)

            Bukhari ‘created’ the flying animal….kids’ tale and you pounced on it for grabs!!..
            …. I still laugh it off as this Bukhari thing is a kids tale!!!!

          • LuckybinRaj, do not get frustrated when you cannot fulfill your wicked agenda against Islam, as winning or losing is to everyone, okay?

            Ishmael did NOT disappear in the wilderness!!

            You forgot to mention : Gen 25:9 And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which is before Mamre (Ishmael buried Abraham too!!)

            Genesis 17:20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation.

            And Genesis 21:13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed. (son of Abraham)

            And finally : Gen 21:20-21 And GOD WAS WITH THE LAD; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer. (God was always with Ismael and never left him)

            21 And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran: and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt. (Ismael married legally as did the Prophet with Aisha and his other wives)

            Ishmael and his mother were removed by Sarah because she was jealous as you are of Islam’s expansion and gradually turning into flying machine of long,…. long and more and more long…longest useless comments.

            As MM told you…”be brief”!!

          • EXPOSING SOME MORE OF THE MORAL PROBLEMS OF ISLAM

            THE QURAN’S CONFUSED STANCE ON SEXUAL ETHICS

            ON TASAWWUF Imam Nawawi (d. 676)
            One of the great Sufi scholars, strictest latter-time hadith masters, and most meticulous of jurists, Shaykh al-Islam Imam Muhyiddin Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi is with al-Rafi`i the principal reference of the late Shafi`i school. His books remain authoritative in the methodology of the law, in Qur’an commentary, and in hadith. His commentary of Sahih Muslim is second only to Ibn Hajar’s commentary of Sahih Bukhari. Allah gave his famous compilation of Forty Hadiths more circulation and fame than possibly any other book of hadith, large or small, and has allowed Nawawi to be of immense benefit to the Community of Islam.
            Nawawi was considered a Sufi and a saint, as is evident from the titles of some of his works and that of Sakhawi’s biography entitled Tarjamat shaykh al-islam, qutb al-awliya’ al-kiram, faqih al-anam, muhyi al-sunna wa mumit al-bid`a Abi Zakariyya Muhyi al-Din al-Nawawi (The biography of the Shaykh of Islam, the Pole of Noble Saints, the Jurist of Mankind, the Reviver of the Sunna and the Slayer of Innovation… al-Nawawi). (Source; underline emphasis ours)
            And:
            Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277)
            Imam Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi was born in the village of Nawa in Southern Syria, Nawawi spent most of his life in Damascus where he lived in a simple manner, devoted to Allah, engaging single-mindedly in worship, study, writing and teaching various Islamic sciences. The life of this world seems scarcely to have impinged upon him. He was a versatile and extremely dedicated scholar whose breadth of learning was matched by its depth.
            Imam Nawawi died at the young age of 44 years, leaving behind him numerous works of great importance, the most famous of these being:
            • al-Arba’un Nabawi (An-Nawawis Forty Hadith)
            • Riyadhus saleheen
            • al-Maqasid (Al-Nawawi’s Manual of Islam).
            • Kitab al-Adhkar,
            • Minhaj al-Talibin (a main reference for Shafi’i fiqh)
            • Shar’ Sahih Muslim (he was the first to arrange the sahih of Muslim in the now familiar categories)
            Although best known for his works in hadith, Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277) was also the Imam of the later Shafi’i school of Jurisprudence, and widely acknowledged as the intellectual heir to Imam Shafi’i. He was a renowned scholar and jurist who dedicated his life to the pursuit of Islamic learning. (Source)
            Both the hadith and Al-Nawawi’s explanation are taken from the Al-Azhar Islamic web site (*). This is the official web site of Cairo’s Al-Azhar university and mosque, and is considered trustworthy.
            What you are about to read is very graphic and quite shocking. Our translator, Dimitrius, made sure to carefully translate the text, and even double-checked the meaning of one specific word (Hash-fa) to insure proper translation and correctness.
            We now proceed to the text of the Hadith and the commentary of Al-Nawawi.
            Sahih Muslim
            Book of Menstruation
            Hadith number 525
            Chapter of Hadith: Abrogating a fluid with water and the necessity of washing.
            Narrated by Zuhair Ibn Harb, narrated by Ghasan Al-Masma’i, narrated by Muhammad Ibn Al-Mathny, narrated by Ibn Bashar, who said that it was narrated by Muath Ibn Hisham, narrated by Abu Qatada, narrated by Mattar, narrated by Al-Hassan, narrated by Abu Rab’i, narrated by Abu Huraira who said,
            “The prophet – peace be upon him – said, ‘If one sits between a woman’s fours (shu’biha Al-arba’) and then fatigues her, then it necessitates that he wash.’
            In the hadith of Mattar it is added ‘even if he does not excrete (yunzil).’ Zuhair narrated among them using the phrase ‘Ashba’iha Al-arba’. It was also narrated by Muhammad Ibn Umar Ibn Ibad Ibn Jablah, narrated Muhammad Ibn Abi Uday, narrated by Muhammad Ibn Al-Mathny, narrated by Wahb Ibn Jarir who both related from Shu’bah who narrated from Qatada who gave this same chain of transmission, except that in the hadith of Shu’bah it has the phrase ‘then he labored’ but did not have the phrase ‘even if he does not excrete.’
            NOTE-
            Here is a similar hadith from the on-line English version of Sahih Muslim:
            Book 003, Number 0684:
            Abu Musa reported: There cropped up a difference of opinion between a group of Muhajirs (Emigrants) and a group of Ansar (Helpers) (and the point of dispute was) that the Ansar said: The bath (because of sexual intercourse) becomes obligatory only when the semen spurts out or ejaculates. But the Muhajirs said: When a man has sexual intercourse (with the woman), a bath becomes obligatory (no matter whether or not there is seminal emission or ejaculation). Abu Musa said: Well, I satisfy you on this (issue). He (Abu Musa, the narrator) said: I got up (and went) to ‘A’isha and sought her permission and it was granted, and I said to her: O Mother, or Mother of the Faithful, I want to ask you about a matter on which I feel shy. She said: Don’t feel shy of asking me about a thing which you can ask your mother, who gave you birth, for I am too your mother. Upon this I said: What makes a bath obligatory for a person? She replied: You have come across one well informed! The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: When anyone sits amidst four parts (of the woman) and the circumcised parts touch each other a bath becomes obligatory. (Source)

            Commentary of Imam Al-Nawawi on the Hadith
            The saying of the prophet – peace be upon him- ‘If one sits between a woman’s fours (shu’biha Al-arba) and then fatigues her’
            In another narration the word ‘Ashu’biha’ is used. The scholars have disagreed about the intended meaning of ‘shu’biha Al-arba’ (the fours) for some said that it means the arms and the legs, while others have said that it refers to the legs and thighs, and other said it means the legs and the edge of the pubic area. Al-Qadi Ayad chose the meaning of the four areas surrounding the vagina. The word (Shu’b) means areas, its singular form being (Shu’bah). As for those who say (Ashba’iha) that is the plural of the word (Shu’b).
            The word Aj-hada-ha (fatigue her) means to plow her, which was also stated by Al-Khatabi. Others have said it means to make her reach exhaustion as in the phrase ‘she made him toil and labor till he was exhausted’. Al-Qadi Ayad – may Allah rest his soul- said ‘Primarily, the word (Jahada’ha) means that the man exerted his effort working in a woman, where the word (Juh’d) means energy and refers to motion by describing the type of work. This is similar to his (the prophet) saying ‘he who plowed her’ meaning he who penetrated her by his motion. Otherwise, what other fatigue could a man experience because of her, and Allah knows best.
            The meaning of the hadith is that the necessity to wash is not limited to when semen is ejaculated, rater it is when the penile head (Hash-fa, lit. “the head of the male member,” i.e. head of the penis) penetrates the vagina, then it is necessary for the man and the woman to wash. There is no disagreement on this today, even though there was disagreement on this by some of the early companions and others later. However, an agreement was later reached and this is what we have shown and presented previously.
            Our companions have said that if the penile head has penetrated A WOMAN’S ANUS, or A MAN’S ANUS, or AN ANIMAL’S VAGINA or ITS ANUS then it is necessary to wash whether the one being penetrated is alive OR DEAD, YOUNG OR OLD, whether it was done intentionally or absentmindedly, whether it was done willfully or forcefully. This also applies if the woman places the male member inside her while the man is asleep, whether the penis is erect or not, whether the penis is circumcised or uncircumcised. All these situations require that the person committing the act and the one the act is committed on must wash themselves, unless the person committing the act or the person the act is committed on is a young male or female. In that case it cannot be said that the person must wash, for they do not have the responsibility, rather it is said that this person is in a state of impurity. If that person can discern (the sexual act) then his guardian can command him to wash just as he commands him to perform the ablution washing for prayers. For if he prays without washing, his prayer has not been performed correctly; likewise if he doesn’t wash after he reaches puberty he must be forced to wash. If he washed as a youth and then reaches puberty, then he does not have to repeat the washing.
            Our companions have said that intercourse occurs when a healthy male’s penile head completely penetrates (an orifice), as has been unanimously agreed. Thus, when the penile head has completely disappeared (inside the orifice), then all the regulations concerning washing apply. It is unanimously agreed that it is not necessary that the entire penile shaft penetrate to apply the regulations of washing. If part of the penile head penetrates, then the regulations of washing are not imposed as is agreed, except by an odd few of our companions who said that even in this case all the regulations of washing apply. However, this opinion is wrong, rejected and abandoned.
            If the male member was severed and what remained was less than the length of the penile head, then none of the washing regulations apply. If the part remaining was equal in length to the penile head length then that part must completely penetrate for the regulation of washing to apply. If the part remaining was greater in length to the penile head length then there are two famous opinions for our companions. The most correct is that if the portion that penetrates is equal to the length of the penile head, then the regulations for washing apply. The other opinion is that none of the regulations for washing apply until the entire remaining length of the penile shaft completely penetrates and Allah knows best.
            If a man wraps a sheath around his male member and then ejaculates inside a woman’s vagina, then there are three opinions from our companions. The most famous is that the man must wash. The second is that he does not have to wash because he ejaculated inside the sheath. The third is that if the sheath is thick and prevents climax and wetness (in the vagina) then washing is not necessary, otherwise it is necessary and Allah knows best.
            If a woman inserts (in her vagina) AN ANIMAL’S PENIS she must wash, and if she inserts A DETACHED PENIS (thakaran maktu-an, lit. “a severed male member”; a marital aid perhaps!?) there are two opinions; the most correct is that she must wash.

            In order to help our readers better appreciate what has been said we would like to break down the material and highlight certain points.
            The hadith states that Muhammad made bathing necessary for the person sitting between a woman’s fours.
            The expression “a woman’s fours” required an explanation, which the Muslim scholars such as Imam Al-Nawawi sought to provide.
            Imam Nawawi was a renowned Muslim scholar whose works such as the Forty Hadith Qudsi and his commentary on Sahih Muslim are considered to be some of the greatest.
            One Muslim source which we cited even states that Imam Al-Nawawi’s commentary on Sahih Muslim was second only to Imam Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani’s commentary of Sahih Bukhari.
            According Al-Nawawi, the Muslim scholars provided elaborate details on what sexual acts necessitated washing.
            The acts which Imam Al-Nawawi lists as necessitating washing presupposes that there were individuals engaging in these sexual acts, i.e. persons who were engaging in homosexuality, anal sex, bestiality, use of sexual props and/or dismembered sexual organs. Otherwise, what was the purpose of Al-Nawawi mentioning these acts if there hadn’t been individuals in the Muslim community engaging in them?
            In light of the preceding, we have some questions for the Muslims, and readers in general, to ponder on. Al-Nawawi stated that a person was required to wash in case the penile head made penetration with someone who was young:
            Our companions have said that if the penile head has penetrated a woman’s anus, or a man’s anus, or an animal’s vagina or its anus then it is necessary to wash whether the one being penetrated is alive or dead, YOUNG or old…
            The question is, YOUNG means exactly what in the above? Does this take pedophilic actions as a given? And washing is the only advice he gives in that case? What about punishment for the person who abuses children??? Just wash yourself and you are acceptable before God again? Note again:
            … unless the person committing the act or the person the act is committed on is a young male or female. In that case it cannot be said that the person must wash, for they do not have the responsibility, rather it is said that this person is in a state of impurity. If that person can discern (the sexual act) then his guardian can command him to wash just as he commands him to perform the ablution washing for prayers. For if he prays without washing, his prayer has not been performed correctly; likewise if he doesn’t wash after he reaches puberty he must be forced to wash. If he washed as a youth and then reaches puberty, then he does not have to repeat the washing.
            These are rules for what young boys or girls – before they have reached puberty! – have to do after they have been penetrated. It does not prohibit the sexual act with prepubescent children, it only regulates what they have to do in regard to washing. Even worse, the formulation “If that person can discern (the sexual act)” creates two cases, only one of which is then discussed explicitly, but by implication the other one is clear too, i.e. that in the case of a child who is not yet able to discern (the sexual act), it is not necessary that he/she has to wash. Again, such abominable abuse is not forbidden nor is a punishment specified, but it simply prescribes certain washings for such a case, or implies that they are not necessary for the very young.
            Again, pay careful attention to this paragraph:
            Our companions have said that if the penile head has penetrated a woman’s anus, or a man’s anus, or an animal’s vagina or its anus then it is necessary to wash whether the one being penetrated is alive or dead, young or old, whether it was done intentionally or absentmindedly, whether it was done willfully or forcefully.
            What does this mean? Willfully refers to the case that the act was committed by consent / agreement of the other person – woman or man or animal, dead or alive, or young boy or young girl. Forcefully refers to the case that the act was done to any of the above against their will. In plain words: If you raped a child, you need to wash and you have to command the victim to wash as well, as if the issue at hand is washing and not the disgusting crime itself.
            Do Muslims want us to believe that Islamic morality is the “best morality” and “best instruction for life” in light of the foregoing?
            ________________________________________
            Now someone may contest Al-Nawawi’s interpretation and choose to simply ignore it by claiming that it is not binding upon Muslims. It is simply his own fallible interpretation and opinion. The problem with this approach is that it fails to explain what exactly did Muhammad mean by sitting between “a woman’s fours”? Since the hadith doesn’t clarify what the phrase means exactly, what must a Sunni Muslim do or where does he/she turn to in order to know for certain? Well, the only thing one can do is to turn to the Muslim scholars such as Al-Nawawi for the interpretation and understanding of the expression in order to know how it applies to daily Muslim life.
            In fact, the Quran never expressly condemns either bestiality or lesbianism, and we will shortly provide several texts which seem to be supporting what this Muslim scholar said. We even found one Muslim who honestly admitted that neither the Quran nor the so-called authentic hadith collections prescribe any kind of punishment for this gross perverted act of bestiality. His comments will be presented in the next section.
            As we now turn our attention to the Quran we will see that it isn’t simply silent on these issues, but even contains passages which seem to allow them. For instance, there is a specific passage where its wording implies that Allah created spouses for mankind from among the cattle:
            The Originator of the heavens and the earth; He made mates (azwajan) for you from among yourselves, and mates (azwajan) of the cattle too, multiplying you thereby; nothing like a likeness of Him; and He is the Hearing, the Seeing. S. 42:11 Shakir
            Fatiru alssamawati waal-ardi jaAAala lakum MIN anfusikum azwajan WAMINa al-anAAami azwajan yathraokum feehi laysa kamithlihi shay-on wahuwa alssameeAAu albaseeru
            Notice the Arabic preposition min and the conjunction wa in the sentence. As a result of the wording of the text this is how it literally reads:
            The Creator of the heavens and the earth, he has made for you spouses FROM yourselves AND FROM the cattle spouses, whereby He multiplies you…
            Several immediate problems arise from this verse.
            What exactly does it mean that Allah has created mates or spouses from themselves (i.e., “you,” “yourselves”)? Who are the “yourselves” of the sentence?
            Are they both men and women, and if so does this mean that marriage can take place only between members of the opposites sex?
            Or does this mean that marriage can occur between all sexes, i.e. heterosexual, homosexual, lesbian marriages are all permitted and sanctioned by this text?
            Since the text addresses the same group, i.e. “you,” when it mentions that Allah also created mates from the cattle does this therefore mean that humans can engage in sexual intercourse with animals?
            Why even mention mates from the cattle in a context dealing with human sexual relations?
            If the text does imply that persons can engage in sexual acts with cattle then in light of the statement that Allah ordained this for the multiplying of mankind, does this therefore mean that the author of the Quran thought that man could cause an animal to get pregnant thereby conceiving human species? Or perhaps the author assumed that the union between these two species would result in a third type of species thereby propagating two kinds of creatures simultaneously?
            Or maybe the author wasn’t saying that Allah multiplies humans via intercourse with cattle. The text may actually be saying that Allah has made spouses for humanity from among themselves and the cattle for enjoyment, and yet he multiplies humans only through sexual union amongst themselves. To put it another way, Allah maybe saying that human intercourse is for both pleasure and multiplication, whereas intercourse with cattle is strictly for pleasure!
            If a Muslim claims that homosexual and bestial relations are condemned in Islam can that person provide explicit Quranic references where these acts are prohibited? In other words, by using the Quran alone can a Muslim show that Allah abhors homosexual and lesbian relations, as well as bestial acts?
            The straightforward reading of the text seems to support bestiality. To highlight this point, imagine if you will that this text was found in any other source besides the Quran, for instance in a document circulating in a society which practices sodomy and bestiality. Would there be any doubt that the wording of the text implies that such acts are permitted by the deity or deities of that particular group? The answer is rather obvious.
            There are two more passages that also provide indirect support for the permissibility of bestiality. They are:
            Successful indeed are the believers, Who are humble in their prayers, And who keep aloof from what is vain, And who are givers of poor-rate, And who guard their private parts, Except before their mates (azwajihim) or those whom their right hands possess, for they surely are not blameable, But whoever seeks to go beyond that, these are they that exceed the limits; And those who are keepers of their trusts and their covenant, And those who keep a guard on their prayers; These are they who are the heirs, Who shall inherit the Paradise; they shall abide therein. S. 23:1-11 Shakir
            for, behold, of their Sustainer’s chastisement none may ever feel [wholly] secure; and who are mindful of their chastity, [not giving way to their desires] with any but their spouses (azwajihim) – that is, those whom they rightfully possess [through wedlock] – : for then, behold, they are free of all blame, whereas such as seek to go beyond that [limit] are truly transgressors; and who are faithful to their trusts and to their pledges: and who stand firm whenever they bear witness; and who guard their prayers [from all worldly intent]. These it is who in the gardens [of paradise] shall be honoured! S. 70:28-35 Asad
            What makes these texts quite interesting is that some Muslims have used these to prove that Islam does not permit bestiality. They claim that the references limit lawful relations to a man’s spouses or slave girls, and anything beyond this is clearly exceeding the limits which Allah has ordained (source).
            The problem with this attempt is that the Arabic words for spouses/mates and “those whom your right hands possess” are not limited to wives or female slaves, at least not in these specific texts. The context of these verses refer to all the believers, whether male or females, and implies that the words refer to either spouse, i.e. to husbands or wives, and to whatever a person owns or possesses such as animals, property etc. There is even one place in the Quran that presents a list of persons and things that a man possesses:
            Fair in the eyes of men is the love of THINGS they covet: women and sons, heaped-up hoards of gold and silver, horses branded for blood and excellence, and wealth of cattle and well-tilled land. Such are the POSSESSIONS of this world’s life, but in nearness to Allah is the best of the goals to return to.” S. 3:14
            Even though the above text doesn’t use the same Arabic expression found in Suras 23 and 70, the meaning is the same since “those whom your right hands possess” obviously encompass all the above persons and items. That is unless, of course, Muslims want to argue that a person’s possessions are different from what his right hand owns!
            Furthermore, there are places in the Quran where the phrase “those whom your right hands possess” includes more than just the female captives (cf. Suras 4:36; 16:71; 30:28).
            In fact, one Muslim admitted that the expression “right hands possess” does include everything which a person may own such as animals etc., even though he tries to refute the notion that Islam allows bestiality. Near the end of his audio presentation, Osama Abdallah says by way of response to a paltalk(*) debater named Christian Prince(*):
            Also Allah almighty allowed only sex to be done with the female right hand possessions from out of all of the right hand possessions which include male, males, females, and animals; and other objects like furniture, for instance, or weapons, or, or objects that could be used, for instance, for sex, you know I don’t want to get graphic but you get the picture, where small objects could be used for sexual pleasures. These are all, ah, right hand possessions. But God almighty in the noble Quran made it clear that out of the right hand possessions, only females are allowed to be, to have, for the Muslims to have sex with them. And only the male Muslims, not the female, ohm, Muslim masters. And not, and certainly the female Muslim masters are not allowed to have sex with the, with the male slaves.
            Even the late Muhammad Asad provides indirect attestation for our exegesis when he writes regarding Sura 23:6:
            Lit., “or those whom their right hands possess” (aw ma malakat aymanuhum). Many of the commentators assume unquestioningly that this relates to female slaves, and that the particle aw (“or”) denotes a permissible alternative. This interpretation is, in my opinion, inadmissible inasmuch as it is based on the assumption that sexual intercourse with ones female slave is permitted without marriage: an assumption, which is contradicted by the Quran itself (see 4: 3, 24, 25 and 24: 32, with the corresponding notes). Nor is this the only objection to the above-mentioned interpretation. Since the Quran applies the term ‘‘believers” to men and women alike, and since the term azwaj (“spouses”), too, denotes both the male and the female partners in marriage, there is no reason for attributing to the phrase ma malakat aymanuhum the meaning of “their female slaves”; and since, on the other hand, it is out of the question that female and male slaves could have been referred to here it is obvious that this phrase does not relate to slaves at all, but has the same meaning as in 4: 24 – namely, “those whom they rightfully possess through wedlock (see note on 4: 24) – with the significant difference that in the present context this expression relates to both husbands and wives, who “rightfully possess” one another by virtue of marriage. On the basis of this interpretation, the particle aw which precedes this clause does not denote an alternative (“or”) but is, rather, in the nature of an explanatory amplification, more or less analogous to the phrase “in other words” or “that is”, thus giving to the whole sentence the meaning, “save with their spouses – that is, those whom they rightfully possess [through wedlock]”, etc. (Cf. a similar construction 25: 62 – “for him who has the will to take thought -that is [lit., “or”], has the will to be grateful”.) (Asad, fn. 3; online source; bold emphasis ours)
            Asad’s candid admission destroys any attempt of using Sura 23:5-6 to refute the permissibility of bestiality, since he admits that neither the term azwaj (spouse) nor ma malakat aymanuhum (right hands possess) are necessarily limited to wives or female slaves. His admission implies that these terms are inclusive, that they encompass anyone or anything which necessarily falls under these specific groups, i.e. all lawful spouses and everything that a person owns or possesses. Since animals also fall under the category of “what” or “whom their right hands possess” one can therefore make a case that these specific passages are actually condoning sexual relations with one’s animals, as well as with one’s male and female slaves (i.e., men with men and women with women relations)! After all, the Quran nowhere explicitly condemns homosexuality or lesbianism.
            In fact, had the Quran wanted to limit this group to wives and to the women slaves it could have qualified it in the same way it does elsewhere:
            If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women (al-nisa) of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. S. 4:3
            And all married women (al-nisa) except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah’s ordinance to you, and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise. And whoever among you has not within his power ampleness of means to marry free believing women, then (he may marry) of those whom your right hands possess from among your believing maidens; and Allah knows best your faith: you are (sprung) the one from the other; so marry them with the permission of their masters, and give them their dowries justly, they being chaste, not fornicating, nor receiving paramours; and when they are taken in marriage, then if they are guilty of indecency, they shall suffer half the punishment which is (inflicted) upon free women. This is for him among you who fears falling into evil; and that you abstain is better for you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 4:24-25 Shakir
            Note the qualifiers here, “women,” “married women,” “from among your believing maidens,” none of which appear in either Suras 23 or 70.
            One Muslim author candidly admits that neither the Quran nor the sound Islamic narrations prescribe any specific punishment for bestiality, or even homosexuality, which provides indirect and implicit support for its permissibility. After all, if there is no punishment for such an act then that means a person can commit it and nothing will happen to him or her! Dr. Ahmad Shafaat writes:
            Death Penalty for Bestiality
            There is nothing about the punishment for bestiality in Muwatta, Bukhari or Muslim. We find some ahadith on the subject in books of Abu Da`ud, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, and Ahmad and, of these muhaddithun those who do express opinions on the authenticity of ahadith they record, do not have a favorable opinion of these particular ahadith.
            There is essentially one hadith prescribing death penalty for bestiality:
            ‘Abd Allah bin Muhammad al-Nufayli related to us: ‘Abd al-‘Aziz bin Muhammad related to us: ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr related to me from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas that the Messenger of God said: “If anyone has sexual intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill it along with him.” (‘Ikrimah) said: “I asked him (Ibn ‘Abbas): ‘Why the animal?’ He replied: ‘I think (the Prophet) disapproved of its flesh being eaten when such a thing had been done to it’.” Abu Da`ud said, This is not strong. (Abu Da`ud 3871)
            Narrations of this hadith with variations are also found in Tirmidhi (1374), Ibn Majah (2554), and Musnad Ahmad (2294, 2591). They all are narrated from ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas. One narration in Ahmad comes from ‘Abbad bin Mansur instead of ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr but in that narration the Prophet is not mentioned and the words quoted are understood to be the words Ibn ‘Abbas:
            ‘Abd al-Wahhab related to us: ‘Abbad bin Mansur informed us from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas that concerning the one who has sex with an animal he said: “kill the fa`il and maf`ul bihi”. (Ahmad 2597)
            But in al-Hakim a narration from the same ‘Abbad bin Mansur from ‘Ikrimah in which the saying of Ibn ‘Abbas becomes a hadith of the Prophet:
            From ‘Abbad bin Mansur from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas that he mentioned (dhakara) the Prophet that concerning the one who has sex with an animal he said: “kill the fa`il and maf`ul bihi” (Al-Hakim, quoted from ‘Awn al-Ma‘bud 3869).
            Note that this narration is the same as the one from Ahmad except for the words, “he mentioned the Prophet”. These words are awkward and vague, not clearly stating that the death penalty was prescribed by the Prophet. They are a timid attempt to turn a view attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas into a hadith.
            It is even doubtful that Ibn ‘Abbas held this view, since in the following narration, Ibn ‘Abbas in fact says something completely different:
            Ahmad bin Yunus related to us that Sharik, Abu al-Ahwas and Abu Bakr bin ‘Ayyash related to them from ‘Asim (bin Bahdalah Abi al-Najud) from Abu Razin from Ibn ‘Abbas who said: “There is no prescribed punishment for one who has sexual intercourse with an animal.” Abu Da`ud said: “‘Ata also said so.” Al-Hakam said: “I think he should be flogged, but the number should not reach the prescribed punishment (for zina`, that is, 100 lashes)”. Al-Hasan said: “He is like al-zan.” Adu Da`ud said: “This hadith of ‘Asim weakens the hadith of ‘Amr bin ‘Amr.” (Abu Da`ud 3872)
            The following facts about the above narrations, when taken together, leave little doubt that the hadith prescribing the death penalty for sex with animals is a fabrication resulting from some mistake or an outright lie:
            First, the hadith is narrated only on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas (d. 68) in the first generation, only on the authority of ‘Ikrimah (d. 104) in the second generation, and then mostly from ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr (d. 144) in the third generation and very rarely from ‘Abbad bin Mansur (d. 152). Imams Malik, Bukhari, Muslim either did not know about it or did not trust it.
            Second, narrators in the third generations, ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr and ‘Abbad bin Mansur, are not reliable. Abu Zur‘ah al-Razi considers ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr thiqah and Abu Hatim, Ibn ‘Adi and Ahmad say la bas bi hi. But al-Nasa`i considers him munkar and says he is not strong. Bukhari said that ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr is trustworthy but he has wrongly attributed to ‘Ikrimah several traditions. Yahya bin Ma‘in and al-‘Ajli also called him thiqah but rejected the ahadith he narrated from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas. The views of scholars about ‘Abbad bin Mansur are even more negative. Thus he is described as da‘if al-hadith by Abu Hatim, laysa bi shay` by Yahya bin Ma‘in, layyin by al-Razi and munkar al-hadith, qadri, mudallis by Ahmad.
            Third, in one narration in Musnad Ahmad, also from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas, the “hadith” is found as a saying of Ibn ‘Abbas and NOT a saying of the Holy Prophet. So there is a distinct possibility that an opinion of Ibn ‘Abbas was attributed to the Prophet by a later transmitter such as ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr.
            Fourth, it is doubtful that Ibn ‘Abbas believed in the death penalty for bestiality, since in another tradition Ibn ‘Abbas himself says clearly, “there is no prescribed punishment for sex with an animal”.
            Fifth, as noted in ‘Awn al-Ma‘bud, the four Sunni schools of fiqh are unanimous that death is not prescribed for one who commits sexual intercourse with an animal, but may be given some other punishment (yu‘azzar wa la yuqtal). Such an agreement among the fuqaha` would have been difficult to develop if they generally knew and accepted a hadith, in which the Prophet ordered to kill the one who has sex with an animal.
            Although, in view of the above considerations, there can be little doubt the hadith in question is a false hadith, yet some later scholars accept the hadith and then try to reconcile it with the opinion of the fuqaha`. Thus some say that killing is mentioned in the hadith only as a threat not meant to be carried out. Some say that the killing of the man is only a threat but killing of the animal is to be carried out in actuality. In contrast to such artificial explanations of later scholars, Abu Da`ud and Tirmidhi themselves show better sense. Abu Da`ud, facing the obvious, declares: the tradition of ‘Asim (in which it is denied that there is any prescribed punishment for sex with animals) weakens the tradition of ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr (in which the death penalty is prescribed). Tirmidhi also shows reservation about the hadith by noting: “We do not find this hadith except from ‘Amr bin ‘Amr and he from ‘Ikrimah and he from Ibn ‘Abbas and he from the Prophet.”
            It is necessary that when the weakness of a hadith reaches the level shown above we should have the courage to call it a false hadith, something that many scholars do not do. The authentic teaching of Islam, meant to guide humanity for all times to come, could not have been transmitted in this weak way. If we do not declare such ahadith as false then this means that we cannot free ourselves from the errors and lies of some Muslims in the past and therefore cannot faithfully interpret and implement what God and his Messenger have taught us. This in turn means that we cannot move forward as a civilization…
            Since the narration in Abu Da`ud 3870 does not attribute the death penalty for the homosexual act to the Prophet but only to Ibn ‘Abbas, it is quite possible that the tradition originally was not marfu‘ (attributed to the Prophet) but became so only at a later time. Earlier we noted a similar situation in case of a hadith from ‘Abbad bin Mansur about bestiality. In one narration (Ahmad 2597) the death penalty for this misdeed is attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas while in another narration, reported in al-Hakim, it becomes a hadith. This evidence strongly suggests that death penalties for sexual crimes were not originally based on the words of the Prophet but of some Companions. We can even go further: since the death penalty at least for the homosexual act was not known to al-Zuhri or Imam Malik as a hadith or even as an opinion of a Companion but as an opinion of some fuqaha` among the Successors, it is quite possible that even its attribution to a Companion such as Ibn ‘Abbas is not historical. Certainly, in case of bestiality we have seen evidence showing that Ibn ‘Abbas did not think that there was any prescribed penalty.
            It is also worth noting that all the ahadith about the death penalty for deviant sex, i.e. sex with animals, a mahram, or a member of one’s own gender come from the same very small group of transmitters in the first four generations: Ibn ‘Abbas, ‘Ikrimah, Da`ud bin al-Husayn, ‘Amr bin Abi ‘Amr, Ibrahim bin Isma‘il etc. If the Prophet prescribed the death penalty for all these crimes, it is strange that its knowledge in all three cases remained limited to a few Hadith students for about one and a half century. (Shafaat, Death Penalty For Homosexuality, Incest, And Bestiality: Source)
            Not only are there no sound narrations prescribing any specific punishments for bestiality, we actually find at least one scholarly reference that seems to support the permissibility of engaging in this perverted act.
            {Side note: One interesting thing about the author is that he consistently claims throughout his article that the prescribed punishments mentioned in these weak or forged narrations regarding bestiality, homosexuality etc. actually come from the Holy Bible!}
            To summarize our analysis of the Quran, we found one text worded in such a manner as to suggest that a person can take a mate, a partner from cattle. Other texts seem to support it by saying that individuals are to protect their private parts except from their spouses and what their right hands own. Since animals are part of what a person owns this seems to suggest that intercourse with beasts is permissible. Even if one wishes to argue that the author didn’t mean to imply that bestiality is permissible, at the very least this shows that the Quran is far from being as eloquent and as clear as Muslims believe. Specific texts are written in a very chaotic and confusing manner, leading into all kinds of ethical and theological problems.
            The Muslims are obviously left in a very difficult position.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s