IslamiCity.org Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Religion - Islam > Interfaith Dialogue
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Contracts & technical loopholes - what is  What is Islam What is Islam  Donate Donate
  FAQ FAQ  Quran Search Quran Search  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Contracts & technical loopholes - what is
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Friendship View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 24 August 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 884 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Friendship Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 November 2012 at 12:12am
Assalamu alaika.

You are an Arab I guess. The Revelation is in your mother's tongue. All that you need is to read what the Sahabas explained on each and every letter, word and verse time and time again to understand the Revelation. I do not argue with a Muslim because they never give away their opinion and agree with the Truth. I do not intend to insult you, but only to live by my experience.

Friendship.
Back to Top
Usmani View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 07 September 2006
Location: Pakistan
Status: Offline
Points: 184 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Usmani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 November 2012 at 1:27am

Allah SubHanuhu wa Ta'ala is the Lord and Creator of the Prophets and they are His beloved. He can mention their mistakes in whatever way He wishes and they can demonstrate their humility to Him in whatever way they wish. We have no right to speak about their mistakes or disrespect and slander them unless we want our record books blackened with sins. Allah SubHanuhu wa Ta'ala has ordered us to respect and revere His Prophets. If a Prophet became a sinner, both opposing him and obeying him would become necessary, and this is a concentration of two opposite things. So, the majority of the Scholars including the Imams of the Four Schools of Law followed what they considered to be the stronger position, namely that Prophets are protected even from minor sins. Beware... Beware.. Beware O My Muslim Brothers and Sisters!! To disrespect any Prophet, to find any faults or defect in them or to be rude or insolent to these Prophets is Kufr (Infidelity).

 http://www.ahlesunnat.net/media-library/downloads/regularupdates/infallibilityofprophets.htm
Engage your self in good deeds,otherswise yours nafs will engage you in bad deeds
Back to Top
Abu Loren View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 June 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1646 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Abu Loren Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 November 2012 at 1:46am
All Prophets of God sinned and none of them were withour sin. The Prophet (pbuh) himself warned us against giving him divine attributes like the Christians gave to Jesus (pbuh). The Prophet was a simply a man, a mere human being, nothing more and nothing less. Some people praise him above Allah Subhana Wa Ta'ala and give him titles like 'perfect creation' which is not true at all. Nobody is perfect except Allah Subhana Wa Ta'ala and millions of Muslims have forgotten this fact.
 
Don't condemn me to hell fire and call me kufr for giving you the facts and telling the truth.
Back to Top
Usmani View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 07 September 2006
Location: Pakistan
Status: Offline
Points: 184 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Usmani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 November 2012 at 10:36am
 
Dear Brother Abu Loren,
 
All the Prophets of God are Special people, they are infallible, God protect them for commenting sins. Whoever praise them above Allah Subhanau wa ta'ala are on mistake and who ever think that they commits sins, they too are on mistake.

 

If the Prophets of God does not commit sins by the special protection of Almighty Himself, this is no way an attribute of Divine.

 

 
Engage your self in good deeds,otherswise yours nafs will engage you in bad deeds
Back to Top
Abu Loren View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 June 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1646 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Abu Loren Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 November 2012 at 11:19am
Originally posted by Usmani Usmani wrote:

 
Dear Brother Abu Loren,
 
All the Prophets of God are Special people, they are infallible, God protect them for commenting sins. Whoever praise them above Allah Subhanau wa ta'ala are on mistake and who ever think that they commits sins, they too are on mistake.

 

If the Prophets of God does not commit sins by the special protection of Almighty Himself, this is no way an attribute of Divine.

  

 
All the Prophets of God were indeed special people, but they were just people just like you and me. I'm not saying that they committed sins during their Prophethood but that they all sinned just like you and me.
 
Prophet Ibrahim (pbuh) lied to a king to protect his wife Sarah and he lied to his people when they asked him who broke their idols. Prophet Musa (pbuh) killed an Egyptian albeit accidentally.
 
Also all the Prophets will be judged too just like you and me.
Back to Top
nospam001 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 02 October 2012
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 149 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nospam001 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 November 2012 at 2:57pm

Originally posted by Abu Loren Abu Loren wrote:

Originally posted by nospam001 nospam001 wrote:

It would save time supposing someone could refer back to my short narrative as posted on 23-Oct and point out which specific elements appear to be incorrect. When doing so, please remember to substitute the word 'wife' in place of 'concubine'.
I think we already answered your question. If you missed it then here it is again.
 
Narrated 'Aishah:
It was narrated that 'Aishah said: "The Messenger of Allah did not die until Allah permitted him to marry whatever women he wanted."

Reference : Sunan an-Nasa'i 3205
In-book reference : Book 26, Hadith 10
English translation : Vol. 4, Book 26, Hadith 3207

 
The Prophet (pbuh) was given special privileges by Allah Subhana Wa Ta'ala because he was a highly regarded slave of Allah Subhana Wa Ta'ala. The Prophet (pbuh) was to fulfil an important mission for mankind, also note that Allah Subhana Wa Ta'ala forgave his past and future sins.
 
If the Prophet (pbuh) was showing favouritism towards a wife that is because he was a human being and had all the faults of a human being. If you read his hadiths you will seee that time and again he reminds us that he was just a human being like you and me and prone to mistakes like you and me.
 
Btw I don't know if you know but some of the wives, especially the older ones gave up their rights on visits by the Prophet (pbuh) so that he can spend time with whomever he wanted to. Again read the hadiths to get the full picture.


Sorry, but the question you insist on answering is not one that I have ever asked.

In case you didn't notice, my question is not about sexual morality or 'sin' or who the husband was allowed to marry or whether he was entitled to have favourites. (As much as some people might enjoy discussing those topics.)

Originally posted by nospam001 nospam001 wrote:

Looking at S66 in isolation, the combined weight of sunna plus Qur'an could be used to justify any sort of cover-up, whenever the facts are felt to be inconvenient.

Presumably there are limits on such duplicity, but what are they? How do we deduce them from Qur'an or Hadith? Is the 'licence to deceive' reserved for certain situations only?

Here's the reconstructed narrative I posted on 23-Oct.

Originally posted by nospam001 nospam001 wrote:

Prior to the revelation of Sura 66 the husband went to considerable lengths in order to appease his frustrated wives. He undertook to give equal attention to each in turn, and also to abstain from further relations with a particularly beautiful [wife], who was the focus of their jealousy. (Some 'G-rated' commentaries talk instead of a 'honey pot'. Either way makes little difference to the core principles involved.)

In making this concession he had unwittingly spurned the unique honour of conjugal privileges given to him (alone) in S33:50-51, thereby offending the giver. That was his only mistake, for which he receives a gentle reprimand.

Some time later(?) - but before S66 was revealed - the husband realised that there was in fact no binding commitment.  Thus freed from any moral obligation he resumed relations with the same [wife], in secret. Things went smoothly until he was 'caught in the act' by one of his jealous wives. Damage control then required her silence. She duly swore she would keep the matter secret, but then broke her promise and told the other wives. As finally revealed, Sura 66 deals severely with gossiping and eavesdropping, but tacitly approves of the husband's duplicity, secrecy and attempted cover-up.

Aside from the word 'concubine' (already amended to 'wife'), is there anything else in that narrative (above) which is not generally agreed by everyone? 

Originally posted by nospam001 nospam001 wrote:

The 'engine' of this thread, to me anyway, is that Sura 66 deals severely with gossiping and eavesdropping, but tacitly approves of the husband's duplicity, secrecy and attempted cover-up i.e. it condones the fact that he acted in secret, contrary to an earlier understanding or promise and then, when found out, tried to stop the truth from spreading. These points are not disputed anywhere, as far as I can tell. 

It may surprise you to discover that I'm not raising objections to polygamy and I'm not saying that the husband by 'managing' information was therefore guilty of any offence - legal or moral. I assume he had good reasons to act in that way, possibly something to do with local cultural norms of that era. I also assume that the Qur'an has good reasons for condoning those actions for all believers, for all time. My problem is that those reasons are not self-evident, at least not to me, not yet.

Originally posted by nospam001 nospam001 wrote:


Originally posted by Abu Loren Abu Loren wrote:

If you had read and understood the opening verse of Surah 66 then you would have known that the Prophet was given privileges.
Yes, but did those privileges also include the special freedoms to act in secret, contrary to an earlier understanding or promise and (when found out) to stop the truth from spreading? If so then please say where. I can't find it in 33:50.
God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.
Back to Top
Abu Loren View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 June 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1646 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Abu Loren Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 November 2012 at 7:32pm
Originally posted by nospam001 nospam001 wrote:

Yes, but did those privileges also include the special freedoms to act in secret, contrary to an earlier understanding or promise and (when found out) to stop the truth from spreading? If so then please say where. I can't find it in 33:50.

First of all you are confused about one or two things here. The wife of the Prophet (pbuh) in question is Zainab and not Maria. He acted in 'secret' because he was allowed to do anything he wanted to because he was the Prophet of God. It's also true that Zainab was one of his favourite wives along with Aisha.
 
Explain to us the contradiction you keep talking about, the earlier understanding or promise. May be the following hadith will set your mind at ease.
 
'Ubaid bin 'Umair narrated from 'Aishah, the wife of the Prophet:
"The Prophet used to stay with Zainab bint Jahsh and drink honey at her house. Hafsah and I agreed that if the Prophet came to either of us, she would say: 'I detect the smell of Maghafir (a nasty-smelling gum) on you; have you eaten Maghafir?' He came to one of them and she said that to him. He said: 'No, rather I drank honey at the house of Zainab bint Jahsh, but I will never do it again.' Then the following was revealed: 'O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you.' 'If you two turn in repentance to Allah, (it will be better for you).' addressing 'Aishah and Hafsah; 'And (remember) when the Prophet disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his wives.' refers to him saying: "No, rather I drank honey.""
 
Sunan-an-Nasa'i
English reference : Vol. 4, Book 27, Hadith 3450
Arabic reference : Book 27, Hadith 3434
Back to Top
nospam001 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 02 October 2012
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 149 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nospam001 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 November 2012 at 7:59pm


Thanks, I really think we're making progress now.

Originally posted by Abu Loren Abu Loren wrote:

He acted in 'secret' because he was allowed to do anything he wanted to...
Does the Qur'an actually say that, and if so is it in S33:50 or somewhere else?
Originally posted by Abu Loren Abu Loren wrote:

Explain to us the contradiction you keep talking about, the earlier understanding or promise.

'Ubaid bin 'Umair narrated from 'Aishah, the wife of the Prophet:
"...He said: 'No, rather I drank honey at the house of Zainab bint Jahsh, but I will never do it again'..."

Sunan-an-Nasa'i
English reference : Vol. 4, Book 27, Hadith 3450
Arabic reference : Book 27, Hadith 3434


Wasn't the husband later observed doing something contrary, in secret before any retraction was uttered to his other wives? How else does one explain their behaviour, upon hearing about the secret?

 Clearly their reaction, whatever it was, was wrong enough to deserve a severe rebuke from Allah() Himself.  Would a devoted wife ever do such things supposing she had been fully informed, in advance?
 
(Let us suppose, for now, that the quotation above is the most reliable of all hadiths relating to this sura; i.e., 'something contrary' simply means 'drinking honey at a particular place'.)
God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.