Nonsense. We are only using the quranic verse and what it says . The verse is clear. "We married her to you in order that there not be upon the believers any discomfort concerning the wives of their adopted sons when they no longer have need of them"MesMorial wrote: The reason they were joined was to break the taboo. Muhammad was also being taught, because his decisions were being disapproved of. Muhammad was also a student of this teaching, thus in no way can you say that his actions were the example. It was an active example staged with certain conditions, just like in 8:43. It was to influence, and Muhammad being compelled to do one thing is different from him simply explaining the Qu’ran.
Mo is not being taught here. He has already acted. He is not taught anything about marrying zainab in this verse. The only thing he is admonished about is that he should fear the people instead of allah. Whereas the believers are taught by his action/example that it is okay to marry daughters in law.
Let us see - Instead of giving a straight verse allowing marriage to adopted daughter in law, this allah finds it necessary to make mo have the hots for his daughter in law first and marry her, so that mo can understand this concept? Sounds logical to you? (You have to be a muslim to accept such rubbish. If you are a non muslim believer of God attributing such a verse to God seems blasphemous).MesMorial wrote: Explaining the Qur’an is different, because it is not a compelled event. Zaid’s wife may not have agreed to the marriage had it not been a “preordained” event.
I am not saying anything. I am simply pointing out what quran says - We married her to you in order that there not be upon the believers any discomfort concerning the wives of their adopted sonsMesMorial wrote: Basically you say the Qur’an does not sufficiently convey the need to follow Muhammad’s “sunna”, so it needed some vague verse which still does not achieve its supposed motive.
- The quran is the one that seems to indicate people are to be guided/encouraged to a particular action because of this action of mo.
As you know already there are other verses that ask you to look at mo as a guide, but you people try to twist it and say that it means only follow mo in the manner of his prayer. We say that is wrong when there are clearly other verses such as 33.37 where quran points to action of mo as the guide.
No, there was never a need to say that people could marry the wives of their adopted sons, because people never thought of doing it before (it was a taboo and prohibited). The need only arose when mo had the hots. There is no indication that someone else had approached mo with a ruling on this subject. No, people were quite happy treating their adopted daughter in law as their daughter.MesMorial wrote: There was never any need to say that people could marry the wives of their adopted sons, because it was never prohibited.
Prove it. BTW, there was nothing wrong in that prohibition. For those pre islamic tribes, adopting children was noble.When adopting children, they treated the spouses of those children as their own children too. These were noble principles that were being following. There is nothing to indicate that these noble principles were given up before mo had the hots for zainab. There is nothing to indicate that before mo acted as he did with zainab, that he found anything wrong with this prohibition.MesMorial wrote: People already knew this prohibition wsa false, which is why there is no verse stating it before this.
The correct way to put it is - his mission was - to recite the words and to teach people - which is what the quran says (and which you have been unable to disprove however much you twist the words)MesMorial wrote: He recited the verses, and an attribute of this mission was teaching people.
What way do I see? I see it exactly as told in the verse -MesMorial wrote: The prophets were not perfect, thus no Muslim would see this the way you want to. Your understanding leads to contradictions, and thus is invalid.
a) mo had the hots for zaid's wife
b) mo was afraid of the people's opinion in this matter
c) mo married zaid's wife
d) verse was produced legtimizing mo's action, absolving mo of all blame and declaring that allah was guiding mo's action in order to guide the believers in the future in this matter
Sorry it has not. It is clearly seen that quran uses mo's example to guide/direct believers in another case. So all your mental gymnsatics is useless. Quran says what it says and from that we have the following conclusions (every one of which is supported by quran only) -MesMorial wrote: Thus Muhammad’s personal example is not to be followed, unless it follows the Qur’an alone.
Your theory has been refuted.
a) quran said mo recited the verses and taught (So you need to go to study those explanations/examples)
b) quran used mo's life as an active example to guide people and make things clear
- in some cases by clearly stating that mo's example is to be followed
- in some cases by clearly stating that mo's action are allowed only for mo (special prophetic privilege)
- in some cases by settling mo's inner conflicts (for example absolving him of his promise to hafsa of not going near maria the copt. In such cases allah makes it easy for him to break his promise and do his thing)
- Unless specifically stated other wise in the quran, believers are to be guided by mo's actions .
I am not going to continue on with this useless exercise. I have stated my case and you have given your spin. It is up to readers to make up their own mind.