Hadith Timelines

Shari'a, errancies, miracles and science
User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by skynightblaze »

Eagle wrote: The person you're vaguely referring to was Zaynab, the Prophet's cousin, from a noble lineage who at first, the prophet arranged her to be united with Zayd ibn Haritha, a slave bought and freed by the prophet, and then adopted by him. It was simply unthinkable at the time for such unions to happen between the daughters of the aristocracy and a slave even if he was freed. This was a radical step taken by the Prophet in order to bring down the sense of superiority the Arabs had over slaves, a process that had already started through the countless verses of the Quran speaking of dealing with slaves as one would deal with his own family.
By persuading Zaynab and her family, the marriage did finally happen but it did not last as she would keep looking down upon Zayd, boasting of her lineage, she was hard to manage and live with, for a simple man.
What was Allah doing the whole time when Muhammad was marrying Zaid with a wrong girl? If the marriage was to turn unfortunate in future Allah would have known this before hand. Why didn't Allah tell Muhammad not TO marry Zainab with Zayd in the first place if he knew that there would be conflicts between them making them marriage unsuccessful?

Eagle wrote:He complained many times to the Prophet and wanted to divorce her at one point but the prophet would keep telling him to be patient 33:37"And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favor and to whom you had shown a favor: Keep your wife to yourself and be careful of (your duty to) Allah". But the situation did not improve and Zayd finally divorced her.
If Zaynab had conflicts with Zayd then the verse should stop at saying “zayd should divorce Zaynab”. Why should Muhammad replace Zayd?? I guess even you know the answer but I know you are never going to accept it so I am going to prove it in my post further.
Eagle wrote: At the time Arab custom viewed adopted children as blood children, which is against nature, and would pass onto them the adopter's genealogy and name, his investments with all the rights of the legitimate son including that of inheritance and the prohibition of marriage on grounds of consanguinity. This was the opportunity to erase these customs first through admonishment 33:4-5 and then through a practical example with the prophet's marriage proposal to Zaynab, the ex-wife of an adopted son. He was at first reluctant to make the proposal known publicly because of the pressure of society who viewed such relation as incestuous but at the end, the important thing was to bring to light what Allah intended to improve in this society 33:37"and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. 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. There is no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has ordained for him; such has been the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before".
Your theory falls flat to face with a simple logic..

The verse goes on to say that Marriage of Muhammad was arranged with Zaynab so that there may be no difficulty to believers regarding marrying their adopted son’s wife but when the concept of adoption itself is banned then the difficulty of dealing with adopted son;s wife would never arise because you would never have an adopted son at all to start with and hence the difficulty of marrying the adopted son’s wife would never arise. SO it is obvious that verse 33:37 never came to clear a difficulty for disbelievers in terms of adopted son’s wife because it was shortly banned .

If that verse served anyone then it was Muhammad alone. Had you theory been valid i.e it was done to set a practical example then Muhammad would not have committed the mistake of banning adoption !

Further there is no need to have any practical example to show us this. All he could have said is you can marry adopted son’s wife and the issue would be solved. If Muhammad really wanted to set examples then he should have started with himself marrying 4 rather 9 to 11 wives that he had. Isn't it surprising that Muhammad claims to set an example only when it earns him more women but not when it deals with having for yourself less women and showing restraint? :lol:
Eagle wrote: And the 3rd repercussion of this marriage was to lift the burden which society put upon divorced women who were degraded and often couldnt remarry. The degradation of divorced women is still present in the bible Matt5:31-32 and many societies throughout the world.
If what you claim is true then How could Muhammad marry Khadija in that case? Khadija was a widow when Muhammad married her. Muhammad did not even claim to be a prophet when he married her. So there never arose a question of lifting the burden which society put on the divorced women because they never placed a burden to start with.
Eagle wrote: As an aside, the story of Zayd and Zainab as reported in some traditions is fantastically absurd and has been criticized by specialists in hadith. It's a fabricated story for multiple reasons, amongst them, Zaynab was the cousin of the Prophet, and it was the Prophet that arranged the wedding in the first place, and the Prophet knew her through familial relations going back to Mecca. The idea that he one day saw the 'beauty' of this woman is just so ridiculous by all intents and purposes, because he had seen 'her beauty' multiple times before. In fact, the Quran expressly contradicts the story-telling of the seera writers who collected it, simply by saying the Prophet was trying to tell Zayd to keep Zaynab as his wife and he was doing everything possible to prevent the marriage from breaking up. After he was ordained to marry her as a matter of moral reform meant at addressing the deeply ingrained social stigma of marrying the former wife of an adopted son, the Prophet feared the reaction of the people, thus the term "you feared the people, when you should have feared God." In fact, as Aisha is reported to have said, if any revelation were to be covered up by the Prophet, this would have been it.
A man can develop attraction for a woman any time in his life. It is not difficult at all. You try to tell us as if it is impossible for such a thing to happen! According to the islamic literature he saw her semi naked and therefore he was aroused! That can happen to anyone however decent human beings do not react and snatch the wife of their sons and suddenly terminate a beautiful concept of adoption . Well this is so pathetic. You suddenly make a person who considered you as his father for all his life fatherless within a matter of minutes!

Secondly the reason why Muhammad wanted to buy time was because he was afraid of the society and that is why he was postponing the issue. This is what the quran says and not us. Anyway using logic I will prove that Muhammad desired to marry Zainab.. So here we go..

Anyway I am going to prove to you using the quran and the ahadith that the Muhamamd desired Zainab and therefore the verse came to satisy his desires.! Lets see.
Spoiler! :
[033:037]
Behold! Thou didst say to one who had received the grace of God and thy favour: "Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear God." But thou didst hide in thy heart that which God was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear God. Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And God's command must be fulfilled.

What did Muhammad hide in his heart? According to the verse 33:37 ,Muhammad his in his heart what Allah was to reveal sometime in the future. Now what did Allah reveal in the future? Allah revealed that Muhammad marry Zainab. SO if Muhammad hide this in heart even before Allah revealed it then doesn’t it mean that Muhammad desired Zainab even before Allah revealed regarding marrying Zainab?

What I say is further confirmed by a sahih hadith.. The verse was revealed after Muhammad had desired Zaynab because in the ahadith below Muhammad asks Zaid to make a mention of him to Zaynab and after Zaid makes a mention of Muhamamd to Zaynab the verse was revealed in connection to this...

… (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3330)
Anas (Allah be pleased with him) reported: When the ‘Iddah of Zainab was over, Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to Zaid to make a mention to her about him. Zaid went on until he came to her and she was fermenting her flour. He (Zaid) said: As I saw her I felt in my heart an idea of her greatness so much so that I could not see towards her (simply for the fact) that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) had made a mention of her. So I turned my back towards her, and I turned upon my heels, and said: Zainab, Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) has sent (me) with a message to you. She said: I do not do anything until I solicit the will of my Lord. So she stood at her place of worship and the (verse of) the Qur’an (pertaining to her marriage) was revealed, and Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to her without permission
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

Eagle
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:37 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by Eagle »

skynightblaze wrote:Why didn't Allah tell Muhammad not TO marry Zainab with Zayd in the first place if he knew that there would be conflicts between them making them marriage unsuccessful?
So God must prevent people from marrying if they will divorce down the line, as well as prevent the birth of people who will become criminals later.
And you've already been told why it was necessary for such radical step to be demonstrated in practice:
Eagle wrote:It was simply unthinkable at the time for such unions to happen between the daughters of the aristocracy and a slave even if he was freed. This was a radical step taken by the Prophet in order to bring down the sense of superiority the Arabs had over slaves, a process that had already started through the countless verses of the Quran speaking of dealing with slaves as one would deal with his own family.
skynightblaze wrote:Why should Muhammad replace Zayd?
Such relations were viewed as incestuous and none other than someone of a prophet's status who represents in addition the most outstanding example to follow in a nation, had the stature to bring down such taboo
skynightblaze wrote:when the concept of adoption itself is banned
False
skynightblaze wrote:If Muhammad really wanted to set examples then he should have started with himself marrying 4 rather 9 to 11 wives that he had.
Many Muslims had more than 4 wives prior to the revelation of the verses you're vaguely referring to, including the prophet. The difference between the prophet's wives and others is that obviously none would ever marry and sleep with Moses', Abraham's or Muhammad's wives had they been divorced or had the prophets passed away. This is why the prophet was told he could not divorce any of them except for an extraordinary case of misbehavior 66:5 after the ordinance to all Muslims not to marry more than 4 women. In addition, he was forbidden from divorcing any of the wives he already had with the aim of remarying if it is for purely physical motives 33:52. This was an answer to the hypocrites' annoying talk reported prior in the sura, since the prophet was never denied the right to divorce his women if they misbehaved with the aim of replacing them with others whose primary criterias are faith 66:5 showing that his divorces would be dictated not by whims or lust but by righteousness and uprightness in conduct.
skynightblaze wrote:So there never arose a question of lifting the burden which society put on the divorced women because they never placed a burden to start with.
Total ignorance
skynightblaze wrote:A man can develop attraction for a woman any time in his life. It is not difficult at all.
One more time for you:
HE knew her from long ago, saw her and interracted with her meaning he had already seen her "beauty" many times before. It would have been much easier for him to marry her then, than wait for her to be married to his adopted son
skynightblaze wrote:however decent human beings do not react and snatch the wife of their sons
So for you, a person who not only arranged for you to marry a woman he knew for while, but in addition is telling you to do everything to keep your own wife constitutes evidence that the he secretly lusted for your wife. And when he was doing everything possible to prevent the marriage from breaking up, what he truly desired was that the marriage infact does break up? So funny
skynightblaze wrote:Secondly the reason why Muhammad wanted to buy time was because he was afraid of the society and that is why he was postponing the issue
Of course, here it is again:
Eagle wrote:He was at first reluctant to make the proposal known publicly because of the pressure of society who viewed such relation as incestuous but at the end, the important thing was to bring to light what Allah intended to improve in this society 33:37"and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. 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. There is no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has ordained for him; such has been the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before"
skynightblaze wrote:What did Muhammad hide in his heart? According to the verse 33:37 ,Muhammad his in his heart what Allah was to reveal sometime in the future. Now what did Allah reveal in the future? Allah revealed that Muhammad marry Zainab. SO if Muhammad hide this in heart even before Allah revealed it then doesn’t it mean that Muhammad desired Zainab even before Allah revealed regarding marrying Zainab?
No it says the Prophet concealed something that God wanted to bring to light, meaning the prophet knew what that thing was but he was reluctant to make it known, due to his fear "and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him". It doesnt say the Prophet concealed a future command, how could he conceal something that wasnt revealed yet?
Your absurd and ridiculous conclusions are now painting God as wanting to bring to light the prophet's secret lust for Zaynab by ordaining him to marry her, in other words God wanted to humiliate his prophet, instead of God desiring to bring about through the prophet's union to Zaynab, a social reform as regards to the adopted children who were considered blood children, as pointed to in the words "so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons". These words show that the objective of what Allah "would bring to light", would stop the believers from having any "difficulty" ie repercussions or pressures in their society. How does the supposedly bringing to light of the prophet's secret lusts create this reform, as opposed to the bringing to light of the command to marry her, which the prophet already knew about but concealed due to his fear of the people's reaction? Besides, how does anyone conclude from the marriage that the prophet supposedly lusted for her in secret, especially when the reference to the prophet's concealement is in direct connection with his order to Zayd to keep his own wife at all costs?
And there is no "some time in the future", the Prophet did not marry Zaynab after the revelation of the verse. The verse is relating past events. It is recounting how the Prophet feared the people's reaction so he maintained for some time in his heart the command to marry his adopted son's wife, a union regarded as incestuous at the time, until he was urged to bring it to light by making it known publicly.
Last edited by Eagle on Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:25 am, edited 20 times in total.

darth
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 2:16 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by darth »

Eagle wrote: So God must prevent people from marrying if they will divorce down the line,
Well, if your allah must make people marry just so that they will divorce later, your allah is as silly as you are
Eagle wrote: Such relations were viewed as incestuous and none other than someone of a prophet's status who represents in addition the most outstanding example to follow in a nation, had the stature to bring down such taboo
Basically, as per you (and the quran incidently) mo had more status than the word of allah in the quran. So mo's example of lusting and marrying his daughter in law accomplished what a mere verse could not do. So mo is greater than the quran and allah

Eagle wrote: This is why the prophet was told he could not divorce any of them except for an extraordinary case of misbehavior 66:5 after the ordinance to all Muslims not to marry more than 4 women.
What was the extrordinary misbehavior of the wives, can you tell us? Don't tell us he told a matter to one wife in confidence without telling another wife. By the quranic law is he not supposed to share equally between wives? What was the secret he told one wife that he did not tell another? Why did he break the quranic law of sharing equally amongst the wives. Who misbehaved. (Note, I am asking only from the quran and am not even referring to the scandalous behavior of your prophet as per the hadiths)

User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by The Cat »

darth wrote:You have already shown yourself to be a dishonest, illogical idiot who needs to resort to ad hominems to supplicate idiotic counter arguments.
This is itself a dishonest ad hominem. From a demonstrated abject liar then pretending to objectivity!
viewtopic.php?p=168337#p168337" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
viewtopic.php?p=168532#p168532" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
darth wrote: "Immersed in god", "prayer" - what is the difference, pray tell? And that is not what the verse says. All that the verse says is that by following mo's pattern and remembering allah you will have hope on the last day etc.
Open a dictionary once in a while, like between prayer and fortitude. There's nothing in the surah referring to the sunna of Muhammad.
More so, the including of the 'last day' doesn't refer to any earthly example, but in the fortitude brought by the belief in the Hereafter.

Muhammad, as a person, is not to be followed.

34.50: Say: If I err, I err only to my own loss, and if I am rightly
guided it is because of that which my Lord hath revealed unto me....

darth wrote:
The Cat wrote:This is like stating that the American Constitution should be understood and amended only through Thomas Jefferson's life examples.
The proper simile would be - if the american constitution refers to Thomas Jefferson's example, then that example must be studied. Fortunately American constitution does not say such silly things. That is only the quran
And so there's no hint in the Koran that one should abide to the sunna of Muhammad or that it's of any special worth.

The very collecting of the Koran, and then of its standardization, were performed quite contrary to Muhammad's example.
There you have it from the first caliphs themselves... and then of their burning of all circulating hadiths in their own time.
darth wrote:Verse has nothing to do with hadiths and you know it.... quran does not really forbid hadiths. It simply sets itself on a higher plane from the hadiths.
33.53 has all to do with not spreading indiscretions which is the core of hadiths. The Koran portrays them
on a 'lower plane' because none of them are revelation and thus none of them can be religiously binding.

The hadiths came to substitute themselves to the Koranic reliance over the previous scriptures as binding

4.152: Lo! Those who believe in Allah and His messengerS and make no
distinction between any of them, unto them Allah will give their wages...


12.111: In their history (previous messengers) verily there is a lesson for men of understanding.
It is no invented HADITH but a confirmation of the existing (Scripture) and a detailed explanation
of everything, and a guidance and a mercy for folk who believe.


Here the Koran stresses the previous scriptures against all man-made hadiths on an all-time basis.
It states that the previous scriptures + Koran are the explanation of everything, the true final guidance.

So the guidance can't be the specific sunna of Muhammad...
That's the blatant distortion brought by the Islamic Pharisees.
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by The Cat »

skynightblaze wrote:Who wrote the quran? If your answer is Muhammad then you should stop repeating your rubbish that Muhammad never wanted people to follow him.
It's Zaid bin Thabit who wrote the Koran, first as a scribe, then under the auspices of Abu Bakr,
Umar and Uthman, plus two testimoners for each verses, plus 3 experts of his personal dialect.

If Muhammad was indeed to be followed we wouldn't even have a Koran, for they all acted contrary
to his example. More so in its standardization... since Muhammad allowed seven versions of it.
skynightblaze wrote:It still means that Muhammad is an example for entire mankind. The verse does not limit it by any means.
To state that 'looking unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembering Allah much' does mean
to follow the hadiths is preposterous... unless you can validate this with many Koranic verses.

And the very use of -the Last Day- indicates that the verse is not earthly grounded at all.
skynightblaze wrote:John of Damascus did not have the idea who Zayd was but it does not mean that whatever he said about Muhammad falling in love with Zainab is invalid.
Until you can prove that from the Koran it is invalid. And your JoD argument has been trashed.
skynightblaze wrote:It is obvious that Muhammad would not be able to explain his filthy indecent act of stealing his poor son's wife and that is why needed God to intervene.
None of your allegations would stand a chance in any courtroom, let alone Islamic.

That says it all about your 'logic'.
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

Idesigner
Posts: 1867
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 6:51 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by Idesigner »

Eagle:So God must prevent people from marrying if they will divorce down the line, as well as prevent the birth of people who will become criminals later.
And you've already been told why it was necessary for such radical step to be demonstrated in practice:
Allah has given common sense to whole human race. God doesnot arrange any marriages between an adopted son and noble Kuresh? woman of Mohemmed's family.God does not show such an eligible woman to prophet so that he can marry her to his adopted son who was a slave.

Allah doesnot convey his wishes to any prophet to O.K. marriage with divorced women who was wife of prophet's adopted son. Again Allah had given common sense to marry or not marry such woman. Only mentally retard will believe that Allah micro managed purely interpersonal problems by conveying revealations via third party called Gibreel.


.
Such relations were viewed as incestuous and none other than someone of a prophet's status who represents in addition the most outstanding example to follow in a nation, had the stature to bring down such taboo
That means after the revealations muslims are allowed to marry divorced or widowed daughter in law.

This taboo was not really destructive for new followers of Islam. In all societies father in law keeps distance with daughter in law .Biggest issue is big age difference. There are many moral and social reasons behind this taboo. All their lives father in laws treat daughter in laws as daughters, only lecher will dream of having sex with daughter in law. Whether divorceed or widowed, daughet in law is off limit. Human race whether his Arab or caveman had to respect this kind of taboo as it involved lots of trust between young son and old father who had ots of economic resources. In all joint family this kind of trust was taken for granted. Without the trust human race could not have survived.. This kind of marriages, entanglement can really destroy peace between father, sons, daughters and grand children. In ancient socities many issues like modesty as well as property matter was involved. If Mohemmed's allah had not mess around with this taboo , Arab society of the time would have done just fine.

.These kind of revealations along with that 'apartment" revealation is proof positive that Mohemmed fabricated them for his own benifit. I just cant understand why Allah is bothered about how faithfuls should behave in when they enter prophet's house..Mohemmed could have educated his followers without the help of revealations. Looks like Allah has not given any common sense to eithrt Mohemme or his desert bandits.

What is the point? Mohemmed thought that by announcing revealations even on a matter of marrige, divorce, social interactions he can educate his followers lot better?

User avatar
MesMorial
Posts: 1572
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:15 am

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by MesMorial »

Currently, what we call "hadiths" are simply eyewitness accounts of the people who were contemporaries to mo. The chain of transmission has been recorded. Sometimes there are more than one independent accounts corroborating an incident. When quran points to the example of mo, we should look at the life of mo as recorded by contemporaries. Why do you think we should look only at the quran? That makes no sense.
You and SNB have been refuted on 33:21, and will continue to be refuted. The people who agree with you appear to be you.
No external source except what is pointed to by quran. Injeel, torah, mo's example are all pointed to by quran and recommended to be followed. Sorry, but there it is.
The other books were confirmed by the Qur’an so of course they would be followed…by following the Qur’an. Muhammad’s own personal example is never mandated to be followed.
FEED MORE MORE - WAKE UP!
- Ryback

http://allpoetry.com/Noctifer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
MesMorial
Posts: 1572
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:15 am

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by MesMorial »

@ Darth;

/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=11219&p=168788#p168788" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cheers.
FEED MORE MORE - WAKE UP!
- Ryback

http://allpoetry.com/Noctifer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by skynightblaze »

Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Why didn't Allah tell Muhammad not TO marry Zainab with Zayd in the first place if he knew that there would be conflicts between them making them marriage unsuccessful?
So God must prevent people from marrying if they will divorce down the line, as well as prevent the birth of people who will become criminals later.
Allah becomes a fool if he united Zaynab and Zaid only to have them divorced later. That is heights of stupidity! Allah could have easily asked Muhammad to choose someone else from a noble family for Zaid and the problem would be solved!
Eagle wrote: And you've already been told why it was necessary for such radical step to be demonstrated in practice:
It was simply unthinkable at the time for such unions to happen between the daughters of the aristocracy and a slave even if he was freed. This was a radical step taken by the Prophet in order to bring down the sense of superiority the Arabs had over slaves, a process that had already started through the countless verses of the Quran speaking of dealing with slaves as one would deal with his own family.
EDIT
Allah could have asked Muhammad to marry zayd with some other noble woman whom he would not have divorced or else he could simply have revealed a verse stating this and there was no need of example which spoiled Zayd's life. Quran does not give an example every time to illustrate a case and hence here too it would have been just fine if Allah avoided marriage with Zainab and Zayd and merely stated this in the quran.

Looks like Allah was a real dumbass. I guess Allah needs to bend his arse 5 times daily to me because even a mortal human being like me can bring plenty of solutions for this problem without causing harm to anyone.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Why should Muhammad replace Zayd?
Such relations were viewed as incestuous and none other than someone of a prophet's status who represents in addition the most outstanding example to follow in a nation, had the stature to bring down such taboo
Indeed such relations are viewed incestuous and rightly so. It is absolutely disgusting to steal your son’s wife. This is an insult to the relationship between a father and a son. By allowing such relationships you break the bonds between father and a son. No son will even feel safe to let his wife go with his father. That is disgusting to say the least.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:when the concept of adoption itself is banned
False
There is nothing false about what I said. Adoption is banned by the quran in 33:4-5 so the verse 33:37 hardly makes sense when it says that this marriage is an example to those who have a difficulty of marrying adopted son’s wife. When adoption itself is banned the verse 33:37 can never be an example to anyone. The only beneficiary of that verse was Muhammad. If it was an example to all mankind then quran would not have banned adoption.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:If Muhammad really wanted to set examples then he should have started with himself marrying 4 rather 9 to 11 wives that he had.
Many Muslims had more than 4 wives prior to the revelation of the verses you're vaguely referring to, including the prophet. The difference between the prophet's wives and others is that obviously none would ever marry and sleep with Moses', Abraham's or Muhammad's wives had they been divorced or had the prophets passed away. This is why the prophet was told he could not divorce any of them except for an extraordinary case of misbehavior 66:5 after the ordinance to all Muslims not to marry more than 4 women. In addition, he was forbidden from divorcing any of the wives he already had with the aim of remarying if it is for purely physical motives 33:52. This was an answer to the hypocrites' annoying talk reported prior in the sura, since the prophet was never denied the right to divorce his women if they misbehaved with the aim of replacing them with others whose primary criterias are faith 66:5 showing that his divorces would be dictated not by whims or lust but by righteousness and uprightness in conduct.
Do not bring chapter 66 into the discussion .WE can leave it for some other day.

So you want to tell me that Muhammad already had more than 4 wives when the verse concerning marrying 4 was revealed?? The so called creator is indeed sloppy if that is the case! . Allah does not reveal the verses at appropriate times only to let his prophet later violate his own quran.

Now Muhammad was monogamous for 9 long years till Khadija died. Khadija died when Muhammad was 49 and Muhammad started receiving revelations when he was 40 so there were 9 long years wherein Allah could have revealed this verse and told Muhammad not to engage in more than 4 marriages so again this explanation from you does not make sense.

Allah could have easily revealed the verses concerning 4 wives limit for Muhammad when Muhammad was about marry the fifth but looks like Allah does not come in Muhammad’s way when he is receiving more women.

Another question for you is why can’t Muhammad divorce his wife and let others marry them? What is wrong with it? Muhammad could have easily divorced his other wives and stuck with 4.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:So there never arose a question of lifting the burden which society put on the divorced women because they never placed a burden to start with.
Total ignorance
Khadija was a widow who Muhammad married even before islam came into being. Who is ignorant here? The society obviously never put a burden on people about re marrying widows otherwise Khadija would not be able to marry Muhammad.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:A man can develop attraction for a woman any time in his life. It is not difficult at all.
One more time for you:
HE knew her from long ago, saw her and interracted with her meaning he had already seen her "beauty" many times before. It would have been much easier for him to marry her then, than wait for her to be married to his adopted son
SO you want to tell me that people cannot be aroused suddenly about someone whom they knew for a long time?? Here is a testimony from one of woman who was molested by her father in law after 5 long years. Her father in law never acted pervert before.
Spoiler! :
It was Fathers day..We were by the pool and I was picking up my sunglasses while everyone gathered inside.
Out of nowhere I felt this reach under my buttucks and squeezed my private area really firm.
He must've been waiting ..I never saw him, I was laying in the sun and fell asleep from a nap and woke groogy..I bend down and woom, i get gropped, I shreeked but nobody heard me or payed any attention while they were near the house.

I looked to see him and he just dove in the pool like nothing took place.I hurried inside and took a shower and cried.

I never told my husband.I feel like I dont know what I feel or should do.Its so messed up..first time in 5 years i ever saw my father in law act this way.
im sad by the whole act.
Now im nervous to tell anyone.
do I tell my husband?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index ... 437AA2uxtM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Even in this case the father of the son himself must have married this woman to his son but yet he got aroused by his daughter in law after 5 years and molested her.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:however decent human beings do not react and snatch the wife of their sons
So for you, a person who not only arranged for you to marry a woman he knew for while, but in addition is telling you to do everything to keep your own wife constitutes evidence that the he secretly lusted for your wife. And when he was doing everything possible to prevent the marriage from breaking up, what he truly desired was that the marriage infact does break up? So funny
As shown above people who have married their sons themselves have acted pervert so it is not impossible for someone to act pervert as you claim.

You also claim that Muhammad would not have asked Zayd to keep his wife if he was a pervert but the quran itself tell us the reason as to why he asked Zayd to keep his wife. The quran says that Muhammad was afraid of what people would say if they come to know that Zayd divorced his wife because Muhammad told him . The fear of society was holding back so Muhammad solved the problem with a solution by bringing a verse out of the arse and claiming that Allah also wanted this thing to happen and not he alone.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:What did Muhammad hide in his heart? According to the verse 33:37 ,Muhammad his in his heart what Allah was to reveal sometime in the future. Now what did Allah reveal in the future? Allah revealed that Muhammad marry Zainab. SO if Muhammad hide this in heart even before Allah revealed it then doesn’t it mean that Muhammad desired Zainab even before Allah revealed regarding marrying Zainab?
No it says the Prophet concealed something that God wanted to bring to light, meaning the prophet knew what that thing was but he was reluctant to make it known, due to his fear "and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him". It doesnt say the Prophet concealed a future command, how could he conceal something that wasnt revealed yet?
Let me put into a simple equation so that you understand

Muhammad hide in his heart= that Allah revealed after wards – Equation 1

Allah revealed= that he(Muhammad) marry Zainab- Equation 2

From 1 and 2 , we have
Muhammad hide in his heart= that he marry Zainab

It follows a simple logic A=B, B=C and therefore A=C.

The verse says that Muhammad hide this before Allah brought this matter to light so it means that the thought of marrying Zainab crossed Muhammad’s mind even before Allah had sanctioned the marriage. Now One certainly does not fancy marrying a person who one does not desire. It is obvious that Muhammad desired Zainab.

Btw just focus on the part underlined above. You said that prophet knew what God was about to reveal . How can Muhammad know what God was to reveal beforehand unless he was making quran himself?
Eagle wrote: Your absurd and ridiculous conclusions are now painting God as wanting to bring to light the prophet's secret lust for Zaynab by ordaining him to marry her, in other words God wanted to humiliate his prophet,
Actually it is exactly the opposite. Muhammad brought this verse only to tell his goofy believers that the marriage was divinely sanctioned and it is Allah who wanted the marriage to happen and not he alone. The use of this verse was merely merely used as a justification of Muhammad’s marriage proposal to Zainab.
Eagle wrote: instead of God desiring to bring about through the prophet's union to Zaynab, a social reform as regards to the adopted children who were considered blood children, as pointed to in the words "so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons". These words show that the objective of what Allah "would bring to light", would stop the believers from having any "difficulty" ie repercussions or pressures in their society.
I have already refuted this. Quran banned adoption shortly after this verse was revealed and therefore if the aim of this verse to set an example then it would not help anyone because a case of dealing with adopted son’s wife would never arise when you do not have an adopted son at all.

Eagle wrote: How does the supposedly bringing to light of the prophet's secret lusts create this reform, as opposed to the bringing to light of the command to marry her, which the prophet already knew about but concealed due to his fear of the people's reaction?
The aim was never to bring about a reform as proven above. The aim was snatch his adopted son’s wife without people objecting to it and therefore the verse was brought from the arse to give it a stamp of Allah .

Btw Allah seems to be very naughty to me! :lol: Well even I am thinking of claiming to be a prophet as it seems that it is not at all a bad idea if you are going to get loads of women :lol:
Eagle wrote: Besides, how does anyone conclude from the marriage that the prophet supposedly lusted for her in secret, especially when the reference to the prophet's concealement is in direct connection with his order to Zayd to keep his own wife at all costs?
Explained above.
Eagle wrote:And there is no "some time in the future", the Prophet did not marry Zaynab after the revelation of the verse. The verse is relating past events. It is recounting how the Prophet feared the people's reaction so he maintained for some time in his heart the command to marry his adopted son's wife, a union regarded as incestuous at the time, until he was urged to bring it to light by making it known publicly.
The tafsir of Ibn Kathir makes it clear that Muhammad married her after the revelation of the verse. I even quoted even a sahih hadith last time to prove my case. As far as the verse being recounted in past tense , the compilers of quran may possibly be blamed for that. After all Quran of today is one of the many Qurans that existed after Muhammad’s death so it is very much possible as to why we find it in past tense. However, your own scholars clarify that this verse was revealed after Muhammad proposed Zainab.
Go to her and tell her about me (that I want to marry her).) So, he went to her and found her kneading dough. He (Zayd) said, `When I saw her I felt such respect for her that I could not even look at her and tell her what the Messenger of Allah had said, so I turned my back to her and stepped aside, and said, `O Zaynab! Rejoice, for the Messenger of Allah has sent me to propose marriage to you on his behalf.' She said, `I will not do anything until I pray to my Lord, may He be glorified.' So she went to the place where she usually prayed. Then Qur'an was revealed and the Messenger of Allah came and entered without permission.
Now look how disheartened Zaid was to tell Zainab . It clearly shows that Zayd loved Zainab and was not readily willing to divorce her which would have been the case if there were bitter conflicts between the 2 and if he wanted to get rid of her. Looks like Zayd was deeply disheartened as he could not face her . I guess any husband would be .

Secondly this tafsir from Kathir proves one point that quranic verse was revealed shortly after Muhammad proposed Zainab with the marriage offer . In short Muhammad desired Zaynab even before the quranic verse was revealed.!
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by skynightblaze »

Another hadith proving that Muhammad married Zainab after the verse was revealed.. That verse was merely a justification or excuse to make a claim that Allah also wanted marriage with Zainab.

(Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 516)
Narrated Anas:
Zaid bin Haritha came to the Prophet complaining about his wife. The Prophet kept on saying (to him), "Be afraid of Allah and keep your wife." Aisha said, "If Allah’s Apostle were to conceal anything (of the Quran) he would have concealed this Verse." Zainab used to boast before the wives of the Prophet and used to say, "You were given in marriage by your families, while I was married (to the Prophet) by Allah from over seven Heavens." And Thabit recited, "The Verse:-- ‘But (O Muhammad) you did hide in your heart that which Allah was about to make manifest, you did fear the people,’ (33.37) was revealed in connection with Zainab and Zaid bin Haritha."
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

Eagle
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:37 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by Eagle »

skynightblaze wrote:Allah could have asked Muhammad to marry zayd with some other noble woman
Bring the name of another daughter of the aristocracy whom the prophet knew enough, as well as her family, in order to persuade them of a union with a poor ex-slave.
skynightblaze wrote:there was no need of example which spoiled Zayd's life
The drama now. So how does a short union end one's life, looks like you're easily heartbroken and on the edge of suicide
skynightblaze wrote:Quran does not give an example every time to illustrate a case
It was perfectly appropriate to give a practical example of human brotherhood in a society with class systems
skynightblaze wrote:Actually the example was already there when Muhammad married Julaybib with another woman who was refusing to marry him
How does your example match that of Zaynab and Zayd. Here it is again for you:
Eagle wrote:It was simply unthinkable at the time for such unions to happen between the daughters of the aristocracy and a slave even if he was freed.
skynightblaze wrote:Indeed such relations are viewed incestuous and rightly so
What is the definition of incest? Ask one of the rats dwelling in your monkey temples to go fetch you a dictionary
skynightblaze wrote:Adoption is banned by the quran in 33:4-5
Continued ignorance
skynightblaze wrote:Allah does not reveal the verses at appropriate times only to let his prophet violate his own quran
So to you, acting contrary to a law that doesnt exist constitutes transgression. You're a failure.
skynightblaze wrote:Allah could have easily revealed the verses concerning 4 wives limit for Muhammad when Muhammad was about marry the fifth but looks like Allah does not come in Muhammad’s way when he is receiving more women.
You're speaking of a man who could have as much women as he desired and who is now going against his alleged lust and uncontrolable sexual urges by putting a limit on the number of wives, and in addition, making mutliple unions expressedly conditional on the caring for orphans, who the Quran reports how women kept approaching him for marriage and yet he went against his alleged lusts by prohibiting to himself any marriage solely based on physical motives 33:52, enumerating many restrictions throughout the same sura aimed at warning any would-be wife of the difficult responsibilities they would be facing as a Prophet's wife. You're so weak.
skynightblaze wrote:why can’t Muhammad divorce his wife and let others marry them?
Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:The difference between the prophet's wives and others is that obviously none would ever marry and sleep with Moses', Abraham's or Muhammad's wives had they been divorced or had the prophets passed away.
To a vermin worshiper, it obviously wouldnt matter to sleep with the wife of his vermin prophet after his demise
skynightblaze wrote:Khadija was a widow who Muhammad married even before islam came into being. Who is ignorant here?
The case is that of a marriage to a divorced woman, you speak of marriage to a widow. So funny
skynightblaze wrote:SO you want to tell me that people cannot be aroused suddenly about someone whom they knew for a long time?
Which hadith or seera writer speak of "arousing". They speak of a change of heart as he saw her "beauty", something which he obviously had seen closely many times before she was even married and had plenty of opportunity to approach her without creating any polemic or transgressing any taboo. You dont suddenly have a heart change based on seeing something you have already seen mutliple times before and neither do you secretly desire someone whom you had just arranged to marry with another and in addition provide counseling to make the union work despite the difficulties.
skynightblaze wrote:Even in this case the father of the son himself must have married this woman to his son
"must have married"? Weak assumption. Go back to google and keep doing some research, maybe you'll find a case that resembles the one being discussed. And where does this father in law ask his son to keep his wife at all costs, did this father in law know that woman from long ago before her marriage?
skynightblaze wrote:As shown above
How did you show that one secretly lusts for your wife and desires to snatch her from you when he not only knew of her "beauty" before you even came into the scene meaning he could have approached her long ago, arranged for you to marry her, but in addition is telling you to do everything to maintin your union
skynightblaze wrote:The quran says that Muhammad was afraid of what people would say if they come to know that Zayd divorced his wife because Muhammad told him
What you're saying is the Prophet, despite telling Zayd to keep his own wife, what he truly wanted was the contrary. Funny. And how do you conclude from the words of the Quran that what the Prophet feared was the people's reaction for having ordered the end of the marriage
skynightblaze wrote:Muhammad hide in his heart= that Allah revealed after wards...You said that prophet knew what God was about to reveal
One more time for you: there is no "about to reveal", there is "about to bring to light". The command to marry her was already revealed but he concealed it, fearing the people's reaction, until it was brought to light through the marriage
skynightblaze wrote:Actually it is exactly the opposite.
No its not the opposite, its the ridiculous consequence of your poor reasoning skills. You claim what the prophet concealed in his heart was his lust, this means that by Allah bringing to light what the prophet concealed, what was actually done was the public humiliation of the prophet. Something of course easily negated by the verse when it states the consequence of what Allah "would bring to light" ie the marriage command, would stop the believers from having any "difficulty" ie repercussions or pressures in their society.
skynightblaze wrote:The use of this verse was merely merely used as a justification of Muhammad’s marriage proposal to Zainab
The verse is relating past events, how could the prophet use it in excuse when the union had already occured
skynightblaze wrote:As far as the verse being recounted in past tense , the compilers of quran may possibly be blamed for that. After all Quran of today is one of the many Qurans that existed after Muhammad’s death so it is very much possible as to why we find it in past tense.
Empty speculations and assumptions of a vermin worshiper
skynightblaze wrote:Now look how disheartened Zaid was to tell Zainab . It clearly shows that Zayd loved Zainab and was not readily willing to divorce her which would have been the case if there were bitter conflicts between the 2 and if he wanted to get rid of her.
How was there not conflicts when the Prophet had to tell him to keep his wife in God-consciousness as related in 33:37. And which "disheartening" are you now fantasying about. Zaid's shyness as he went to announce the Prophet's proposal was due to his awe at the fact he was now looking at and addressing the future wife of the prophet of God in her private quarters, something you obviously cannot relate to as a vermin worshiper "As I saw her I felt in my heart an idea of her greatness so much so that I could not see towards her (simply for the fact) that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) had made a mention of her"
skynightblaze wrote:Secondly this tafsir from Kathir proves one point that quranic verse was revealed shortly after Muhammad proposed Zainab with the marriage offer
Which proof. Kathir presents an opinion completely bellied by the construction and tense of the verse
skynightblaze wrote:Another hadith proving that Muhammad married Zainab after the verse was revealed
Impossible due to the past tense of the verse, and your hadith speaks of the prophet relating the divine command to marry her, which he knew about and concealed in his heart because of the social stigma as made clear in 33:37 until it was brought to light when the proposal was made public
Last edited by Eagle on Sun Dec 04, 2011 10:59 am, edited 3 times in total.

darth
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 2:16 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by darth »

The Cat wrote: This is itself a dishonest ad hominem. From a demonstrated abject liar then pretending to objectivity!
Continue babbling. Maybe when you stop you may discover what logic and objectivity are.
Your entire idea of using the quran to prove itself is rubbish. No person with logic or objectivity would do that.
The Cat wrote: Open a dictionary once in a while, like between prayer and fortitude. There's nothing in the surah referring to the sunna of Muhammad.
The verse does point to mo as a beautiful pattern to follow. On the other hand, there is nothing in the verse about "immersing in god" or such rubbish.
The Cat wrote: More so, the including of the 'last day' doesn't refer to any earthly example, but in the fortitude brought by the belief in the Hereafter.
Are you writing your own quran? Last day is last day - day of judgement.
The Cat wrote: Muhammad, as a person, is not to be followed.
quran says, mo is an example to follow. End of story.
The Cat wrote: And so there's no hint in the Koran that one should abide to the sunna of Muhammad or that it's of any special worth.
Verses pointing to mo's example are not mere "hint"s. They are a direct call to action
The Cat wrote: The very collecting of the Koran, and then of its standardization, were performed quite contrary to Muhammad's example.
There you have it from the first caliphs themselves... and then of their burning of all circulating hadiths in their own time.
The quran never banned the writing of mo's life story. If the caliphs went about burning hadiths, they did something the quran had not asked them to do.
The Cat wrote: 33.53 has all to do with not spreading indiscretions which is the core of hadiths. The Koran portrays them
on a 'lower plane' because none of them are revelation and thus none of them can be religiously binding.
33.53 has nothing to do with hadiths. The instructions there is only for those who come to mo's house. What you are doing is - twist a verse and derive a false interpretation and then spread that falsehood as the truth. Fortunately, the rest of us can read and verify for ourselves.
The Cat wrote: Here the Koran stresses the previous scriptures against all man-made hadiths on an all-time basis.
It states that the previous scriptures + Koran are the explanation of everything, the true final guidance.
Actually it stresses the quran (allah's words ) as being superior to anything else. But, then it also points to other scriptures and mo's example as guides. If it did not need mo's life example, then it would not have made him the beautiful pattern to follow. The truth, is hard to swallow, but there is no changing this.

iffo
Posts: 4692
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 3:29 am
Contact:

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by iffo »

I been in Eagle's shoes. I can understand why it is so difficult for him to understand things that seems so obvious to others. Not only Islam but all religions put a lock on your thinking, as long as that lock is there nothing can get in, no matter how hard others try.

To disprove Islam you don't even need stupid hadiths but quran itself is enough to disprove it.
I don't claim to be most merciful and most forgiving, I am an average person and even I will not do type of cruel butcher like things to humans that Allah will do to humans in hell. I am sure even Eagle will not do that to animals. But Allah is so proud of it that he repeats his cruelty over and over again in quran that how he will torture humans in hell.

And what is their fault ? They they were not convinced that Muhammad was a prophet. Its mind boggling how one can believe,love and respect this god who is such a butcher. This simple thing will be impossible for Eagle to understand. And he will not have any problem Allah ripping of the skin and slaughtering his innocent fellow human beings like this.

The following lovely family most likely is of unbelievers. I ask what is their fault if message of Islam was given to them and they rejected it, do they deserve to be butchered in hell. These are the questions muslims need to ask themselves seriously, but even I did not ask and thought about it for most of my life.





Image

User avatar
MesMorial
Posts: 1572
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 4:15 am

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by MesMorial »

Darth wrote:

[quote]
Actually it stresses the quran (allah's words ) as being superior to anything else. But, then it also points to other scriptures and mo's example as guides. If it did not need mo's life example, then it would not have made him the beautiful pattern to follow. The truth, is hard to swallow, but there is no changing this.[quote]

Except the previous books are confirmed by the Qur'an, thus are not different. Muhamad's example is never mandated to be followed.

You so far have provided nothing to scratch the claim that ahadith are not a part of Islam.

Cheers.
FEED MORE MORE - WAKE UP!
- Ryback

http://allpoetry.com/Noctifer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by skynightblaze »

Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Allah could have asked Muhammad to marry zayd with some other noble woman
Bring the name of another daughter of the aristocracy whom the prophet knew enough, as well as her family, in order to persuade them of a union with a poor ex-slave.
You want me to believe that in entire Medina there was only 1 girl of the noble origin with whom Zayd was could have been married??. I am not even going to bother to look for character names during Muhammad’s time. There were plenty of tribes around Medina. Even within Ansar we have so many tribes and it is impossible for him to not find one woman of noble tribe other than Zaynab. More ever the excuse that he did not know them is not a valid at all. Arranged marriages can be done between people who have never known each other. Muhammad was known to everyone in Medina by 625 AD when the marriage happened .

Secondly you never answered the other solution proposed by me. There was absolutely no need of an example because quran does not give example every single time to illustrate a point. Quran could have simply revealed a verse and the problem would have been solved.

Let me tell you, I believe in finding optimized solutions. With God prescribing solutions , the least we can expect is to give optimum solutions. Muhammad should not have really gone with the project of claiming prophet hood. It was simply too much for him to solve logical problems.
Eagle wrote:[
skynightblaze wrote:there was no need of example which spoiled Zayd's life
The drama now. So how does a short union end one's life, looks like you're easily heartbroken and on the edge of suicide
That short union indeed hurts people. Destruction of marriage is not simple to handle. I am amazed that you can go to such depths to defend the so called prophet.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Quran does not give an example every time to illustrate a case
It was perfectly appropriate to give a practical example of human brotherhood in a society with class systems
It was not optimum. With God I expect 100% optimum solutions. More ever let us see what kind of appropriate example it was. Zayd was not at all a slave when he married Zaynab and more ever Zayd was very dear to Muhammad. How could Muhammad set an example of marrying a arrogant girl like Zaynab who behaved so ruthlessly with Zayd?? Are we to take an example that marrying arrogant girls who discriminate unfairly should be married?? Is this the wife that one should marry? What kind of stupid example is that?? On one hand it shows an example of marrying a divorced woman and on other hand it serves as a bad example with regards to the character of the girl being married. This is a poor example.

Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Actually the example was already there when Muhammad married Julaybib with another woman who was refusing to marry him
How does your example match that of Zaynab and Zayd. Here it is again for you:
It was simply unthinkable at the time for such unions to happen between the daughters of the aristocracy and a slave even if he was freed.
I deleted that example because I did not think it exactly matched the description of the scenario that we are examining but nevertheless that example is similar. Julaybib was not considered to be of noble origin. His origins were not known and he did not have any tribe so his condition was actually worse than Zayd as Zayd who atleast was very dear to Muhammad as compared to Julaybib.

Read this for details..

http://www.qss.org/articles/julaybib/julaybib.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So we have a similar case of a woman from ansar marrying a person with low status in the society and hence this example was again not needed.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Indeed such relations are viewed incestuous and rightly so
What is the definition of incest? Ask one of the rats dwelling in your monkey temples to go fetch you a dictionary
AS for the meaning of incest it is sexual intercourse between 2 person who are too closely related to marry.
Anyway I am not a member of any cult and I am an atheist but I think the members of cult you mentioned are any time better than following a paedophile worshiper. Even worshiping a animal is better than worshiping a scoundrel like Muhammad and his fake God Allah.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Adoption is banned by the quran in 33:4-5
Continued ignorance
There is no ignorance here. You keep repeating that I am ignorant yet you do not bother to substantiate. Am I ignorant in claiming that Quran forbids you to have an adopted son?
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Allah does not reveal the verses at appropriate times only to let his prophet violate his own quran
So to you, acting contrary to a law that doesnt exist constitutes transgression. You're a failure.
I did not say that. What I said is Allah could have easily stopped Muhammad from marrying more than 4 and revealed the verse at the right time however I see Allah intervening and sanctioning his marriages only when Muhammad is adding women to his harem but not otherwise where he could have stopped Muhammad from marrying someone.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Allah could have easily revealed the verses concerning 4 wives limit for Muhammad when Muhammad was about marry the fifth but looks like Allah does not come in Muhammad’s way when he is receiving more women.
You're speaking of a man who could have as much women as he desired and who is now going against his alleged lust and uncontrolable sexual urges by putting a limit on the number of wives, and in addition, making mutliple unions expressedly conditional on the caring for orphans, who the Quran reports how women kept approaching him for marriage and yet he went against his alleged lusts by prohibiting to himself any marriage solely based on physical motives 33:52, enumerating many restrictions throughout the same sura aimed at warning any would-be wife of the difficult responsibilities they would be facing as a Prophet's wife. You're so weak.

Tell all those stupid excuses to one who doesn’t know islam

Really what a self restrained and noble prophet Muhammad was! Let us read the following verse to see..

033:050

O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom God has assigned to thee; and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makka) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her;- this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess;- in order that there should be no difficulty for thee. And God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Indeed I am arrogant to speak about such a noble man who at a time used to visit 9 wives for sex . What a noble person he was!
:lol:
Let us examine 33:52 which Eagle cites..

033:052
It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for (other) wives, even though their beauty attract thee, except any thy right hand should possess (as handmaidens): and God doth watch over all things.

Even that verse does not prohibit prophet from taking to bed the captives . :lol: and we are supposed to believe this person was self restraint.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by skynightblaze »

CONTINUED FROM ABOVE ^^^^^^
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:why can’t Muhammad divorce his wife and let others marry them?
Once more for you:
The difference between the prophet's wives and others is that obviously none would ever marry and sleep with Moses', Abraham's or Muhammad's wives had they been divorced or had the prophets passed away.
To a vermin worshiper, it obviously wouldnt matter to sleep with the wife of his vermin prophet after his demise
Once more for a paedophile worshiper like you , I am an atheist and I am not a member of any cult.

It is amazing to notice that Muhamamad does not think the same way that he can sleep with a wife of a person who was so close to him but yet when reverse is the case the person has to think twice about he being a prophet. More ever marriage is not just about sex and sex. Poor Aisha was left alone without a life partner after 18 years of age till 66 or 67 when she died and so were other wives.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Khadija was a widow who Muhammad married even before islam came into being. Who is ignorant here?
The case is that of a marriage to a divorced woman, you speak of marriage to a widow. So funny
Yeah It is really funny as to how I missed these words twice and not once and interpreted wrongly. This is one of the reasons as to why I don’t claim to be intelligent.

Anyway let me tell you more funny thing. You are trying to show as if the concept of marrying divorced women never existed entirely in history and Muhammad was the first to to do that.


[Abu Da'ud - The Book of marriag
e]
Pre-Islam Arabs had no limited number of wives. They could marry two sisters at the same time, or even the wives of their fathers if divorced or widowed. Divorce was to a very great extent in the power of the husband.

The point I want to make here is that there existed the concept of marrying divorced women whoever they were.More ever it was also common among romans to marry divorced woman so it was nothing new.
Lastly as shown above there was no need of an example for this and even if there was a need it was a poor example to be honest because Zainab was not the girl who deserved to be married!.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:SO you want to tell me that people cannot be aroused suddenly about someone whom they knew for a long time?
Which hadith or seera writer speak of "arousing". They speak of a change of heart as he saw her "beauty", something which he obviously had seen closely many times before. You dont suddenly have a heart change based on seeing something you have already seen mutliple times before and neither do you secretly desire someone whom you had just arranged to marry with another and in addition provide counseling to make the union work despite the difficulties.
The desire for Zaynab did not immediately creep into Muhammad;s mind and there have been plenty of such cases I personally have seen where 2 people started to have feelings for each other long time after they met.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Even in this case the father of the son himself must have married this woman to his son
"must have married"? Weak assumption. Go back to google and keep doing some research, maybe you'll find a case that resembles the one being discussed. And where does this father in law ask his son to keep his wife at all costs
I need to walk you through some reasoning.

The case involves a father in law who got attracted towards his son’s wife 5 years after his son’s marriage. If the father had any thoughts of lust right in the beginning i.e before the marriage he exactly would not let 5 years go by and do nothing. HE would tried to oppose the marriage and also done something immediately after the marriage. The very fact that he behaved normal for 5 long years before getting the hots for son’s wife proves my point that one can get attracted to someone at any point of time.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:As shown above
How did you show that one secretly lusts for your wife and desires to snatch her from you when he not only arranged for you to marry her, but in addition is telling you to do everything to maintin your union
The sudden attraction example explains that inspite of Muhammad arranging their marriage it was not impossible for him to develop attraction for Zaynab. Secondly who told you that he did EVERYTHING TO MAINTAIN THEIR UNION??? All the quran says is that Muhammad told Zayd to keep his wife and immediately it says that Muhammad feared the society so we can see that he asked Zayd to keep his wife not because he wanted them stay together but because he was afraid of what society will say so what Muhammad does is bring a verse out of the arse and say that it is more appropriate that he fears Allah rather than society and thereby the verse regarding marriage is revealed.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:The quran says that Muhammad was afraid of what people would say if they come to know that Zayd divorced his wife because Muhammad told him
What you're saying is the Prophet, despite telling Zayd to keep his own wife, what he truly wanted was the contrary. Funny. And how do you conclude from the words of the Quran that what the Prophet feared was the people's reaction for having ordered the end of the marriage
Quran itself says that. I am not making inventions like you. The quran clearly states that Muhammad feared the society regarding a matter that was in his heart. That matter was what Allah was to bring it to light I,e, marriage with Zaynab.

Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Muhammad hide in his heart= that Allah revealed after wards...You said that prophet knew what God was about to reveal
One more time for you: there is no "about to reveal", there is "about to bring to light". The command to marry her was already revealed but he concealed it, fearing the people's reaction, until it was brought to light through the marriage
Quit playing games here. Let us read the verse..

33:37
And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favor and to whom you had shown a favor: Keep your wife to yourself and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. 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.

Notice the part in red. It says you concealed in your heart what Allah WOULD bring to light and not what Allah HAD brought to light! The verse is talking about future and not what was already revealed.
Btw is there any difference between t “About to reveal” and “about to bring to light”??

Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Actually it is exactly the opposite.
No its not the opposite, its the ridiculous consequence of your poor reasoning skills. You claim what the prophet concealed in his heart was his lust, this means that by Allah bringing to light what the prophet concealed, what was actually done was the public humiliation of the prophet. Something of course easily negated by the verse when it states the consequence of what Allah "would bring to light" ie the marriage command, would stop the believers from having any "difficulty" ie repercussions or pressures in their society.
Well my claim was that Allah was going to bring out the idea of Muhammad marrying zaynab which already had in his mind and therefore I concluded that Muhammad lusted after Zaynab. Ofcourse Allah was wise enough to NOT SAY THAT HIS PROPHET LUSTED! Finally it is all about lust .

Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:The use of this verse was merely merely used as a justification of Muhammad’s marriage proposal to Zainab
The verse is relating past events, how could the prophet use it in excuse when the union had already occurred
Let us see the verse again .

[033:037]
And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favor and to whom you had shown a favor: Keep your wife to yourself and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. 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.

Notice what the verse says in red. When Zaid had divorced Zaynab, Allah gave Muhammad Zaynab as a wife. Notice the timing here. Allah gave Muhammad Zaynab as a wife after Zayd divorced Zaynab and not after Muhammad had already married her.

SO if you claim that this verse was revealed AFTER Muhammad had already married Zaynab then quran is wrong here. How can Allah claim that he gave Zaynab as a wife to Muhammad if he had already married Zaynab when this verse was revealed??? In that case Allah cannot say that he gave Muhammad Zaynab as a wife because he never gave Zaynab as a wife to Muhammad but rather he merely confirmed Muhammad's decision after he married her.

I guess this ends you are running short of excuses.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:As far as the verse being recounted in past tense , the compilers of quran may possibly be blamed for that. After all Quran of today is one of the many Qurans that existed after Muhammad’s death so it is very much possible as to why we find it in past tense.
Empty speculations and assumptions of a vermin worshiper
I have a 10 or more pages of debate with the resident TROLL – The Cat who lost miserably in that debate.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=9828&start=160" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Any sane person who reads it will know that Quran of today is one of the version that existed after Muhammad’s death. Anyway even from the quranic verse of the current version I have proved above that the verse could not have been possibly revealed after Muhammad married Zaynab.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Now look how disheartened Zaid was to tell Zainab . It clearly shows that Zayd loved Zainab and was not readily willing to divorce her which would have been the case if there were bitter conflicts between the 2 and if he wanted to get rid of her.
How was there not conflicts when the Prophet had to tell him to keep his wife in God-consciousness as related in 33:37. And which "disheartening" are you now fantasying about. Zaid's shyness as he went to announce the Prophet's proposal was due to his awe at the fact he was now looking at and addressing the future wife of the prophet of God in her private quarters, something you obviously cannot relate to as a vermin worshiper "As I saw her I felt in my heart an idea of her greatness so much so that I could not see towards her (simply for the fact) that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) had made a mention of her"
So how come we don’t see any account of Zayd being shy when he dealed with other wives of prophet?
More ever Zaynab was still his wife legally and she was to become Muhammad;s wife in the future so there is no way for him to be embarrassed . More ever there was no reason as to why he would not face her out of respect unless you showed that Zayd did the same for all the wives of the prophet when speaking with them.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Secondly this tafsir from Kathir proves one point that quranic verse was revealed shortly after Muhammad proposed Zainab with the marriage offer
Which proof. Kathir presents an opinion completely bellied by the construction and tense of the verse
Even using the quran I have proven above as to how Kathir is right or else please accept that quran was wrong when it said that After Zayd divorced Zaynab . WE GAVE YOU ZAYNAB AS A WIFE which means that Allah was the one who instructed Muhammad to marry Zaynab after Zayd divorced her. So thank you for bringing the tense excuse because we found one more error in the quran apart from the huge list of errors in the quran. Someone should have told Muhammad that wisdom and he had no connection and hence he should have given up this business of prophet hood.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Another hadith proving that Muhammad married Zainab after the verse was revealed
Impossible due to the past tense of the verse, and your hadith speaks of the prophet relating the divine command to marry her, which he knew about and concealed in his heart because of the social stigma as made clear in 33:37 until it was brought to light when the proposal was made public
See above.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

Eagle
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:37 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by Eagle »

skynightblaze wrote:You want me to believe that in entire Medina there was only 1 girl of the noble origin with whom Zayd was could have been married?
Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:Bring the name of another daughter of the aristocracy whom the prophet knew enough, as well as her family, in order to persuade them of a union with a poor ex-slave.
skynightblaze wrote:Secondly you never answered the other solution proposed by me. There was absolutely no need of an example because quran does not give example every single time to illustrate a point.
Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:It was perfectly appropriate to give a practical example of human brotherhood in a society with class systems
skynightblaze wrote:That short union indeed hurts people. Destruction of marriage is not simple to handle.
Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:how does a short union end one's life, looks like you're easily heartbroken and on the edge of suicide
skynightblaze wrote:Zayd was not at all a slave when he married Zaynab
Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:Bring the name of another daughter of the aristocracy whom the prophet knew enough, as well as her family, in order to persuade them of a union with a poor ex-slave.
skynightblaze wrote:Are we to take an example that marrying arrogant girls who discriminate unfairly should be married?
No, we're talking of this:
Eagle wrote:It was simply unthinkable at the time for such unions to happen between the daughters of the aristocracy and a slave even if he was freed.
skynightblaze wrote:I deleted that example
Yes go back to google and continue your research
skynightblaze wrote:but nevertheless that example is similar
No, once more for you:
Eagle wrote:And where does this father in law ask his son to keep his wife at all costs, did this father in law know that woman from long ago before her marriage?
skynightblaze wrote:Julaybib was not considered to be of noble origin
And who said his wife was, or that the reason why the woman's family were reluctant to marry her to him was because of his unknown lineage. In the link you first brought with Kathir's tafsir it said Julaybib was seen as someone who lacked seriousness in his general conduct, which is why the woman's family were skeptical.
In your new link, it speaks of his unknown descendancy and poor physical form. So how does that match the example of a an ex-SLAVE.
skynightblaze wrote:AS for the meaning of incest it is sexual intercourse between 2 person who are too closely related to marry.
No, go back to google
skynightblaze wrote:Am I ignorant in claiming that Quran forbids you to have an adopted son?
Not just ignorant, but utterly.
skynightblaze wrote:I did not say that
Thats what your poor reasoning skills entail. So how did God "let his prophet violate his own quran" when the law wasnt revealed yet
skynightblaze wrote:Allah intervening and sanctioning his marriages only when Muhammad is adding women to his harem
Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:You're speaking of a man who could have as much women as he desired and who is now going against his alleged lust and uncontrolable sexual urges by putting a limit on the number of wives, and in addition, making mutliple unions expressedly conditional on the caring for orphans, who the Quran reports how women kept approaching him for marriage and yet he went against his alleged lusts by prohibiting to himself any marriage solely based on physical motives 33:52, enumerating many restrictions throughout the same sura aimed at warning any would-be wife of the difficult responsibilities they would be facing as a Prophet's wife.
skynightblaze wrote:033:050
this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives
The "only for thee" clause refers to his exemption of the preceding order to all Muslims of having to reduce the number of wives to 4 "We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives.."

Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:Many Muslims had more than 4 wives prior to the revelation of the verses you're vaguely referring to, including the prophet. The difference between the prophet's wives and others is that obviously none would ever marry and sleep with Moses', Abraham's or Muhammad's wives had they been divorced or had the prophets passed away. This is why the prophet was told he could not divorce any of them except for an extraordinary case of misbehavior 66:5 after the ordinance to all Muslims not to marry more than 4 women. In addition, he was forbidden from divorcing any of the wives he already had with the aim of remarying if it is for purely physical motives 33:52.
skynightblaze wrote:Indeed I am arrogant
Rather ignorant
skynightblaze wrote:Let us examine 33:52 which Eagle cites
Yes, lets us
skynightblaze wrote:Even that verse does not prohibit prophet from taking to bed the captives
So you havent addressed the ridiculous implications of your poor reasoning skills, that is a man who is supposedly lustful for women is forbidden from taking wives on the basis of their beauty which is precisely what is supposed to satisfy his lusts.
As regards the mulk yamin, he had 1 who was a gift provided by a ruler of Egypt and whom he treated like any of his other wives. As per the decorum of international relationships, it would have been a direct insult to not except a gift, especially when peace treaties were signed. This was part of an international policy of the time.
skynightblaze wrote:I am not a member of any cult
Dont believe any of that, you surely sound and smell like a vermin worshiper dwelling in a rat temple
skynightblaze wrote:Aisha was left alone without a life partner after 18 years
She moved in with the Prophet at 19
skynightblaze wrote:Muhamamad does not think the same way that he can sleep with a wife of a person who was so close to him
It wasnt the son/father relationship you're trying to paint. Islam does it utmost to guarantee the well being of the weak people of society, including the orphans whom one can adopt, while at the same time making it clear they need to preserve their real identify and not be confused with one's own children. This is again to safeguard their rights and inherited wealth that are in the adoptive father's responsibility until it is released when the child is fully grown and mature.
skynightblaze wrote:but yet when reverse is the case the person has to think twice about he being a prophet
Nobody has to, it comes naturally to a Believer but of course you cannot relate to that
skynightblaze wrote:You are trying to show as if the concept of marrying divorced women never existed
No, even if it existed there was a social stigma marked on these women and who other than a prophet of God could definetly erase it
skynightblaze wrote:The desire for Zaynab did not immediately creep into Muhammad;s mind and there have been plenty of such cases I personally have seen where 2 people started to have feelings for each other long time after they met.
Was one of these supposed person not only fixing for the other to marry, but in addition was providing marriage counseling to avoid the marriage from falling appart?
skynightblaze wrote:The case involves a father in law who got attracted towards his son’s wife 5 years after his son’s marriage
Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:where does this father in law ask his son to keep his wife at all costs, did this father in law know that woman from long ago before her marriage?
skynightblaze wrote:The very fact that he behaved normal for 5 long years before getting the hots for son’s wife
How could there exist any lust when the Prophet is trying to prevent the marriage from falling appart, and when the marriage occured right after the divorce meaning there is no way he could have lusted for her while trying to make her marriage work. Are you now claiming that the Prophet' lusts began right after the divorce, and if you do, where is the problem with that
skynightblaze wrote:The sudden attraction
When did that suddenly happen: before the marriage, during or after? A very short time passed between the marriage and divorce of Zaynab and Zayd (about a year), what could have happenned during this short interval of time that did not happen during all the years the Prophet knew Zaynab, saw her and interracted with her in his aunt's house for him to suddenly desire her now. Ridiculous vermin worshiper
skynightblaze wrote:Secondly who told you that he did EVERYTHING TO MAINTAIN THEIR UNION?
Because the Prophet is depicted as having to tell his adopted son to maintain his union in God-consciousness, meaning with added emphasis. Why would he be saying this if he desired the contrary
skynightblaze wrote:All the quran says is that Muhammad told Zayd to keep his wife and immediately it says that Muhammad feared the society
No, the mention of the Prophet's fear is in connection to what he concealed in his heart and which Allah was about to bring to light
skynightblaze wrote:Quran itself says that
How do you conclude from the words of the Quran that what the Prophet feared was the people's reaction for having ordered the end of the marriage
skynightblaze wrote:It says you concealed in your heart what Allah WOULD bring to light
Right, not what Allah was about to "reveal" since the command to marry her was already revealed but he concealed it, fearing the people's reaction, until it was brought to light through the marriage
skynightblaze wrote:Well my claim was that Allah was going to bring out the idea of Muhammad marrying zaynab which already had
So i am right in my analysis of your weak reasoning skills when you claim what the prophet concealed in his heart was his lust, this means that by Allah bringing to light what the prophet concealed, what was actually done was the public humiliation of the prophet. Something of course easily negated by the verse when it states the consequence of what Allah "would bring to light" ie the marriage command, would stop the believers from having any "difficulty" ie repercussions or pressures in their society.
skynightblaze wrote:When Zaid had divorced Zaynab Allah gave Muhammad Zaynab as a wife.
Of course, after they divorced, we GAVE you...past tense. The prophet received the command to marry her after the divorce and concealed it in his heart for fear of the people's reaction
skynightblaze wrote:Any sane person who reads it will know that Quran of today is one of the version that existed after Muhammad’s death
Further empty speculations and assumptions of a vermin worshiper
skynightblaze wrote:So how come we don’t see any account of Zayd being shy when he dealed with other wives of prophet?
How does that negate what the hadith you brought says, which is that he had a perception of greateness when looking at her due to what he was about to announce
skynightblaze wrote:which means that Allah was the one who instructed Muhammad to marry Zaynab after Zayd divorced her
Of course

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by skynightblaze »

I am going to answer only a few points because I do not see any point in repeating the same things.

Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:Bring the name of another daughter of the aristocracy whom the prophet knew enough, as well as her family, in order to persuade them of a union with a poor ex-slave.
First of all it cannot happen that there was not a single girl in Medina of a noble tribe other than Zaynab. Secondly there is also no need for Muhammad to know every single woman of noble tribe in Medina. Allah could have told him. Looks like Allah had abundant time to waste to tell Muhammad who he should marry and therefore it should not have been difficult for Allah to spend some time so that life of Zayd was not screwed.
Eagle wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:Julaybib was not considered to be of noble origin
And who said his wife was, or that the reason why the woman's family were reluctant to marry her to him was because of his unknown lineage. In the link you first brought with Kathir's tafsir it said Julaybib was seen as someone who lacked seriousness in his general conduct, which is why the woman's family were skeptical.
In your new link, it speaks of his unknown descendancy and poor physical form. So how does that match the example of a an ex-SLAVE.
This person was never considered in line with standards of the noble class and yet Muhamamad asked a woman from ansars to marry him. So this example is similar but not exactly same because this person was not a slave however the concept of a person of inferior status marrying a person of higher status was already shown via this example.

Mate you should really look at things objectively and I am sure you will definitely see light. As Iffo said you cannot see the obvious things that any person can see because you are highly blinded by the love of Muhammad.I admit and do not deny that there is at least something that you can be proud of Muhammad as I have identified some qualities in him. Believe me mate, If your prophet was alive today he would definitely make a low budget porn star considering his resume which consists of having sex with 9 wives in a night, having sexual strength of 30 men and having sex with so many concubines. Cheers to you mate! You can boast it to everyone out here and we infidels would have no counter argument!.
:lol:

Just to remind a paedophile worshiper like you, I am an atheist and I do not fancy worshiping anyone which includes animals.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

Eagle
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:37 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by Eagle »

skynightblaze wrote:First of all it cannot happen that there was not a single girl in Medina of a noble tribe other than Zaynab.
Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:Bring the name of another daughter of the aristocracy whom the prophet knew enough, as well as her family, in order to persuade them of a union with a poor ex-slave.
She was the prophet's cousin whom he knew and interracted with 100s of time in his aunt's house back in Mecca. It is on the basis of such familial and intimate relation with her and her family that she was the perfect candidate to overturn that social class system
skynightblaze wrote:This person was never considered in line with standards of the noble class and yet Muhamamad asked a woman from ansars to marry him.
Once more for you:
Eagle wrote:And who said his wife was, or that the reason why the woman's family were reluctant to marry her to him was because of his unknown lineage. In the link you first brought with Kathir's tafsir it said Julaybib was seen as someone who lacked seriousness in his general conduct, which is why the woman's family were skeptical.

darth
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 2:16 pm

Re: Hadith Timelines

Post by darth »

One thing I want to point out - This idea that zaynab did not want to marry zayd because he was a slave is simply a muslim speculation. A woman has every right to choose who she wants to marry and whatever the reason, she did not want to marry zayd. Zaid, at that time was not considered a slave, but as the adopted son of muhammad. Adopted sons in the pre-islamic tribes were treated like sons and were eligible for inheritance same as any blood children. Zaid was then known as zaid bin muhammad which makes clear who he was considered to be. So this idea that zainab refused him because he was a slave is bunkum. She is more likely to have refused him because she wanted someone richer and more powerful.
Also, note that zaid appears to have been already happily married and was equally reluctant to marry zainab. For all you know zainab was reluctant to marry zaid because of this. So consider the whole thing again -

allah and mo force marriage between two people who did not want to marry each other (one of them was already happily married)
mo one days suddenly lusts for zainab but out of fear of the people hides it
zaid divorces zainab
mo marries zainab

To top it all a quranic verse comes which claims that this deplorable action of mo was permitted in order that in future fathers could marry their adopted daughters in laws (like there was a queue of father eager to marry their daughters in law waiting for allah's permission). What is more preposterous than this verse is the idiotic muslims who fall for it.

The quranic verse seems to indicate it happened in the past which would mean the verse came later (after the marriage). Traditional beliefs hold that mo married zainab after the quranic verse.

Which one is the truth? Perhaps we will never know (especially as we do not acknowledge the quran as any more or any less authentic than the hadiths.). But the hadiths in this case are better because they at least show that mo actions followed the quran rather than the quranic verse following mo's actions as the quran seems to say.

When the quranic verse came is a moot point -

Either way the verse is an eye opener -

If the quranic verse came before the marriage it means allah rushed to aid his prophets sexual exploits
If the quranic verse came after the marriage it means allah rushed to give legitimacy to his prophet sexual exploits

The verse covered up something else - the fact that allah's arranged marriage between zainab and zaid had failed. If people in mo's time had not been diverted by the scandal of mo's lustful scandalous behavior, they would have realized by this that allah was a fraud and mo's sidekick.

Post Reply