Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Shari'a, errancies, miracles and science
Eagle
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:37 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by Eagle »

Josephus says nothing of Petra, he describes an area far vaster than the northern nabatean kingdom, whose inhabitants originally came from the south of the peninsula anyway meaning these Abrahamic descendants originated from Hijaz as always held by the Arab tradition.

Theres a difference between rewriting a statement and reading it properly. For example when it says there is a temple revered by all the Arabs, and that, not only none ever qualified in the history of the Arabian peninsula than the one in Mecca, but also none ever came close to being majoritarily or even vastly revered, as would be the case with a random mosque or cathedral (revered by all members of their religions and the pre-islamic Arabs did not all have the same religion), then the proper conclusion is that it is speaking of the one in Mecca. As to geographical description, besides the fact it does not conflict with what Jeddah's coast is, it was shown how the statement from Diodorus is an amalgam from different sources who never been anywhere close to the coast nearby Mecca.

The hadith about the prophet wanting to make structural changes to the Kaaba, besides saying nothing of Ibrahim or Ismail, here is what proves he did exactly as he said he would:
First the short and misused version:
I would have dismantled the Kaaba and would have made two doors in it; one for entrance and the other for exit
And here parts of the longer version
heard 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) say that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) had observed: If the people had Rot recently (abandoned) unbelief, find I had means enough to reconstruct it, which I had not, I would have definitely excompassed in it five cubits of area from Hijr. And I would also have constructed a door for the people to enter, and a door for their exit. I today have (the means to spend) and I entertain no fearfrom the side of people (that they would protest against this change). So he added five cubits of area from the side of Hatim to it that there appeared (the old) foundation (upon which Hadrat Ibrahim had built the Ka'ba). and the people saw that and it was upon this foundation that the wall was raised. The length of the Ka'ba was eighteen cubits. when addition was made to it (which was in its breadth), then naturally the length appears to be) small (as compared with its breadth). Then addition of ten cubits (of area) was made in its length (also). Two doors were also constructed, one of which (was meant) for entrance and the other one for exit
As to pre-islamic sources, firstly the onus is on the revisionists to prove that what an entire people believes concerning their ancestral lineage is false and that they held a different belief before. Islam didnt show up and change a people's lineage so it cannot be accused of revisionism. Second, the revisionists need to show the prophet was unique in this claim, as well as explain why would anyone claim descendancy from Ibrahim in a vacuum, why wouldn't anyone raise an eyebrow at the proposition.
The Adnanites of whom the prophet Muhammad was a descendant, were conscious of Ibrahim having constructed the Kaaba. Hadith books, which are based upon oral tradition and oral tradition in any culture, precedes the writing of that tradition, abounds with evidence such as the pre-Islamic poems of Jiran al-'Awd or Umayyah ibn Abi as-Salt speaking of the trial of the sacrifice which Ibrahim and Ismail went through. All history is a 'written' attestation to an ORAL tradition, meaning written word comes AFTER THE FACT. Just because pre-Islamic history became written down after a certain time period does not predicate it never existed. History did not fail to exist, because it was not written down.

As to Qusay, as attested by every sources, he was entrusted for the Kaaba's guardianship after the death of his father in law. He did not assume the position forcefully. His house was not the largest nor a palace, it is where the notables gathered for important decisions.

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11617
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by manfred »

As to Qusay, as attested by every sources, he was entrusted for the Kaaba's guardianship after the death of his father in law. He did not assume the position forcefully. His house was not the largest nor a palace, it is where the notables gathered for important decisions.
False, as I QUOTED THE SOURCES.

As to the rest, that has been refuted a dozen times in this thread previously. Repeating junk does not make it any better.

And Muslim history is "revisionist", i.e. generally false. It is rich calling serious historians "revisionist", coming from a Muslim, the people who falsify history wholesale, so much so that if has become a joke.

As to the hadith, also explained already, twice.

and as usual your post lack references, not a testimony to good academic effort or indeed, honesty.

It seem you have nothing else to say here.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

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

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by Eagle »

It isnt the historians that are revisionists, but those recent polemicits whose conspiracies do not stand the test of facts, reason and objectivity.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qusai_ibn_Kilab" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
When Qusai came of age, Hulail ibn Hubshiyyah the chief of Banu Khuza'a tribe was the trustee and guardian of the Ka'bah. Soon Qusai asked for and married Hulail's daughter Hubbah. When his father-in-law died after a battle which ended in arbitration, he committed the keys of the Kaaba to Hubbah. Hulail preferred Qusai as his successor from his own sons and according to Hulail's will, Qusai got the trusteeship of the Kaaba after him.

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11617
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by manfred »

This is the revisionist Muslim version, ignoring Al Tabari and Ibn Ishaq, as it is damaging to Islam, leaving out the Khuza, the owners of the Kaaba before Qusayy ...
Ishaq:49
“Qusayy thought he had a better right to the Ka’aba and to rule over Mecca than the Khuza’a since the Quraysh were the most noble and pure descendants of Ishmael.”

Tabari VI:20
“He called upon his fellow tribesmen, the Quraysh, to expel the Khuza’a and seize Mecca for themselves. They accepted his proposal and swore an oath of allegiance to him.”

“The Arabs, recognizing their religious duty, accompanied Qusayy. Marching to the Ka’aba they said, ‘We have better right to this than you.’ At that they opposed one another and began to fight. A fierce battle broke out, as a result of which...Qusayy wrested from them the privileges which had been in their hands, thus denying them.”

What is also interesting about the Ishmael story is that Qursay, and also later Mohammed, suggested that ancestry beyond ADNAN was not to be "sought". This is an implicit admission that there is no actual trace back to Ishmael at all, not for Qusayy, not for Mohammed, not for the Quraish, in fact not for any Arab. It is all fantasy and politics.

The full sequence is this; using Tabari...

Al-Azraqī mentions that Ḥalil liked Quṣay, and gave him his daughter’s hand during his lifetime. Quṣay became the father of ‘Abd al-Dār, ‘Abd Manāf and ‘Abd al-‘Uzzā among others. Note he named his children after the idols, showing what his intention was. Now when Ḥalīl became old he expected to be made the custodian of the Kaaba .But Ḥalīl passed control of the Kaaba to Abū Ghabshān Salīm bin ‘Amr al-Khuzā’ī. Elsewhere it says, he handed comtrol to his daughter, but in effect Abū Ghabshān of the Khuza tribe ended up in control. One day this new owner and Quṣay were drinking together, and Qursayy made him drunk, and promptly bought the control of the Kaaba from him for a skinfull of wine and a a lute (or possibly a young camel).

As this crocked deal was not honoured and declared void, Qusayy was really angry, and resorted to violence to resolve the issue. Qusay thought he had more right to govern Mecca than Khuzā’ah, since the tribe of Quraysh were the cream of the sons of Ismā’īl son of Ibrāhīm and he was their "pure" descendant. :lotpot: The sons of Kinānah and Quraysh joined together to help him to expel Khuzā’ah and Banū Bakr from Mecca. He sent a message to is stepbrother, Razāḥ bin Rabī’ah, asking him to assist, and he did indeed come. Razāḥ rushed to Mecca with his tribe from Quḑā’ah, to help his brother in the war against Khuzā’ah.

The Khuza, defeated, left, and were very bitter. Much later Mohammed used this to persuade them to join him to fight the Quraish.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11617
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by manfred »

Now, let's compare Mohammed with his great-great-great-grandfather Qusayy...

Qusayy was brought up in care away from home. Mohammed was brought up in care, away from home, as an orphan.

Qusayy had nothing but he married the richest woman in town. Mohammed also had nothing and married the richest woman in town, in effect being a toy boy for many years.

Qursayy had ambitions, specifically, he wanted control over the Kaaba, one of the reasons for the marriage. Mohammed had similar ambitions. Apart from the control over the Kaaba, he wanted all the riches of Rome and Persia, as he said himself.

Qusayy claimed to have a “better claim” to the Kaaba, because of his “pure blood” (much like Lord Voldemort…) Mohammed claimed to have a “better claim” to the Kaaba, also because of this “pure blood” but as others would make that claim also, he mostly insisted he was a “prophet”, and that is why his claim to the Kaaba is greater than his uncle’s.

Qusayy used lies and deception to promote his claim, a scammer of the first order. He tried lies about being special as a descendant of Ishmael, and even getting people drunk to get them to agree to dodgy deals. Mohammed invented a new religion to aid his claim, and also of course made the “pure blood “assertion.

Qusayy’s deceptions failed, and in the end he resorted to violence. Mohammed’s deceptions failed and he also resorted to violence.

When Qusayy had possession of the Kaaba, he forced the previous owners out of town. When Mohammed had possession of the Kaaba he forced all connected with the previous regime to leave.

While Qusayy is an obvious, self-serving despot, somehow Mohammed, who did pretty much exactly the same thing, became a “blessing for mankind”… In fact, when it comes to bloodshed and sexual excesses, Mohamed outdid Qusayy by miles...

Strange, isn’t it, eagle?
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

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

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by Eagle »

Nothing strange of one considers, firstly that prior to prophethood Muhammad was actually a succesful businessman, and Khadija employed him to manage her goods. Those that owned goods often employed businessmen to represent them on these caravans. It was through this employment that Khadija became aware of his outstanding qualities, especially his turstworthiness. He even used to sherd sheep in his teens.

Had the prophet been interested in wealth and wordly benefits he had every occasion to compromise his stance with Quraysh who offered him exactly that. Also, the revisionists should be able to show the opulence and luxury he supposedly experienced in his household, with the victory of Islam all over the Peninsula. But they never will and instead will find how humble the lifestyle inside his household was even at a time where the comunity had grown prosperous.

And also, as already shown, neither did the prophet Muhammad claim more legitimacy over the Kaaba through his lineage to Ismail, neither did he keep the keys of the temple, which he gave back to the previous owner after he has cleansed the Kaaba ftom the idols and thereby dealt the biggest blow to polytheism than any prophet had done before.

Finally the prophet did not expel anybody after the conquest of Mecca but rather graciously declared the end to all previous hostilities and even declared Abu Sufyan governor. He gave a general amnesty to all Quraysh and all the Meccans. To realize the degree of generosity from the Prophet, one must recall the life threatening hardships which these people imposed on him and now that they were completely subdued by him, instead of thinking of vengeance, which was certainly his due, he forgave them. This way he was displaying his function of "rasul", the embodiement of God's mercy to mankind.

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

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by Eagle »

manfred wrote:This is the revisionist Muslim version, ignoring Al Tabari and Ibn Ishaq, as it is damaging to Islam, leaving out the Khuza, the owners of the Kaaba before Qusayy ...
Wikipedia is a revisionist source?

Khuza'a are also Ishmaelites, through Qahtan, hence Qusay's argument of him being a purer Ishmaelite than them, not that they are not Ishmaelites. Qusay says nothing of not counting between Adnan and Ismail and the reason why the prophet advised not to do so was already explained a few posts back to those who jump for joy at anything that even remotely seems to paint Islam in a bad light
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=18423&start=20#p242406" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Besides the other problems already pointed and which the revisionists cannot answer, they need to explain why would anyone prior to Islam claim better right to the Kaaba due to being more directly related to Ibrahim, if the Arabs did not already believe in their Ishmaelite lineage.

Now as to the manner in which he gained control of the temple there are different versions but all show that it did not come directly from the fighting. Some say he first got it from his father in law, as already shown, but upon finding out, the remaining Khuza'a clansmen protested and war ensued between them and Quraysh. Others say Qusay bought the guardianship rights after which Khuza'a declared war on him. However in all cases the sources agree that it isnt the war that gave control of Kaaba to Qusay. Rather arbitration ensued, Khuza'a handed the keys and remained allied with Quraysh until the days of the prophet Muhammad where they enthusiastically joined his side and the prophet, who was Quraysh himself and even more directly linked to Qusay, did not use this old event to gain their allegiance.

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11617
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by manfred »

Wikipedia is a revisionist source?
Surely you know that wili can be written by anyone? There is a lot of useful stuff there, but you need to also exercise care.

You selected a snippet from an article knowing full well that is not the whole story.

Mohammed did not expel anyone?
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
9:5

"Compassion" or "mercy in Islam is exclusively reserved for Muslims. Do you think he would hand the keys to the Kaaba to a non-Muslim? And who was the undisputed ruler in Mecca, and the Lord over the Kaaba?

As to his wealth, you only need to realise that each of his wives had her own household, complete with servants. And that he owned HORSES, the equivalent of Porsche cars in hos days. He would make Trump look poor....

With that in mind, you say....
To realize the degree of generosity from the Prophet, one must recall the life threatening hardships which these people imposed on him and now that they were completely subdued by him, instead of thinking of vengeance, which was certainly his due, he forgave them. This way he was displaying his function of "rasul", the embodiement of God's mercy to mankind.
:lol:

A man who invades his home town, kills all critics, establishes himself as a ruler with violence, steals, murders and rapes... a "mercy to mankind"....

I hope God has a sense of humour, as otherwise he could be deeply offended to be associated with such a low life.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

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

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by Eagle »

Of course wiki can be written by anyone. But is it revisionist? And nothing was said that isnt part of the larger picture. Fighting did not result in Qusay gaining control of the Kaaba.

The prophet Muhammad gave back the Kaaba keys to Uthman Bin Talha, a non Muslim. He was astonished, the story is known. No violence, bloodbath, killing of "all the critics", stealing nor raping. And even if he was guilty of every single one of those accusations, even comitting them with 10 times more severity than attributed to him by the revisionists, then that still doesnt diminish his status as a Semitic prophet. Read the HB.

The quote from sura tawba is about the treaty violators among the pagans, who are given respite until the end of their term after which retaliation is allowed. How is that in anyway a forceful and arbitrary expulsion.

About his wealth, what the revisionists need to show isnt a vague allusion to horses and servants but a clear example of the prophet and his household living above the average standards of their time, even during the most prosperous times of the community. Instead, these polemicists will find things such as
33:28-29 where the wives are told that if their desire for this world and its adornment is preferable in their eyes than a life of sacrifices dedicated to their spiritual duties "say to your wives: If you desire this world´s life and its adornment, then come, I will give you a provision and allow you to depart a goodly departing". After divorce the woman would have stood excluded from the category of "mothers of believers", and she would not be forbidden to any other Muslim; for she would have chosen divorce from the prophet only for the sake of the world and its adornments of which she had been given the choice. The prophet's wives had thus the option of requesting and getting a just and kind divorce for even such petty reasons like their desire to pursue this wordly life which God's prophet could not afford giving them in his household.

By the time this verse was revealed, and as shown in the direct context, the Muslims had conquered the rich agricultural region of Khaybar, and the community had grown more prosperous. But while life was becoming easier for most of its members, this ease was not reflected in the household of the Prophet who, as before, allowed himself and his family only the absolute minimum necessary for the most simple living. His prestigious status as a prophet and ruler never came in the way of that humble principle of living. Not only was he not ever one to ask for any kind of reward from his addressees but every occasion where he could make use of his status and deep knowledge for material benefit, he would do it for the sake of the needy 58:12"when you consult the Messenger, then offer something in charity before your consultation; that is better for you and purer".

The prophet's wives on the other hand naturally were longing for a share in the comparative luxuries which other Muslim women could now enjoy. His wives often stated that they had little on their shelves besides bread flour and dates. But it is reported that all of them rejected a possible seperation with the prophet and resumed their spiritual duties as "mothers of the believers", and were promised a great reward in the Hereafter for having denied themselves the ordinary comforts of life by remaining in the Prophet's house 33:31.

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11617
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by manfred »

Of course wiki can be written by anyone. But is it revisionist? And nothing was said that isnt part of the larger picture. Fighting did not result in Qusay gaining control of the Kaaba.
That is not what Tabari said.
The prophet Muhammad gave back the Kaaba keys to Uthman Bin Talha, a non Muslim. He was astonished, the story is known. No violence, bloodbath, killing of "all the critics", stealing nor raping. And even if he was guilty of every single one of those accusations, even comitting them with 10 times more severity than attributed to him by the revisionists, then that still doesnt diminish his status as a Semitic prophet. Read the HB.
Well as you like Wiki...
Waqidi records that Uthman converted to Islam in June 629 at the same time as Khalid ibn al-Walid and lived in Medina until the Muslim army set out for the conquest.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uthman_ibn_Talha" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The conquest of Mecca was in December of that same year. So when he was handed the keys, he had been a Muslim for 6 months.

The murders, rapes and the caravan raids are well sourced and has been shown on this forum ad nauseam. It is true though that the Mecca raid was relatively bloodshed free, mostly due to the restraint of the Quraish.

The wealth of Mohammed is also well documented. Hence the rather ugly quarrel after his death.

And there is nothing at all about Mohammed in the HB.

So would God choose an utter scoundrel like Mohammed for a spokesperson?
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11617
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by manfred »

And nothing was said that isnt part of the larger picture.
Yes, eagle. True.

However what has been LEFT OUT, that is the problem.

"Your honour", says the accused in court, "I went to the supermarket and then I went home.", not mentioning the murder committed in the supermarket car park....
Josephus says nothing of Petra, he describes an area far vaster than the northern nabatean kingdom, whose inhabitants originally came from the south of the peninsula anyway meaning these Abrahamic descendants originated from Hijaz as always held by the Arab tradition.
He describes what in his days would be "Arabia", and he LEAVES OUT most of the Arabic peninsula,certainly the hijaz. Why? Because that was at his time not "Arabia" proper.

And he certainly does not mention the "tradition" you describe. This is a much later, Muslim fable.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

User avatar
Takeiteasynow
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 8:24 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by Takeiteasynow »

Also there is this:
Qusai ruled as a King. He reconstructed the Kaaba from a state of decay, and made the Arab people build their houses around it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qusai_ibn_Kilab" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This wiki article mentions the "Quraysh of the Hollow" or Quraysh al-Biṭāḥ (قُـرَيْـش الْـبِـطَـاح). That sounds like a fellowship, movement of tribal alliance that venerates whatever is at the 'hollow'. This idea becomes significant as new discoveries imply the veneration of the 'Hollow' in Nabataean territories. And yet there is just a single place that is like a venerated hollow place and matches the description of 'bi-batni makkata' - the hollow (batni) basin (makkata): the hollow basin in front of the Ad Deir and center of the pre-Islamic pilgrimage to Petra.

Before the 13th century individuals Islamic tradition doesn't tell us that the Quraysh is a tribe which makes sense if it is some kind of movement. Most likely the 'fellowship of the hollow', gathering at the Ad Deir in Petra. The question: what did they worship?
Abraham= H'ammu'rab(b)i, Historical Muhammad=Benjamin of Tiberias. Theological: Mahmud from Najran Islam: Syncretic Israelite Yahwishm Deity: nameless, epithets Dsr, El Qutbay, ʼAlâhâ, Allāh. Ka'ba: Kutha => Samaria => Petra=> Makkah. Hijrah 622: Petra => Kerak

User avatar
Garudaman
Posts: 1266
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:39 am

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by Garudaman »

circumcised parts touch each other = circumcised penis touch circumcised clitoris
Reliance of the Traveller BOOK E: PURIFICATION page 59 e4.3

Circumcision is obligatory (O: for both men and women. For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. bazr) of the clitoris (n: not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert). (A: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)
Bukhari 5891; Muslim 527

Abu Hurayrah said: I heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “The fitrah is five things – or five things are part of the fitrah – circumcision, shaving the pubes, trimming the moustache, cutting the nails and plucking the armpit hairs.”

sum
Posts: 6531
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by sum »

Hello Garudaman

Do you support female circumcision?

sum


panis
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:44 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by panis »

https://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/USC- ... dith-5251/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
it is not a fake hadith

User avatar
Garudaman
Posts: 1266
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:39 am

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by Garudaman »

panis wrote:https://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/USC- ... dith-5251/
it is not a fake hadith
https://www.asiffhussein.com/2015/04/02 ... den-truth/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
When you circumcise, cut plainly (in a shallow manner) and do not cut deeply, for it is beauty for the face and desirable for the husband” (idha khafadti fa ashimmi wa la tanhaki fa innahu ashraq li-l wajh wa ahza ind al-zawj) (Sunan Abu Dāwud, Sunan Al Kubra of Baihaqi, Al Awsat of Tabarāni and Tārikh Baghdād of Al-Baghdādi)

This hadith clearly indicates the procedure to be followed in the circumcision of girls. The words “Cut plainly and do not cut deeply” (ashimmi wa-la-tanhaki) is to be understood in the sense of removing the skin covering the clitoris, and not the clitoris. The word ashimmi used here comes from the root word m-sh-m which literally means ‘to sniff’, thereby implying a delicate sniff of steel (over the clitoris to remove its skin). La tanhaki means ‘do not cut deeply’, ‘do not uproot’ which is a clear prohibition to do harm to the clitoris. Thus it is very clear that the Prophet commanded the removal only of the clitoral prepuce and prohibited harming the clitoris in any way.

The expression “It is beauty (more properly brightness or radiance) for the face” (ashraq li-l-wajh) is further proof of this as it is to be understood to mean a face suffused with pleasure, in other words, the joyous countenance of a woman, arising out of her being sexually satisfied by her husband. Another version of the hadith puts it more directly, for instead of ashraq li’l wajh (radiance for the face) it gives ahwa li’l mar’a (more pleasure to the woman) When the Prophet said that it was more desirable for the husband, what he obviously meant was that he would be pleased that his wife too had attained orgasm at about the same time as him – perhaps even had multiple orgasms – and that he would not need to exert himself further to ensure she is fully satisfied. The idea here is that it is only with the removal of the clitoral prepuce that real sexual satisfaction could be realized.

It is contended that the procedure enhances sexual feeling in women during the sex act since a circumcised clitoris is much more likely to be stimulated as a result of direct oral, penile or tactile contact than the uncircumcised organ whose prepuce serves as an obstacle to direct stimulation. This necessarily leads to a satisfactory sex life among women, thus ensuring their chastity.

panis
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:44 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by panis »

So you recognize that this hadeeth is not a fake ! 99.99% of Muslims say that female circumcision is not Islamic.
Garudaman wrote:It is contended that the procedure improves sexual sensation in women during the act
Show us a study that proves it?
I do not read links and videos, show me your arguments?

User avatar
Garudaman
Posts: 1266
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:39 am

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by Garudaman »

panis wrote:So you recognize that this hadeeth is not a fake ! 99.99% of Muslims say that female circumcision is not Islamic.
Garudaman wrote:It is contended that the procedure improves sexual sensation in women during the act
Show us a study that proves it?
I do not read links and videos, show me your arguments?
my argument is your hadith said : female circumcision = clitoral hood removal

& why you need a study that show : more exposure of sensitive organ = more stimulation/sensation? :lotpot:

sum
Posts: 6531
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: Any reference of Female Circumcision or Khatna in Quran?

Post by sum »

Hello Garudaman

Isn`t the whole point of FGM to prevent women from enjoying sex as much so that they do not stray into illegal sex? The man will be aroused just the same but the women less so. If this is not the case then was Muhammad wrong to condone it?

sum

Post Reply