Muhammad Maria Affair in Quran

[KhaliL]

______________________________

Muhammad Maria Affair in Quran

Khalil Fariel


Muhammad had a concubine named Maria. His only son Ibrahim was born in her though the child died in infancy.

This is one of the secrets about Muhammad that most Muslims do not want to tell us. But an established fact does not require further substantiations hence I am not going to strive for proving Maria the Copt was Muhammad’s concubine. My attempt is to look into a notorious incident in Muhammad’s life which is connected to Maria our key figure.

Quran chapter (66) Surah Tahrim: for those going through the first part of this Surah, there is enough to wonder what they ARE exactly for in a book claimed to be guidance to the entire humanity to the end of times. We see God compelling Muhammad to expiate his oaths in order to crush the rebellion of his wives. What does this have to do in our affairs in this living period?

I am not hoping for an answer to this from Muslims but there is a little secret again for Muslims to bury or misinterpret to a great extent. The verses 1 to 5 tell us the story of Muhammad’s wives’ rebellion and Allah entering into the sight in a rather reproachful mode. After that god goes on to explain the reason of the rebellion of Muhammad’s wives:

And when the prophet secretly communicated a piece of information to one of his wives-- but when she informed (others) of it, and Allah made him to know it, he made known part of it and avoided part; so when he informed her of it, she said: Who informed you of this? He said: The Knowing, the one Aware, informed me. [Quran Chapter 66:5]

I had to isolate the above because this contains the ingredient I want to dissect. Verse says of a secret prophet informed to one of his wives but she later discloses the secret to others. Muhammad's God informs him of this leakage in right time for his wives to wonder “how come he has been alerted of it”. It is the essence.

Now, there is obviously something reeking with the above. What was that Muhammad had to conceal from some of his wives that is known to only one of them? What is all this drama about?

Muslims will not tell us the truth. The fact about this is not been found in two Sahih Hadith collections namely Bukhari and Muslim. What we get to know is rather a laughable account in something called Maghafir (a drink) or honey is mixed up.

I would quote here from the online English translation of Ibn Kathir the most prominent of all Quran interpreters:

Ubayd bin `Umayr said that he heard `A'ishah claiming that Allah's Messenger used to stay for a period in the house of Zaynab bint Jahsh and drink honey in her house. (She said) "Hafsah and I decided that when the Prophet entered upon either of us, we would say, `I smell Maghafir on you. Have you eaten Maghafir' When he entered upon one of us, she said that to him. He replied (to her), No, but I drank honey in the house of Zaynab bint Jahsh, and I will never drink it again.)'' Then the following was revealed;
O Prophet! Why do you forbid that which Allah has allowed to you) up to, If you both turn in repentance to Allah, your hearts are indeed so inclined in reference to `A'ishah and Hafsah. And (remember) when the Prophet disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his wives,) which refers to this saying, But I have drunk honey.) Ibrahim bin Musa said that Hisham said that it also meant his saying, I will not drink it anymore, I have taken an oath to that. Therefore, do not inform anybody about it.) [Ibn Kathir on Quran chapter 66 Verses 1-6]

[It is a lengthy account in Ibn Kathir we find but I have shortened it to fit this article. Not distorted anything or it can be confirmed by checking the source http://www.qtafsir.com/]

Now: if you have gone through this explanation carefully, does it make any sense to you?

What makes God; the creator and sustainer of this universe enter with holy verses to settle a dispute over a drink called Maghafir or honey? Source says it was foul-smelling but in reality, the deception of Muslims is what really putrid. This is the only account available in online Ibn Kathir translation but the fact is: this is only an additional account the interpreter offered and the real version is conveniently been hidden from the public by the translator. If anyone checks Ibn Kathir in Arabic, 2 pages of his interpretation have been omitted in online English translation. There is no excuse for this wicked misrepresentation. If we see an online source doing it without any reservation; what else Muslims can NOT confine from the world?

So far we got from Muslims: the story of Muhammad drinking a malodorous drinks from one of his wives and his other wives rebelling against him to force the man to take an oath; he will not be drinking the offending beverage anymore. But God reproaches Prophet for taking such an oath because the drink has not been prohibited. It was about this matter of drinking honey (or Maghafir) that Prophet wanted to keep as secret from his other wives.

Simply saying, this is the most ridiculous misinterpretation of something of a very disgusting incident occurred in Muhammad’s life. Drinking honey from one of his wives’ house and wanting to keep it as a top secret from others..!!. Why in the world the Prophet of god has to fear his wives for drinking honey? What is there in the act for him to hide from his wives?

Obviously, the account has been tampered, and to know of this blatant misrepresentation of facts, all it takes is to go through the original Arabic Tafsirs of all Quran interpreters.

Here, let me bring Ibn Kathir in Arabic. [Note that what follows is only the relevant portion of Ibn Kathir and this is the part which Ibn Kathir’s online English translators skipped]

وقال ابن جرير: حدثنا سعيد بن يحيى، حدثنا أبي، حدثنا محمد بن إسحاق عن الزهري عن عبيد الله بن عبد الله عن ابن عباس قال: قلت لعمر ابن الخطاب: من المرأتان؟ قال: عائشة وحفصة. وكان بدء الحديث في شأن أم إبراهيم مارية القبطية، أصابها النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في بيت حفصة في نوبتها، فوجدت حفصة، فقالت: يا نبي الله لقد جئت إليّ شيئاً ما جئت إلى أحد من أزواجك في يَوْمِي وفي دوري وعلى فراشي، قال: " ألا ترضين أن أحرمها فلا أقربها " ، قالت: بلى فحرمها، وقال لها: " لا تذكري ذلك لأحد " ، فذكرته لعائشة، فأظهره الله عليه، فأنزل الله تعالى: { يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِيُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ مَآ أَحَلَّ ٱللَّهُ لَكَ تَبْتَغِي مَرْضَاتَ أَزْوَٰجِكَ } الآيات كلها. [Ibn Kathir on Quran chapter 66 1-5]


The account above reveals of an incident we heard not (from modern day Muslims). Muhammad has been found by Hafsa (one of his wives) in company with Maria-the Copt. It was Hafsa’s turn and the activities occur in Hafsa’s bed. Hafsa’s remonstration is what I bolded in the quote. It can be read as “Hey Messenger of God, how come you are with someone else in my house in my bed on my turn*?”

(*Muhammad had stipulated days for his wives since he had nine plus to care for)

The perplexed prophet apologizes and takes oath he will never approach the slave-woman again and requests to Hafsa to keep the incident as a secret in between them only. But Hafsa, the resentful is not going to forgive him as she discloses the secret to Aisha. That leads to a rebellion from all wives for God to intrude with holy verses. It is what chapter 63 verse 1: “O Prophet! Why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful”.

This is the instant account given by Ibn Kathir which is not seen in online English version. In fact, Ibn Kathir was not making stuff up but has the backing of almost all Quran interpreters. Quoting all of them will only be a waste of time and effort. But the account given by Ibn Kathir is seen in:

1. Tabari,
2. Al-Razi
3. Zamaqshari
4. Qurtubi
5. Baidawi
6. Al-Shoukani
7. Samarqandi
8. Ibn Juzai
9. Two Jalals (Tafsir Jalalain)

Qurtubi and Al-Shoukani's accounts are more plain and explanatory of the incident. So is Tabari. All in the above Muhammad is being caught by Hafsa while he was love-making or being too intimate with Maria-his-concubine on the day that was belonged to either Hafsa herself or Aisha the Prophet’s child bride.

I will just paste here Al-Shoukani’s Tafsir and give explanation of it because it would be giving somewhat clear picture.

قوله: { يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِىُّ لِمَ تُحَرّمُ مَا أَحَلَّ ٱللَّهُ لَكَ } اختلف في سبب نزول الآية على أقوال: الأوّل قول أكثر المفسرين. قال الواحدي: قال المفسرون: كان النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم في بيت حفصة، فزارت أباها، فلما رجعت أبصرت مارية في بيتها مع النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم، فلم تدخل حتى خرجت مارية ثم دخلت، فلما رأى النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم في وجه حفصة الغيرة والكآبة قال لها: لا تخبري عائشة، ولك عليّ أن لا أقربها أبداً، فأخبرت حفصة عائشة، وكانتا متصافيتين، فغضبت عائشة، ولم تزل بالنبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم حتى حلف أن لا يقرب مارية. فأنزل الله هذه السورة[Al-Shoukani]

[Note: This is not giving the word to word translation but necessarily close to it]:

“The reason for revealing the verses “Oh Prophet why do you forbid that is allowed for you” is disputed. But most Quran interpreters are agreed as stated by Al-Wahidi.: “Prophet was in the house of Hafsa and sent Hafsa for her father (Omar). When Hafsa returned, she found Maria with the prophet so she did not enter the house right away and when she entered, and as Prophet saw the fury in Hafsa’s face, he requested her to not to inform of this to Aisha. He assured Hafsa that he will not access to the slave-girl again. (But Hafsa disclosed it to Aisha who got enraged upon knowing it.) And it is about this oath Allah revealed the verses “Oh prophet why do you forbid yourself which has been made Halal for you”. The entire chapter is revealed in connection to this”

Another interpreter Baidawi’s account differs slightly on whose turn it was. He mentions it as the day (in which Muhammad caught with Maria) was belonging to Aisha and it was the reason for Muhammad appealing Hafsa to not to disclose it to Aisha.

The point here is Muhammad had sex with Maria on a day which belonged to one of his wives. There is no need to know it exactly whose turn it was. But the act of Muhammad is what counts. He has been caught red-handed by one of his wives. Then he tried to compromise with her. That did not work and…

God enters with holy verses to vindicate and pacify his Prophet in the case of a sex scandal..!! Moreover, the same God threatens poor hapless wives of this prophet with divorce..!!

The risk Muslims take to make sense of their holy book which contains all the nonsense is great but pathetic indeed. Never in the history, honey was forbidden in any society to be considered odious and never a man had to drink it in private fearing others. But Muhammad had to!!! And his God had to reveal holy verses to support Muhammad’s honey obsession..!!!

Who are these Muslims trying to fool out with drops of honey?

Bottom-line: Muhammad might have pleaded to Hafsa like: “Oh darling, please, pretty honey on top of it…”

[Fin]

[expozIslam]

Wonderful read Khalil. Thank you.
It gives me one more stick to beat muslims with.

May I also point out the contradiction with honey. If honey was so bad, then why would Allah provide rivers of honey in islamic brothel?

[KhaliL]

Wonderful read Khalil. Thank you.
It gives me one more stick to beat muslims with.

May I also point out the contradiction with honey. If honey was so bad, then why would Allah provide rivers of honey in islamic brothel?

Thank you expozIslam;

The problem is Muslims are not going to approve the drinks in their paradise is similar to what we have on earth. For example, wine is served in Allah's brothel but it is not intoxicating ... If honey is offered, that can not be the same honey we have on earth.

No need to say the Houris god offer have no comparison, so is pearly boys. Just have a taste of one of the permanent virgins a believer is going to get:

"The Prophet added, "A forenoon journey or an after noon journey in Allah's Cause is better than the whole world and whatever is in it; and a place equal to an arrow bow of anyone of you, or a place equal to a foot in Paradise is better than the whole world and whatever is in it; and if one of the women of Paradise looked at the earth, she would fill the whole space between them (the earth and the heaven) with light, and would fill whatever is in between them, with perfume, and the veil of her face is better than the whole world and whatever is in it." [Sahih Bukhari: Book: 76 Hadith:572]

So by no means heaven is equal to earth, it can not be compared to anything on earth.

Belinda Carlyle is dead wrong to sing "Heaven is a place on earth"


Hope you liked it..

Regards

KF

[skynightblaze]

The problem is Muslims are not going to approve the drinks in their paradise is similar to what we have on earth. For example, wine is served in Allah's brothel but it is not intoxicating ... If honey is offered, that can not be the same honey we have on earth.

16,69.
Then to eat of all the produce (of the earth), and find with skill the spacious paths of its Lord: there issues from within their bodies a drink of varying colours,wherein is healing for men: verily in this is a Sign for those who give thought.

Allah is contradicting himself in that case. If honey was prohibited then it seems Allah himself is not sure about his own signs . I had debated a muslim 2 years back. His arguments were somehow different. I think the main was denying that Maria was his concubine. HE quoted scholars to prove that she was a wife . I guess you gave me the links to Sam shamouns debate with muslims on this issue. There are scholars in the favour of the argument that she was a concubine and not a wife.

[KhaliL]

Spoiler! :

The problem is Muslims are not going to approve the drinks in their paradise is similar to what we have on earth. For example, wine is served in Allah's brothel but it is not intoxicating ... If honey is offered, that can not be the same honey we have on earth.

16,69.
Then to eat of all the produce (of the earth), and find with skill the spacious paths of its Lord: there issues from within their bodies a drink of varying colours,wherein is healing for men: verily in this is a Sign for those who give thought.

Allah is contradicting himself in that case. If honey was prohibited then it seems Allah himself is not sure about his own signs . I had debated a muslim 2 years back. His arguments were somehow different. I think the main was denying that Maria was his concubine. HE quoted scholars to prove that she was a wife . I guess you gave me the links to Sam shamouns debate with muslims on this issue. There are scholars in the favour of the argument that she was a concubine and not a wife.

Maria was undeniably a concubine of Muhammad because Sahih sources say Muhammad married only one virgin in his life and that was Aisha. Maria being a gift of then Egyptian king was a virgin and if Muhammad had married her, Sahih Bukhari and Muslim would have mentioned it. See it in Bukhari Aisha being the only virgin Muhammad married:

Narrated Ibn Abu Mulaika: Ibn 'Abbas asked permission to visit aisha before her death, and at that time she was in a state of agony. She then said. "I am afraid that he will praise me too much." And then it was said to her, "He is the cousin of Allah's Apostle and one of the prominent Muslims." Then she said, "Allow him to enter." (When he entered) he said, "How are you?" She replied, "I am Alright if I fear (Allah)." Ibn Abbas said, "Allah willing, you are Alright as you are the wife of Allah's Apostle and he did not marry any virgin except you and proof of your innocence was revealed from the Heaven." Later on Ibn Az-Zubair entered after him and 'aisha said to him, "Ibn 'Abbas came to me and praised me greatly, but I wish that I was a thing forgotten and out of sight." [Sahih Bukhari. Book 60, Hadith 277]

Narrated 'aisha : I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Suppose you landed in a valley where there is a tree of which something has been eaten and then you found trees of which nothing has been eaten, of which tree would you let your camel graze?" He said, "(I will let my camel graze) of the one of which nothing has been eaten before." (The sub-narrator added: 'aisha meant that Allah's Apostle had not married a virgin besides herself) [Sahih Bukhari: Book: 62, Hadith:14]

We saw Muhammad had nine wives remaining in his harem at the end of his life, there is not a Maria Al-Qibtiyya mentioned in those nine names. Why?

Apart from Maria, one more name missing is Raihanna al Qarazi who was from the tribe of Banu Quraiza. Sources tell us Muhammad offered her in marriage, but the Jewish woman turned down his appeal and remained in his harem. As what? Concubine...!

Many Muslims claim Muhammad married Raihanna as some sources say it likewise. But I challenge them to bring evidences from authentic sources like Sahih Bukhari and Muslim; Muhammad had a wife named Raihanna. Nowhere in Sahih collections is Raihanna’s name mentioned as Muhammad’s wife. In fact, we lose this brave Jewish girl in history as not more is known about her after her refusing Muhammad’s proposal. According to Ibn Ishaq, she had a repugnance to Islam and remained in her Jewish faith even after Muhammad capturing her and adding as one more addition to his harem. But no authentic sources say Muhammad married her. Besides, such an argument can easily be refuted because Sahih sources of Muslims contradict it. If Raihanna was a wife of Muhammad, why doesn’t her name can be seen any of the authentic hadith collections as Muhammad’s wife?

Maria-the-Copt was a gift from Egyptian ruler to Muhammad along with her sister Shirin whom Muhammad gave to Hassan Bin Tabit. To know of Maria:

Mariya, a Copt maiden according to one statement, daughter of a man named Shamoun, who was sent with her sister Sirin by the Mukawkis in the year 6 or 7 Hijra to Muhammad as a gift of honour. The prophet made her his concubine while he gave Sirin to Hassan bin Tabit. He (Muhammad) was very devoted to her and gave her a house in the upper town of Medina where he is said to have visited her by day and night. To the great joy of the prophet, she bore him a son whom he called Ibrahim, but he died in infancy. [Encyclopaedia of Islam. Vol. 6: 575]

Now from the modern day scholars:

Islam allows a man to have intercourse with his slave woman, whether he has a wife or wives or he is not married.
A slave woman with whom a man has intercourse is known as a sariyyah (concubine) from the word sirr, which means marriage.
This is indicated by the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and this was done by the Prophets. Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) took Haajar as a concubine and she bore him Ismaa’eel (may peace be upon them all).
Our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also did that, as did the Sahaabah, the righteous and the scholars. The scholars are unanimously agreed on that and it is not permissible for anyone to regard it as haraam or to forbid it. Whoever regards that as haraam is a sinner who is going against the consensus of the scholars.
The phrase “and those (slaves) whom your right hand possesses — whom Allaah has given to you” [al-Ahzaab 33:50] means, it is permissible for you take concubines from among those whom you seized as war booty. He took possession of Safiyyah and Juwayriyah and he freed them and married them; he took possession of Rayhaanah bint Sham’oon al-Nadariyyah and Maariyah al-Qibtiyyah, the mother of his son Ibraaheem (peace be upon them both), and they were among his concubines, may Allaah be pleased with them both.
Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 3/500
The scholars are unanimously agreed that it is permissible.
http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/10382

Regards
KF

[AhmedBahgat]

The problem is Muslims are not going to approve the drinks in their paradise is similar to what we have on earth. For example, wine is served in Allah's brothel but it is not intoxicating ... If honey is offered, that can not be the same honey we have on earth.

16,69.
Then to eat of all the produce (of the earth), and find with skill the spacious paths of its Lord: there issues from within their bodies a drink of varying colours,wherein is healing for men: verily in this is a Sign for those who give thought.

Allah is contradicting himself in that case. If honey was prohibited then it seems Allah himself is not sure about his own signs . I had debated a muslim 2 years back. His arguments were somehow different. I think the main was denying that Maria was his concubine. HE quoted scholars to prove that she was a wife . I guess you gave me the links to Sam shamouns debate with muslims on this issue. There are scholars in the favour of the argument that she was a concubine and not a wife.

Ignorant, the alleged story has nothig to do with Honey, it is about a food called maghafir, and indeed it makes you mouth smells bad

dismiss yourself, or keep it itchy

and don't forget to shove Ibn Kathir up the kafirs arse

[AhmedBahgat]

I wonder mister Khalil

why you dodged the first words by Ibn Kathir in his tafsir to the above verse?

Let me show it to you:

اُخْتُلِفَ فِي سَبَب نُزُول صَدْر هَذِهِ السُّورَة


Hahah, you know what the above mean whoich is said by ibn kathir?

it means: the people differed to the reason of revealing those first verses in this sura


Keep it itchy and shifty, mister Khalil

[KhaliL]

Spoiler! :

I wonder mister Khalil

why you dodged the first words by Ibn Kathir in his tafsir to the above verse?

Let me show it to you:

اُخْتُلِفَ فِي سَبَب نُزُول صَدْر هَذِهِ السُّورَة


Hahah, you know what the above mean whoich is said by ibn kathir?

it means: the people differed to the reason of revealing those first verses in this sura


Keep it itchy and shifty, mister Khalil

Hello Ahmed,

I know there is "Ikhtilaf"(dispute) among Quran interpreters on which occassion was the verses been revealed. And I did not claim Ibn Kathir did not have different version. In fact I brought the second version of events first from the online translators and to expose those people's deception brought the instant account from Ibn Kathir. I did not claim there is another version.

Besides, I brought Al-Shoukani too in which it said "scholars have disputed over the "Sabab" = reason". I translated it almost word to word and you can see it in my OP. But the first account all Mufassirs give is the one in "Muhammad is seen with Maria in Hafsa's house in latter's bed". And that can be the only fitting reason for Allah to reveal verses because the apologetic version does not make sense even for those who want to defend it. "Maghafir" is not a prohibited drink for Muhammad to have it privately and to keep it as secret from all of his wives except one.

Regards
KF

[MastaBlaster]

its funny to sit back and watch the enemies of faith banging their hands and trying to find a new angle to try and scratch the noble quran with their dirty nails

so Aaron Spelling aka khalil fariel above (who mixed up his surah numbers) wants to make a BeverlyHills 90210 drama out of a simple set of 5 verses.

I had to isolate the above because this contains the ingredient I want to dissect

of course you have to isolate verses in order to concoct your drama movie. but lets see if the BeverlyHills 90210 scenario holds waters if we put your purposely isolated verse back in context

66:1 O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

the prophet forbid something lawful for himself for the sake of pleasing his lucky wives. a true gentleman ahead of his time, not abusing from his social position, taking into consideration the emotions and needs of his wives 68:4"And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality"

66:2 Allah indeed has sanctioned for you the expiation of your oaths and Allah is your Protector, and He is the Knowing the Wise.

here we learn that muhammad went as far as taking an oath to forbid hismelf this lawful thing, but God says that He previously sanctionned the expiation of oaths when it is something lawful, because idealy one should not abstain himself from the lawful things in life. sometimes a human being under the influence of emotions makes an oath and forbids to himself something permissible as was the case with the prophet, and in such cases the oath should be broken 2:224 and then atoned for 5:89.

66:3 And when the prophet secretly communicated a piece of information to one of his wives-- but when she informed (others) of it, and Allah made him to know it, he made known part of it and avoided part; so when he informed her of it, she said: Who informed you of this? He said: The Knowing, the one Aware, informed me.

the prophet shared a secret with one of his wives but she betrayed his trust. apparently the gentleman of sublim morality was not feared inside his household.

66:4 If you both turn to Allah, then indeed your hearts are already inclined (to this); and if you back up each other against him, then surely Allah it is Who is his Guardian, and Jibreel and -the believers that do good, and the angels after that are the aiders.

the wife that betrayed his confidence and the one(s) that listened (contributing to the betrayal) are given the choice to ask forgiveness to Allah for this shameful act, their abuse of trust and leniency of the prophet towards them. This is done to reveal their true hearts, if they are true believers.
the verse tells them that if they seek forgiveness it means their hearts incline to faith, that they are true believers who made a mistake without any evil intention. but if they persist in their attitude it means they do not fear Allah and they are not among the true believers who do good. Allah, the angels and the true believers will protect the prophet from the machinations of evil spirits, and at the end Allah might replace such wives with true Muslims (see next verse)

66:5 Maybe, his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgins.

if they dont mend their ways and the prophet divorces them, God might replace them with other wives having the following qualities: muslims (muslimatin), true believers (mu'minatin), obedient to Allah, turn to Allah in repentence, worshipers of Allah, fasters, whether widows or virgins.

As seen in Aaron Spelling's original post, there are several conflicting reports as to the circumstances surrounding the revelation of these verses, and this is enough to discard all of them.

The above verses do not serve any biographical purpose of the prophet of course, and the silence of the Quran regarding the thing which the prophet forbid himself from, testifies to this. The intent is thus to bring out a moral lesson applicable to all times and persons: the inadmissibility of regarding as forbidden (haram) anything that God has made lawful (halal), even if such an attitude happens to be motivated by the desire to please someone else. It also shows that the prophet was but a human being, subject to human emotions and even liable to commit an occasional mistake.
These verses also speak of the important notion of trust between husband and wife, that they should remain God-counscious in their interractions with eachother or else they could be replaced with other more pious husband/wife.

[AhmedBahgat]

its funny to sit back and watch the enemies of faith banging their hands and trying to find a new angle to try and scratch the noble quran with their dirty nails

so Aaron Spelling aka khalil fariel above (who mixed up his surah numbers) wants to make a BeverlyHills 90210 drama out of a simple set of 5 verses.

I had to isolate the above because this contains the ingredient I want to dissect

of course you have to isolate verses in order to concoct your drama movie. but lets see if the BeverlyHills 90210 scenario holds waters if we put your purposely isolated verse back in context

66:1 O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

the prophet forbid something lawful for himself for the sake of pleasing his lucky wives. a true gentleman ahead of his time, not abusing from his social position, taking into consideration the emotions and needs of his wives 68:4"And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality"

66:2 Allah indeed has sanctioned for you the expiation of your oaths and Allah is your Protector, and He is the Knowing the Wise.

here we learn that muhammad went as far as taking an oath to forbid hismelf this lawful thing, but God says that He previously sanctionned the expiation of oaths when it is something lawful, because idealy one should not abstain himself from the lawful things in life. sometimes a human being under the influence of emotions makes an oath and forbids to himself something permissible as was the case with the prophet, and in such cases the oath should be broken 2:224 and then atoned for 5:89.

66:3 And when the prophet secretly communicated a piece of information to one of his wives-- but when she informed (others) of it, and Allah made him to know it, he made known part of it and avoided part; so when he informed her of it, she said: Who informed you of this? He said: The Knowing, the one Aware, informed me.

the prophet shared a secret with one of his wives but she betrayed his trust. apparently the gentleman of sublim morality was not feared inside his household.

66:4 If you both turn to Allah, then indeed your hearts are already inclined (to this); and if you back up each other against him, then surely Allah it is Who is his Guardian, and Jibreel and -the believers that do good, and the angels after that are the aiders.

the wife that betrayed his confidence and the one(s) that listened (contributing to the betrayal) are given the choice to ask forgiveness to Allah for this shameful act, their abuse of trust and leniency of the prophet towards them. This is done to reveal their true hearts, if they are true believers.
the verse tells them that if they seek forgiveness it means their hearts incline to faith, that they are true believers who made a mistake without any evil intention. but if they persist in their attitude it means they do not fear Allah and they are not among the true believers who do good. Allah, the angels and the true believers will protect the prophet from the machinations of evil spirits, and at the end Allah might replace such wives with true Muslims (see next verse)

66:5 Maybe, his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgins.

if they dont mend their ways and the prophet divorces them, God might replace them with other wives having the following qualities: muslims (muslimatin), true believers (mu'minatin), obedient to Allah, turn to Allah in repentence, worshipers of Allah, fasters, whether widows or virgins.

As seen in Aaron Spelling's original post, there are several conflicting reports as to the circumstances surrounding the revelation of these verses, and this is enough to discard all of them.

The above verses do not serve any biographical purpose of the prophet of course, and the silence of the Quran regarding the thing which the prophet forbid himself from, testifies to this. The intent is thus to bring out a moral lesson applicable to all times and persons: the inadmissibility of regarding as forbidden (haram) anything that God has made lawful (halal), even if such an attitude happens to be motivated by the desire to please someone else. It also shows that the prophet was but a human being, subject to human emotions and even liable to commit an occasional mistake.
These verses also speak of the important notion of trust between husband and wife, that they should remain God-counscious in their interractions with eachother or else they could be replaced with other more pious husband/wife.

That was awsome bro, thanks. I reckon it should be part of the slam dunk show, what do you think?

[Muhammad bin Lyin]

This is such bull. It's obvious Muhammad was trying to make it look like he didn't want these pleasures, but that Allah wanted him to have them so it is all Allah's doing. It's a childish little lie. It's like someone who's been on a diet one day saying that God told them not to deny themselves that cake they want to eat. I do not want to have sex with that beautiful woman, but God told me to. Could you imagine if someone told you that? What would you think? You'd laugh. But the 20% Profit gets a break because he has hypnotized them with his battle success and the booty. What an absolute howl. And people were either exceedingly stupid or just afraid, because they let this go and didn't question it. It's interesting that Ayesha was reported to have said something to the effect of "oh prophet of Allah, your revelations always seem to arrive at just the right time" Interesting observation. As they say, from the mouth of babes comes the truth, whether she realized what she was pointing to or not. This man was such a despicable liar who made up whatever rules he needed for whatever situation he was in, and it's totally obvious to anyone with half a brain who isn't hypnotized. Why do you think the Quran seems to change it's mind on things? Because the situation changed and Muhammad's needs changed. And then, he conveniently invents the law of 20% of the booty for Allah. I didn't recall any story of that 20% getting burned to be sent up to Allah, so where did it go? How much went to the poor? Who would dare to audit the 20% Profit Muhammad? PUBH. I smell a rat.

[skynightblaze]

@ MastaBlaster

How can you be so dumb? I am amazed . Before making any idiotic statements as you have made please answer the following questions:

1) What did Allah make lawful for Muhhamad?

2) What did Muhhamad forbid himself from?

3) What was that disturbed the wives so much?


Unless you know the answer to the above questions you cant draw any conclusion. How are you sure that Muhhamad wasnt trying to cover up his guilt here ? Well brain dead idiots like you can believe in this nonsense but not us.. To prove that he wasnt trying to get away with something you need to answer these questions. Its only after analyzing the entire incident we can draw some conclusion.Your underlying assumption here is Muhhamad can never be bad.

[Muhammad bin Lyin]

@ MastaBlaster

How can you be so dumb? I am amazed . Before making any idiotic statements as you have made please answer the following questions:

1) What did Allah make lawful for Muhhamad?

2) What did Muhhamad forbid himself from?

3) What was that disturbed the wives so much?


Unless you know the answer to the above questions you cant draw any conclusion. How are you sure that Muhhamad wasnt trying to cover up his guilt here ? Well brain dead idiots like you can believe in this nonsense but not us.. To prove that he wasnt trying to get away with something you need to answer these questions. Its only after analyzing the entire incident we can draw some conclusion.Your underlying assumption here is Muhhamad can never be bad.

Of course, they are hypnotized and incapable of rational, objective thought. That's been proven over and over again. And BTW, he's not going to answer your questions directly. You see, he won't commit to a clear, direct answer because that reduces his flexibility. And he needs as much flexibility room as possible because he's going to be inventing things as the situation dictates. So he needs all of the wiggle room he can get. That's what liars always do. Dogs bark, cats meow, cows moo and Muslims lie about the Quran. It's to be expected. It's ingrained.

[skynightblaze]

@ MastaBlaster

How can you be so dumb? I am amazed . Before making any idiotic statements as you have made please answer the following questions:

1) What did Allah make lawful for Muhhamad?

2) What did Muhhamad forbid himself from?

3) What was that disturbed the wives so much?


Unless you know the answer to the above questions you cant draw any conclusion. How are you sure that Muhhamad wasnt trying to cover up his guilt here ? Well brain dead idiots like you can believe in this nonsense but not us.. To prove that he wasnt trying to get away with something you need to answer these questions. Its only after analyzing the entire incident we can draw some conclusion.Your underlying assumption here is Muhhamad can never be bad.

Of course, they are hypnotized and incapable of rational, objective thought. That's been proven over and over again. And BTW, he's not going to answer your questions directly. You see, he won't commit to a clear, direct answer because that reduces his flexibility. And he needs as much flexibility room as possible because he's going to be inventing things as the situation dictates. So he needs all of the wiggle room he can get. That's what liars always do.

I agree with you 100 % . He is a complete liar . when he joined the forum he wasnt a quran only muslim. He used to accept Tafsirs and the hadiths. When he started seeing that they are exposing him badly he has chosen to become a quran only muslim. Being a quran only muslim gives them an advantage. YOu can invent your own quran and lie to your best ability. Here is the example of it.

[MastaBlaster]

That was awsome bro, thanks. I reckon it should be part of the slam dunk show, what do you think?

yes bro, this deceiver deserves big time exposure. please feel free to remix my post and add whatever info you feel would be valuable then put it in your show

1) What did Allah make lawful for Muhhamad?

2) What did Muhhamad forbid himself from?

3) What was that disturbed the wives so much?

look you faithless cattle, why dont you go through my last paragraph where i answered your 3 completely irrelevant questions.

1) it doesn tmatter, the quran is purposely silent on the matter because it seeks to point another deeper reality
2) it doesn tmatter, the quran is purposely silent on the matter because it seeks to point another deeper reality
3) it doesn tmatter, the quran is purposely silent on the matter because it seeks to point another deeper reality

your conjectures and those of the (contradicting) hadith reports on these matters are irrelevant to the true meaning, clear, and full of wisdom of these simple verses. now go ahead and keep dancing and banging your head with your fellow enemies of faith then try and come up with something new

[KhaliL]

___________________________

MastaBlaster is in my ignore list. I can not see his posts because I do not want to. He is full of noise and NO substance at all.

Here I am forced to look on what he is posted because Ahmed Bahgat quoted him. So, I will focus on Ahmed’s post:

its funny to sit back and watch the enemies of faith banging their hands and trying to find a new angle to try and scratch the noble quran with their dirty nails

It is refreshing to know I brought up something new. But I am not confident enough. The case was already made. Way way earlier;

of course you have to isolate verses in order to concoct your drama movie. but lets see if the BeverlyHills 90210 scenario holds waters if we put your purposely isolated verse back in context

Someone else’s lack of comprehension is not my guilt. I critically analyzed Chapter 63 1-5 bringing Tafsirs too. And if any Muslim wants them in context, he can get hold of his Quran; as simple as that.

66:1 O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

the prophet forbid something lawful for himself for the sake of pleasing his lucky wives. a true gentleman ahead of his time, not abusing from his social position, taking into consideration the emotions and needs of his wives 68:4"And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality"

Let me add this first in case any Muslim does not understand: pomposity is not a prophetic trait. Or if you think it is; my ghosh.., you guys are really good;

Indeed the man of god was a true gentleman to have enough wives and concubines to make it all a mess..!!

It is also argued the guy died as bankrupt. Not surprising since this is the picture we get of his familial life. A guy who has to care for nine plus and rebellions is not going to be well-off by any chance even if he is getting 1/5th for himself.

66:2 Allah indeed has sanctioned for you the expiation of your oaths and Allah is your Protector, and He is the Knowing the Wise.

here we learn that muhammad went as far as taking an oath to forbid hismelf this lawful thing, but God says that He previously sanctionned the expiation of oaths when it is something lawful, because idealy one should not abstain himself from the lawful things in life. sometimes a human being under the influence of emotions makes an oath and forbids to himself something permissible as was the case with the prophet, and in such cases the oath should be broken 2:224 and then atoned for 5:89.

Muhammad was not doing any favour to his wives by bringing up his alter-ego with verses meant for expiation of his oaths. The guy denied family life to all of his wives in Quran 33:6. What the hell of justice he was doing to the widows considering the fact most of his wives were still young as he died of poison? The guy trashed all his wives for them to lead dog-like lives or even worse than it. We see enough evidence for this from his child-bride who in utter frustration went berserk against an elected Caliph of Islam to cause twenty thousand Muslim deaths..!!!

Do not preach Muslim…, it is nauseating;

66:3 And when the prophet secretly communicated a piece of information to one of his wives-- but when she informed (others) of it, and Allah made him to know it, he made known part of it and avoided part; so when he informed her of it, she said: Who informed you of this? He said: The Knowing, the one Aware, informed me.

the prophet shared a secret with one of his wives but she betrayed his trust. apparently the gentleman of sublim morality was not feared inside his household.

Droooool… Is it thus how Muslim minds work?

Why on the hell this guy wanted to confine a secret from other wives in the first place if he was not afraid of anything in his household? All the mess occurred because of it, but Muslim says he was not feared anything.., Apparently the guy was in great fear of his wives and that is why he wanted to keep something as a secret known to only for himself and perhaps one of his wives.

66:4 If you both turn to Allah, then indeed your hearts are already inclined (to this); and if you back up each other against him, then surely Allah it is Who is his Guardian, and Jibreel and -the believers that do good, and the angels after that are the aiders.

the wife that betrayed his confidence and the one(s) that listened (contributing to the betrayal) are given the choice to ask forgiveness to Allah for this shameful act, their abuse of trust and leniency of the prophet towards them. This is done to reveal their true hearts, if they are true believers.
the verse tells them that if they seek forgiveness it means their hearts incline to faith, that they are true believers who made a mistake without any evil intention. but if they persist in their attitude it means they do not fear Allah and they are not among the true believers who do good. Allah, the angels and the true believers will protect the prophet from the machinations of evil spirits, and at the end Allah might replace such wives with true Muslims (see next verse)

I just want to know the reason of this rebellion which made Allah the god intervening., It is a household affair of a seventh century man yet god-the real god, had to reveal verses to silence rebellious wives of this man..,

Up till now, Muslim did not tell us the reason. Take note of this as we can move on…

66:5 Maybe, his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgins.

if they dont mend their ways and the prophet divorces them, God might replace them with other wives having the following qualities: muslims (muslimatin), true believers (mu'minatin), obedient to Allah, turn to Allah in repentence, worshipers of Allah, fasters, whether widows or virgins.

Oh my…, what a god Muhammad can get..!!!

See how the god upstairs is threatening the hapless creatures Muhammad confined in his house as in Quran 33: 33: “Wa Qarna fee buyootikunna wala tabarrajna tabarruja al-jahiliyyail oola”= “Confine in your house (Oh wives of prophet!) and do not go about displaying your fineries as women used to do in the period of Jahiliyya”.

They (Muhammad’s wives) were caged, suppressed with the help of Allah without even having basic rights. They got their quota of food; so what? Even animals feed their mates..,

In short: the chapter 63 of Quran is a part Muslims wish if there was not such a chapter in Quran. Here one Muslim quotes it in context for us infidels to have fun..!!

As seen in Aaron Spelling's original post, there are several conflicting reports as to the circumstances surrounding the revelation of these verses, and this is enough to discard all of them.

That means? If there are conflicting reports on something in Quran you will trash the reports but not the part of Quran which is causative of these conflicts…!!!

Muslim, you can not have your cake and eat it too. Tell us what these verses all about? Obviously something fetid has occurred in Muhammad’s life and that is what these verses for. Anyone with a tiny bit of reasoning ability can get it.

Of course, there are mainly two versions for this incident. Two of them can not be right but one can. And what fits to the verses and more importantly to common sense is what we agree to. Drinking honey (or Maghafir, what the heck it is) from one of the wives and wanting to keep it as a secret from all other wives can not be the reason behind this verse. Because it does NOT make sense;

Then we are left with the version of Muhammad Maria affair. Going through the account, we come to understand this can be and only this can be the true version. Because it makes sense by fitting to the verses and to our common sense;

But I forgot Muslims can not afford to have such reasoning aptitude..!! Apologies;

The above verses do not serve any biographical purpose of the prophet of course, and the silence of the Quran regarding the thing which the prophet forbid himself from, testifies to this.

If verses have no biographical value, what are they for in Muslims’ holy book? Do they have any theological significance? Wait..

The silence of Quran is because the matter is kinky and stinky. It only adds to confuse Muslims more and even more.

The intent is thus to bring out a moral lesson applicable to all times and persons: the inadmissibility of regarding as forbidden (haram) anything that God has made lawful (halal), even if such an attitude happens to be motivated by the desire to please someone else.

Moral lesson..? Phew…,

Breaking oaths is not moral enough for god to recommend to his subjects. Whose god is this?

God has made many things halal for Muslims. Taking war captives as sex-slaves and bonking them is one of them. If any Muslim has given an oath to his wife that he is not going to do such a heinous act, what the **** for Allah want to teach the Muslim can nullify such an oath because raping war captives is made halal by him? What is that great moral lesson in breaking oaths?

Marriage is a life-long partnership. A husband can passionately promise his wife that he will never beat her. But god’s book says he can beat her so wife beware…, anytime this pledge can be nullified by husband to give the other a good beating..!!!

I am not surprised because this is what Muslims are all about. They do not have sense of morality..., they are deeply and irreparably damaged by the highly toxic Quran..!!!


Pathetic guys…

PS: If MastaBlaster responds to this input, I will get it only if Ahmed Bahgat or anyone else quotes it. Otherwise, I don’t care AT ALL;

[Cassie]

The intent is thus to bring out a moral lesson applicable to all times and persons: the inadmissibility of regarding as forbidden (haram) anything that God has made lawful (halal), even if such an attitude happens to be motivated by the desire to please someone else.

How about the inadmissibilty of regarding as haram (i.e. slavery) that your god has made lawful?

[skynightblaze]

look you faithless cattle, why dont you go through my last paragraph where i answered your 3 completely irrelevant questions.

1) it doesn tmatter, the quran is purposely silent on the matter because it seeks to point another deeper reality
2) it doesn tmatter, the quran is purposely silent on the matter because it seeks to point another deeper reality
3) it doesn tmatter, the quran is purposely silent on the matter because it seeks to point another deeper reality

your conjectures and those of the (contradicting) hadith reports on these matters are irrelevant to the true meaning, clear, and full of wisdom of these simple verses. now go ahead and keep dancing and banging your head with your fellow enemies of faith then try and come up with something new

And why are we suppose to believe that quran is pointing to some deeper reality ? just because you say so? Mate this is a debate and not a blog where you can write your thoughts freely without anyone challenging them. Lets see what you wrote in your last paragraph.

The above verses do not serve any biographical purpose of the prophet of course, and the silence of the Quran regarding the thing which the prophet forbid himself from, testifies to this. The intent is thus to bring out a moral lesson applicable to all times and persons: the inadmissibility of regarding as forbidden (haram) anything that God has made lawful (halal), even if such an attitude happens to be motivated by the desire to please someone else. It also shows that the prophet was but a human being, subject to human emotions and even liable to commit an occasional mistake.
These verses also speak of the important notion of trust between husband and wife, that they should remain God-counscious in their interractions with eachother or else they could be replaced with other more pious husband/wife.

So according to you all these 5 verses were just revealed to command that you must give preference to what is lawful for you and not your emotions? DO you require 5 verses to tell such a simple thing? Lets see how I am superior than your quran :


O ye believe never forbid something which is made lawful for you by Allah

O ye believe make sure that you never disclose any secret of your spouses to avoid tensions amongst you

See I could do that within a few words. Why is Muhhamad brought into the picture here if it was just a simple message of bonding between husband and wives and practicing something that is lawful? You cannot argue here that Muhhamad is brought here for the sake of giving an example because nothing of the incident has been mentioned here so I dont see any point in bringing Muhhamad into picture here unless it was Muhhamad who benefits from these verses.

So please answer the question as to why Muhhamad needs to be brought into the picture here?

[Muhammad bin Lyin]

1) What did Allah make lawful for Muhhamad?

2) What did Muhhamad forbid himself from?

3) What was that disturbed the wives so much?

look you faithless cattle, why dont you go through my last paragraph where i answered your 3 completely irrelevant questions.

1) it doesn tmatter, the quran is purposely silent on the matter because it seeks to point another deeper reality
2) it doesn tmatter, the quran is purposely silent on the matter because it seeks to point another deeper reality
3) it doesn tmatter, the quran is purposely silent on the matter because it seeks to point another deeper reality

This is not an answer. An answer would constitute an explanation from you as to why we are supposed to think what you claim. You have to explain and justify your claim or else it is completely meaningless. Hasn't anybody ever told you this? Anyway, I knew you couldn't give a straight, direct answer. Did I call it or what? Hey, I'm a prophet.

your conjectures

Actually, the conjecture appears to be yours. You're the one who wanders the farthest from the actual words used, and you can rarely justify your wanderings. You think that if you can invent it, then it must be true. Surely you are out of your mind or just incredibly stupid. Not sure which.

and those of the (contradicting) hadith reports on these matters are irrelevant to the true meaning, clear, and full of wisdom of these simple verses. now go ahead and keep dancing and banging your head with your fellow enemies of faith then try and come up with something new

If the meaning is so clear and simple, then why don't you explain it to us? Ahhh, yes, another excuse is coming. We're not worthy of your explanation, right? What a truly pathetic liar you are. How come it doesn't bother you to have to attempt these stupid little stunts? It would sure bother me a heck of a lot because I have a conscience and you obviously do not. Islam must win the discussion at all costs, eh? Seen it before. It can't be a genetic thing, so it must be an Islamic thing

[yeezevee]

Boy.. terrifying discussion is going on here
one fellow picks up THE WORST AND MOST INSULTING of all ayahs of Q'uran from that chapter66., AT-TAHRIM

66:1 O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

66:2 Allah indeed has sanctioned for you the expiation of your oaths and Allah is your Protector, and He is the Knowing the Wise

66:3 And when the prophet secretly communicated a piece of information to one of his wives-- but when she informed (others) of it, and Allah made him to know it, he made known part of it and avoided part; so when he informed her of it, she said: Who informed you of this? He said: The Knowing, the one Aware, informed me.

66:4 If you both turn to Allah, then indeed your hearts are already inclined (to this); and if you back up each other against him, then surely Allah it is Who is his Guardian, and Jibreel and -the believers that do good, and the angels after that are the aiders.

66:5 Maybe, his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgins.

And for that one well Educated Muhammad following Muslim fellow says

MastaBlaster:

.. The above verses do not serve any biographical purpose of the prophet of course,
..These verses also speak of the important notion of trust between husband and wife..

And the other fool says:

That was awsome bro, thanks. I reckon it should be part of the slam dunk show, what do you think?

My goodness.. what kind of BRA and what kind of mind set is that., Ha!.. One fellow., Mr. Muhammad, A criminal character, 1400 years back talk silly in the name of God.. and marry 13 women in 13 years after the death of his first wife Khadija., one was child, other was adopted son's wife, few were young women whose families were murdered by the THUGS that followed Mr. Muhammad. That too that fellow was already a 50 year old guy., And GOD .. the God.. the Supreme defends the criminal with those alleged Allah words., Now we have billion Muslim with veil on their brain can not use common sense to dissect few of those Allah words.

Even well educated Muslim guys in ffi forum defends THIS CRIMINAL CHARACTER Mr. Muhammad. What a pity, There is nothing more insulting to God than that. There is nothing that is worse a God can do, which is defending A SEX OBSESSED DIRTY OLD CRIMINAL MAN with the words that I see above in the surah AT-TAHRIM .,

Let me say to the readers., the only way to defend Mr. Muhammad, His Q'uran and his Islam is.. ELIMINATING SUCH AYAHS from Q'uran. delete them.. burn them.., put them in to Hadith.. do some thing. But as long as some one says they are the words of God., there will be yeezevees who will say Mr. Muhammad Criminal and WORST criminal as he used God to satisfy his sexual appetite. Indeed Islam is CULT and Muslims are brain washed cult follower..

That is unpardonable.
yeezevee