Topic: Muhammed's underage bride

[montalban]

From Bukhari vol. 7, #65:
"Narrated Aisha that the prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: "I have been informed that Aisha remained with the prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).""
Bukhari vol. 7, #88:
"Narrated Urwa: "The prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).""
Bukhari vol. 5, #234 says:
"Narrated Aisha: The prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six. We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Harith Kharzraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's messenger came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age."
FROM THE HADITH OF SAHIH MUSLIM VOLUME 2, #3309
Aisha reported: Allah's Messenger married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine".
FROM THE HADITH OF THE SUNAN OF ABU DAWUD
(Abu Dawud's Hadith is the third most respected Hadith in Islam.)
From Abu Dawud, Vol. 2, #2116:
"Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years."). "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."

Confirmed by the following sites...

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Polemics/aishah.html

and

http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=6778

 

A common counter-claim may be that this action was culturally acceptable THEN and not necessarily so, NOW. This is of course to misunderstand the Islamic idea of Muhammad; who is seen as the best example of man, for all time - and Al-lah, an all-knowing god didn't give his laws just for Arabs of the 600s, but for all men, for all time. Even today, based on this example, many Islamic web-sites recommend similar behaviour, thus...

"Question: Is it possible to have intercourse with girls before puberty, would not this physically and mentally harmful to the girl. Is such a thing permissible in Islam, and if it is permissible then what is the minimum age for marriage execution in Islam, since puberty is not a requirement.

Answer: In The Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

Jurists discussed the issue of marrying a girl before puberty, i.e. a girl who might not be able to have sexual intercourse due to her young age.

They agreed that the Wali can marry a girl before puberty. But when she reaches puberty, she has the right to choose either to nullify the marriage contract or to continue her marital life.

Also, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, married `Aishah, may Allah be pleased with her, before she reached the age of puberty.

Hence, we conclude that puberty is not a condition for executing marriage. The only condition is the wife’s ability to bear responsibilities of marital life. However, we do not recommend marriage before puberty because at that early age the girl can’t fulfil her obligations towards her husband properly, nor can she know her rights towards him.

Thus, to avoid any negligence or liability on her part we do not recommend marriage at such an early age.

Allah Almighty knows best.

Dr. Su`aad Ibrahim Salih"

http://www.islam-online.net/livefatwa/english/Browse.asp?hGuestID=YFCeOS

see also:

http://www.islamicvoice.com/august.98/marriage.htm#EAR

and

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=22442&dgn=4

and from the same site...

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=1493&dgn=4

[Fr. George]

It just makes me sick... Always has, always will.

[jayjay]

ditto cleveland!!!

[EkhristosAnesti]

Actually, Muhammed had sexual encounters with Aisha before the earliest mentioned date in the above listed sources. He dreamt of her when she was just a little baby being cradled in his arms, and that was the moment he started desiring her. He furthermore used to engage in a disgusting practise known as "thighing", before he was able to have sexual intercourse with her (i.e. before the marriage was consummated).

For anyone who wants more information, do a search on the thread "The Shame of Islam", which I created at a time when a certain Islamic acquiantence hacked my computer and consequently invaded all the forums that I was involved in.

[Fr. George]

Here are the 2 threads EA was referring to.  The first is the "The Shame of Islam" thread that was an outgrowth of the second, "3-way interfaith cooperation in Jerusalem," which was hijacked by the aforementioned acquaintance.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=5834.0

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=5739.0

[JoeS]

It just makes me sick... Always has, always will.

One question:  Is there such a thing as being under age at all to a Muslim?  I see young boys barely out of diapers carrying home made rifles marching in make believe parades. So maybe anything goes at any age.

[JoeS]

From Bukhari vol. 7, #65:
"Narrated Aisha that the prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: "I have been informed that Aisha remained with the prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).""
Bukhari vol. 7, #88:
"Narrated Urwa: "The prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).""
Bukhari vol. 5, #234 says:
"Narrated Aisha: The prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six. We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Harith Kharzraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's messenger came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age."
FROM THE HADITH OF SAHIH MUSLIM VOLUME 2, #3309
Aisha reported: Allah's Messenger married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine".
FROM THE HADITH OF THE SUNAN OF ABU DAWUD
(Abu Dawud's Hadith is the third most respected Hadith in Islam.)
From Abu Dawud, Vol. 2, #2116:
"Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years."). "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."

Confirmed by the following sites...

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Polemics/aishah.html

and

http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=6778

 

A common counter-claim may be that this action was culturally acceptable THEN and not necessarily so, NOW. This is of course to misunderstand the Islamic idea of Muhammad; who is seen as the best example of man, for all time - and Al-lah, an all-knowing god didn't give his laws just for Arabs of the 600s, but for all men, for all time. Even today, based on this example, many Islamic web-sites recommend similar behaviour, thus...

"Question: Is it possible to have intercourse with girls before puberty, would not this physically and mentally harmful to the girl. Is such a thing permissible in Islam, and if it is permissible then what is the minimum age for marriage execution in Islam, since puberty is not a requirement.

Answer: In The Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

Jurists discussed the issue of marrying a girl before puberty, i.e. a girl who might not be able to have sexual intercourse due to her young age.

They agreed that the Wali can marry a girl before puberty. But when she reaches puberty, she has the right to choose either to nullify the marriage contract or to continue her marital life.

Also, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, married `Aishah, may Allah be pleased with her, before she reached the age of puberty.

Hence, we conclude that puberty is not a condition for executing marriage. The only condition is the wife’s ability to bear responsibilities of marital life. However, we do not recommend marriage before puberty because at that early age the girl can’t fulfil her obligations towards her husband properly, nor can she know her rights towards him.

Thus, to avoid any negligence or liability on her part we do not recommend marriage at such an early age.

Allah Almighty knows best.

Dr. Su`aad Ibrahim Salih"

http://www.islam-online.net/livefatwa/english/Browse.asp?hGuestID=YFCeOS

see also:

http://www.islamicvoice.com/august.98/marriage.htm#EAR

and

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=22442&dgn=4

and from the same site...

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=1493&dgn=4

An this is supposedly a messenger from our God?  Their Allah and our God are two different dieties.

[Nacho]

One question:  Is there such a thing as being under age at all to a Muslim?  I see young boys barely out of diapers carrying home made rifles marching in make believe parades. So maybe anything goes at any age.

Religion of Peace..... How long are we in the 'tolerant' west going to put up with this 'intolerance'? I'm still waiting for our leaders & MSM to call Islam out on the carpet for what it is without the constant fake platitudes & BS that will get us nowhere with these people. For God's sake they still think that Spain still 'rightly' belongs to them and that it's only a matter of time before it's theirs again... If that's the case, when are they going to give back Constantinople which in my recollection doesn't belong to them?

Hmmm, that bit about Mohamed liking little girls isn't surprising at all. An ex-muslim friend of mine who is now Orthodox were just discussing some interesting 'facts' about islam the other night and I just about fell over laughing when he showed me a passage from a book about "Fiqh" , which is basically a handbook on the proper way to prepare yourself for prayer. In one of the passages where it talks about what renders your cleanliness void before you pray it says this: Sexual intercourse (mere penetration of the tip of the penis into the anus or vagina) with a  BOY, women or ANIMAL renders the ablution void. Discharge of semen need not be taken into consideration.

WTF? Need I say anymore?  

[Fr. George]

Religion of Peace..... How long are we in the 'tolerant' west going to put up with this 'intolerance'? I'm still waiting for our leaders & MSM to call Islam out on the carpet for what it is without the constant fake platitudes & BS that will get us nowhere with these people. For God's sake they still think that Spain still 'rightly' belongs to them and that it's only a matter of time before it's theirs again... If that's the case, when are they going to give back Constantinople which in my recollection doesn't belong to them?

Hmmm, that bit about Mohamed liking little girls isn't surprising at all. An ex-muslim friend of mine who is now Orthodox were just discussing some interesting 'facts' about islam the other night and I just about fell over laughing when he showed me a passage from a book about "Fiqh" , which is basically a handbook on the proper way to prepare yourself for prayer. In one of the passages where it talks about what renders your cleanliness void before you pray it says this: Sexual intercourse (mere penetration of the tip of the penis into the anus or vagina) with a  BOY, women or ANIMAL renders the ablution void. Discharge of semen need not be taken into consideration.

WTF? Need I say anymore?      

After seeing this all, and reading a small bit of the Quran, I just have to wonder: is the "moderate islam" in this country the exception?  You don't find moderate Islam in Saudi (where it has existed the longest) or Iran (where it has such a strong influence) or Indonesia (the most populous Islamic nation in the world - with 800 million people, there's got to be one or two "moderate moslems" there, right?).

[Asteriktos]

Maybe y'all should spend an equal amount of time looking for fault among Orthodox as you do 1) casting stones at other religions/cultures which you can't begin to relate to, and 2) rationalizing and dismissing anything that makes you comfortable about your own religion. You might start by taking a look at what Orthodox cultures have thought about marriage agreements binding children under the age of consent (which is rougly equal to puberty), and how much of a say the children had involved, both as children and also when they grew up. It's easy to cast stones at others, why not be consistent and cast them at Orthodox bishops, canonists, etc.? Maybe then you can start some threads about how bad those 17th or 18th century Russians were? You could start by reading something like Eve Levin's Sex and Society Among the Serbs: 900-1700. Or then again, maybe you shouldn't do that, or you might end up like me  ÂÂ

[Fr. George]

Are we talking about Islamic Culture, or are we talking about Islamic scripture and sacred writings?  The bible does not advocate pre-pubescent marriage, and our authoritative writings don't either.  But when the Moslems talk about the example that Mohammed set down, that would be the equivelant of our holding up the example of the Apostles (actually, their view of Mohammed is higher than our view of the Apostles, so you would have to take a halfway approach between comparing to the Apostles and WWJD).  I'm the first to admit, and there are many on this site who have no problems doing likewise, that the incarnations of the Truth are not always perfect, and that sometimes the culture around the Church is imperfect.  But comparing 17th century Russian culture to our critique of the practice done by the Prophet himself is a bit misplaced.

[GiC]

Maybe y'all should spend an equal amount of time looking for fault among Orthodox as you do 1) casting stones at other religions/cultures which you can't begin to relate to, and 2) rationalizing and dismissing anything that makes you comfortable about your own religion. You might start by taking a look at what Orthodox cultures have thought about marriage agreements binding children under the age of consent (which is rougly equal to puberty), and how much of a say the children had involved, both as children and also when they grew up. It's easy to cast stones at others, why not be consistent and cast them at Orthodox bishops, canonists, etc.?

Though betrothals have traditionally been allowed to be preformed at an early age by agreement of the parents, our Canonists have long upheld the right of either of the betrothed to break the betrothal prior to the marriage, without ecclesiastical or legal consequence, after their comming of such an age as is sufficient for marriage. Were there cultural and family consequences? Yes, as there would have been in any primitive culture for such things and as there can be consequences within the family today if one marries a person of whom the family does not approve, but the Church has never condoned forced marriages and the Empire has never sanctioned them.

[montalban]

Maybe y'all should spend an equal amount of time looking for fault among Orthodox as you do 1) casting stones at other religions/cultures which you can't begin to relate to, and 2) rationalizing and dismissing anything that makes you comfortable about your own religion. You might start by taking a look at what Orthodox cultures have thought about marriage agreements binding children under the age of consent (which is roughly equal to puberty), and how much of a say the children had involved, both as children and also when they grew up. It's easy to cast stones at others, why not be consistent and cast them at Orthodox bishops, canonists, etc.? Maybe then you can start some threads about how bad those 17th or 18th century Russians were? You could start by reading something like Eve Levin's Sex and Society Among the Serbs: 900-1700. Or then again, maybe you shouldn't do that, or you might end up like me    

Do you think that Islam's actions as stated in the OP are wrong? I'd like to know how you believe a critique of Islam could be negated by a critique of Orthodoxy - are you suggesting some kind of cosmic cancelling each other out?

What (in the book you mention) shows that Christians did something comparable based on their understanding of the teachings of Christ?* (note also my OP has evidence from modern Islamic advice sites - how is this comparable to a book dealing with things hundreds of years ago? )
For instance I have a book called "Sexual Life in England" by Ivan Bloch which examines the history of sex there. No where does it say that, for instance, incest was practiced BECAUSE of their religious beliefs.

There is thus no connection between the evil deeds in a 'Christian' country, and Christianity itself. Compare this to my OP where I've cited Islamic primary sources, and show how it's viewed today.

Your post needs a lot more work.


*I ask this because
a) you seem to know something 'shameful' but don't actually state what it is
b) you seem to be pleading for people here to go research and prove you correct

[montalban]

An this is supposedly a messenger from our God?  Their Allah and our God are two different dieties.

Indeed. And when the late JPII said that 'we' (Christians and Moslems) worship the same God, I shuddered. Islam is not from God.

[montalban]

Though betrothals have traditionally been allowed to be preformed at an early age by agreement of the parents, our Canonists have long upheld the right of either of the betrothed to break the betrothal prior to the marriage, without ecclesiastical or legal consequence, after their comming of such an age as is sufficient for marriage. Were there cultural and family consequences? Yes, as there would have been in any primitive culture for such things and as there can be consequences within the family today if one marries a person of whom the family does not approve, but the Church has never condoned forced marriages and the Empire has never sanctioned them.

If he can connect the dots in his argument by
a) presenting an actual account of something bad
and
b) how it relates to Christianity

he'd be on his way to having a rational argument.

[Fr. George]

An this is supposedly a messenger from our God?  Their Allah and our God are two different dieties.

To paraphrase my bishop, Metropolitan MAXIMOS, anyone who says that the moslems worship the same god that we do preaches heresy; the difference is easy - the god of Islam has no love.  Our God is a god of Love.  

[montalban]

Maybe y'all should spend an equal amount of time looking for fault among Orthodox as you do 1) casting stones at other religions/cultures which you can't begin to relate to, and 2) rationalizing and dismissing anything that makes you comfortable about your own religion. You might start by taking a look at what Orthodox cultures have thought about marriage agreements binding children under the age of consent (which is rougly equal to puberty), and how much of a say the children had involved, both as children and also when they grew up. It's easy to cast stones at others, why not be consistent and cast them at Orthodox bishops, canonists, etc.? Maybe then you can start some threads about how bad those 17th or 18th century Russians were? You could start by reading something like Eve Levin's Sex and Society Among the Serbs: 900-1700. Or then again, maybe you shouldn't do that, or you might end up like me  ÂÂ

I'm still looking forward to a reply, wherein you might construct an argument against Christainity, and state how this negates the OP

[Yiannis]

How you dare criticize the acts of the most holy Prophet of Allah!!!!
Hmmm, I think you have the wicked intention to present him as a pervert!!!
The Allah's vengeance against every mouth blaspheming his holy Prophet will be terrible  

[aurelia]

This makes me want to throw up.  And curl up in a ball for reasons I wont go into.  They TEACH this as ok? ÂÂ

This is not a reaction the religion it is a reaction to a man doing something like that to a child.

[OrthodoxAndrew]

Maybe y'all should spend an equal amount of time looking for fault among Orthodox as you do 1) casting stones at other religions/cultures which you can't begin to relate to, and 2) rationalizing and dismissing anything that makes you comfortable about your own religion. You might start by taking a look at what Orthodox cultures have thought about marriage agreements binding children under the age of consent (which is rougly equal to puberty), and how much of a say the children had involved, both as children and also when they grew up. It's easy to cast stones at others, why not be consistent and cast them at Orthodox bishops, canonists, etc.? Maybe then you can start some threads about how bad those 17th or 18th century Russians were? You could start by reading something like Eve Levin's Sex and Society Among the Serbs: 900-1700. Or then again, maybe you shouldn't do that, or you might end up like me    

Well you might raise some valid points there. But the point here is that this is the action of Islam's founder, and is not just the random actions of some Imams or regular Muslims.

[Meekle]

This makes me want to throw up.  And curl up in a ball for reasons I wont go into.  They TEACH this as ok?  

This is not a reaction the religion it is a reaction to a man doing something like that to a child.

The saddest thing is, that man made that religion, and they follow his example  

[serb1389]

You could start by reading something like Eve Levin's Sex and Society Among the Serbs: 900-1700. Or then again, maybe you shouldn't do that, or you might end up like me    

You mean every culture doesn't like to have a good time....for a millenium??    

You might also want to read the lives of the Serbian saints, including the entire family of Karadjordjevic (and their predicessors), from which came over a dozen saints, who RULED Serbia and fought every day of their lives for as long as that dynasty ruled (over 400 years) against such things.  But you can't control every noble in the land, hence why Kosovo happened.  

I don't mind if Serbs are used as examples for stupid things.  We make stupid mistakes and i'll be the FIRST to say it.  However, I would appreciate it if you would talk about the whole picture, especially if you are going to use my people as an example.  

If you don't know the whole picture, then I can't appreciate what you're going to say and i'll be forced to ignore you, which would be sad and something which i'm not looking to do.  

[EkhristosAnesti]

But when the Moslems talk about the example that Mohammed set down, that would be the equivelant of our holding up the example of the Apostles (actually, their view of Mohammed is higher than our view of the Apostles, so you would have to take a halfway approach between comparing to the Apostles and WWJD).

Although there is most certainly no conception within Islam of Mohammed being anything more than a mere prophet (i.e. a mere man/human), in terms of morality, he would be considered on par with how Christ is considered within Christianity i.e. as the perfect moral exemplar (many Muslims would in fact go to the extent of declaring Muhammad sinless — the doctrinal principle of isma). Compare the following two verses:

"Surely in the Messenger of God [Mohammed] you have a good example” Surah 33:21

“I [The Lord Christ] have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you.” John 13:15

Now understand that the difference between a genuine Muslim* and a sincere Christian, is the difference between a terrorist progressing towards the likeness of Satan, and a Saint progressing towards the likeness of God.

*I use the term genuine Muslim in this context to denote one who strictly follows and adheres to the precepts and principles of traditional Islam, which allow and at times require the enactment of the many evils taught and practiced by Mohammed, the Islamic paradigm and moral exemplar. I do not use the term in reference to a genuine Muslim who follows a falsely interpreted Islam that leads him/her to believe that he/she must practice basic Christian virtues of love, tolerance, and peace, under the genuine impression that this is the true interpretation of Islam. I used to debate both the former and the latter type of Islamics, but have since had a change of position on the latter type. If they are convinced that virtues of love, peace, tolerance and kindness are divinely instituted principles and expected of God's creation, even if such beliefs stem from within a false religious framework, according to a false interpretation of that religion, then it is better for one to just pray for them.

[Fr. George]

Thanks for the ref EA.  I should be better read on the Quran than I am.

[montalban]

Well you might raise some valid points there. But the point here is that this is the action of Islam's founder, and is not just the random actions of some Imams or regular Muslims.

That's it exactly! There's a difference some people fail to spot.

If Buddha said 'be peaceful' and I as a Buddhist (if I were one), went out and killed a number of people in the name of Buddha, there could be no connection between Buddhism and what I did, despite my claims.

They should remember that Muhammed is deemed a great example of humanity…

"The Prophet accomplished all this through the strength of his character and personal example;"

http://www.missionislam.com/youth/muhammad.htm

[serb1389]

Yah but how does that fit into things that the Quran says, like killing people?  That seems like a contradiction which really can't be solved?  What are you going to do as a muslim, follow one or the other?  

Which one is more correct?  Which one is in the "spirit" of the Qumran?  In my opinion, both are.  Parts of the Quran are very peaceful and talk about living righteously, others talk about killing, so then it becomes up to personal interpretation.  We all know what that can lead to...

[EkhristosAnesti]

Yah but how does that fit into things that the Quran says, like killing people?  That seems like a contradiction which really can't be solved? ÂÂ

There can only be a contradiction between a) Muhammed is the perfect moral example, and b) Muhammed taught and practised murder, if murder is assumed to be an immoral act. According to Christianity, and Natural Law, murder is indeed an immoral act. According to Islam, it is a religious and moral obligation. Thus, within an Islamic religious framework there is no contradiction.

Which one is in the "spirit" of the Qumran?

It's Qur'an, not Qumran. The former is the book of Satan, the latter is a geographical location where Biblical scrolls were discovered. ÂÂ

Parts of the Quran are very peaceful and talk about living righteously, others talk about killing, so then it becomes up to personal interpretation.  We all know what that can lead to...

According to Islamic doctrine, the principle of "Abrogation" solves this apparent contradiction, by dictating that all the "later" verses (i.e. those allegedly inspired during Muhammed's days in Madina) abrogate or "cancel" out the former verses (i.e. those allegedly inspired during Muhammed's sucking up days in Mecca). Therefore, the traditional and genuine Muslim (as defined per my previous post) will ignore all the "good" verses.

[serb1389]

According to Islamic doctrine, the principle of "Abrogation" solves this apparent contradiction, by dictating that all the "later" verses (i.e. those allegedly inspired during Muhammed's days in Madina) abrogate or "cancel" out the former verses (i.e. those allegedly inspired during Muhammed's sucking up days in Mecca). Therefore, the traditional and genuine Muslim (as defined per my previous post) will ignore all the "good" verses.

No way....I need to brush up on my Islam...maybe I should read their theological texts.  i've only read the Qur'an, so my knowledge is a little limited.  Sorry about the typo, I had a midterm in which I had to use Qumran  

I would write more, but i'm so dumbfounded by what you said that I can't.  

How practiced is this "abrogation" ?? Is it a mainline theological thing, or is it just an interpretation?  

[EkhristosAnesti]

Abrogation is a doctrinal principle supported by the Qur'an, the Hadiths, and reputable Islamic scholarship. I could discuss the issue in-depth with you if you like, but wouldn't you rather hear about how Muhammed waxed his legs and wore a skirt?

[serb1389]

"rather" is such a relative world....

I would love to hear if and when Muhamad waxed his legs, but I wouldn't want anything to happen to either of us.  Maybe you could PM me that info  

Could you tell me more about this "doctrinal principle" and what "doctrinal principle" means to Muslims and in the Islam religion?  

To be honest I didn't realize that they HAD doctrinal principles but hey...live and learn  

[GiC]

but wouldn't you rather hear about how Muhammed waxed his legs and wore a skirt?

Yes

[EkhristosAnesti]

"rather" is such a relative world....

I would love to hear if and when Muhamad waxed his legs, but I wouldn't want anything to happen to either of us.  Maybe you could PM me that info ÂÂ

I'm more worried about GiC getting any strange ideas, than either of us getting into trouble; aren't you?

Unfortunately the relevant weblink is not opening properly on my computer in order that I may re-read and recall the circumstances behind Muhammed's leg waxing adventures (I think I may have to re-install my arabic fonts). However, do not despair; rest assured that Muhammed did indeed wax his legs, and the proof is here:

http://www.al-eman.com/Islamlib/viewchp.asp?BID=185&CID=14

The website at the above link is in fact hosted by the second greatest Islamic University in the world - Al-Madina Al-Munawarr University in Saudi Arabia. They're obviously quite proud of this. Once I get the link working on my PC, I will attempt a rough translation of the relevant section.

With respect to Muhammed wearing a skirt, you can find the relevant hadith at the following weblink:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?hnum=2393&doc=0

The circumstances surrounding this one I can recall from memory. Muhammed was having a certain dispute with his wives, since they were jealous of the apparent favouritism he constantly expressed towards one in particular - Aisha (the child-bride). In attempting to justify his favouritism towards her, he explains to them that he never received a divine revelation when wearing a woman's skirt, except when he wore the skirt of Aisha. ÂÂ

Could you tell me more about this "doctrinal principle" and what "doctrinal principle" means to Muslims and in the Islam religion? ÂÂ

I'm not sure what there is explain. The Christian understanding of the New Testament as a fulfillment of the Old Testament, would be a "doctrinal principle" or a "doctrinal truth" unique to Christianity. Those who deny this doctrinal principle are heretics (e.g. the Jews and the Marcionites, since the former reject the NT and the latter reject the OT). Likewise, the understanding that certain verses in the Qur'an cancel out other verses, is a doctrinal truth within Islam - it has vital implications with respect to expected and acceptable forms of Muslim behaviour and worship. It is a principle, which as I said, is grounded in the Qur'an, Hadith literature, and Islamic scholarship.

Here is the take of 13th century Islamic scholar Ibn Kathir on the issue of Abrogation:

"Abrogation is a principle that is confirmed sometimes by...anulling the law as in the case of...abrogating the command that the Muslim ought to have patience with the non-believers in battle...[Abrogation] also involves changing that which is prohibited to that which is permissable, and vice versa. Abrogation may only apply to commandments, permissions and prohibitions. As for facts of history or other, or affirmative information, it doesn't apply."

(Tafsir Ibn Kathir, abridged by Sheikh Ar-Rafa, part 1, page 204)

Ibn Kathir to Orthodox Islam is like St Athanasios to Orthodox Christianity. In fact, he is probably considered even greater.

[EkhristosAnesti]

P.S. The GiC comment was merely a joke in response to his very quick reply to my initial offer to serb1389; I just like to tease him  ...or anyone for that matter, including myself if the occasion calls for it.

[montalban]

No way....I need to brush up on my Islam...maybe I should read their theological texts.  i've only read the Qur'an, so my knowledge is a little limited.  Sorry about the typo, I had a midterm in which I had to use Qumran ÂÂ

I would write more, but i'm so dumbfounded by what you said that I can't. ÂÂ

How practiced is this "abrogation" ?? Is it a mainline theological thing, or is it just an interpretation? ÂÂ

The Koran was authored by Muhammed over several decades. (His authorship is shown by certain verses; see Appendix below). When he started out having visions he preached peace and harmony. And he was persecuted. He fled to Medina, gained in power and his 'revelations' became more violent. When his followers pointed out that there was inconsistancy within his revleations he came up with the idea of 'abrogation' which he explained that al-lah had given him a 'better' revelation than what they had previously... this means that latter verses that contradict earlier verses superseed them. Thus you need to know when the verses were revelaed; and the Koran is not ordered based on this, but rather on the lengths of the chapters.

Most Moslem apologists quote "There is no compulsion in religion" as a sign that the Koran is a peaceful book (ignoring that the Koran also calls for the death of anyone who converts from Islam)

Muhammed spends much time talking of hate and war and violence.
"As for those who are slain in the cause of God, He will not allow their works to perish. ... He will admit them to the Paradise He has made known to them." (47:8 )


"Let those who would exchange the life of this world for the hereafter, fight for the cause of God; whether he dies or triumphs, We shall richly reward him. ... The true believers fight for the cause of God, but the infidels fight for the devil. Fight then against the friends of Satan ..." (4:74,76)
"The believers who stay at home (apart from those that suffer a grave impediment) are not the equals of those who fight for the cause of God with their goods and their persons. God has given those that fight with their goods and their persons a higher rank than those who stay at home ..." (4:95,96)
"Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. ... lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way ..." (9:5)
"Those that make war against God and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land. They shall be held up to shame in this world and sternly punished in the hereafter: except those that repent before you reduce them ..." (5:34,35)
"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme" (8:39)
"Prophet, rouse the faithful to arms. If there are twenty steadfast men among you, they shall vanquish two hundred; and if there are a hundred, they shall rout a thousand unbelievers, for they are devoid of understanding." (8:65)
"Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given ... and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (9:29)
"Allah's Apostle (Muhammed) said, 'Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords.'"
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 4:52:73)
"Allah's Apostle (Muhammed) said, 'The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.'"
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177)
"The Prophet (Muhammed) said: 'When the slave runs away from his master, his prayer is not accepted; he is an infidel.'"
(Hadith No. Muslim 32)
"The Prophet (Muhammed) said: 'Then go to the persons who do not join the congregational prayer and order their homes to be burnt...'"
(Hadith No. Muslim 234)
"Narrated 'Abdullah: Allah's Apostle (Muhammed) said, 'The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.'"
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 9:83:17)
"The Prophet (Muhammad) said: 'Do not stone the adulteress who is pregnant until she has had her child.' After the birth she was put into a ditch up to her chest and the Prophet commanded them to stone her. Khalid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and there spurted blood on the face of Khalid and he cursed her. The gentle Prophet prayed over her and she was buried."
(Hadith No. Muslim 682)
"Bani An-Nadir and Bani Quraiza fought, so the Prophet (Muhammad) exiled Bani An-Nadir and allowed Bani Quraiza to remain at their places. He then killed their men and distributed their women, children and property among the Muslims, but some of them came to the Prophet and he granted them safety, and they embraced Islam. He exiled all the Jews from Medina. They were the Jews of Bani Qainuqa', the tribe of 'Abdullah bin Salam and the Jews of Bani Haritha and all the other Jews of Medina."
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 5:59:362)
"Narrated Anas: 'Some people from the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet (Muhammed) and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the camels of charity and to drink, their milk and urine. They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophet ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die.'"
(Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 8:82:794)






Appendix

The Koran is supposed to be the unaltered words of their god al-lah.


"According to Muslim belief, the Koran is the eternal, unaltered Word of God, which has remained the same for 14 centuries."
http://www.geocities.com/islampencereleri3/querying_the_koran.htm



"For the first time in history, we have a built-in proof that a scripture (Quran) is the unaltered, original and complete word of God. A proof that is verifiable by anyone"

http://www.angelfire.com/az2/submission/proof.html



They believe it's never been altered and is word for word what their god actually said. This is refuted by the Koran itself which has Muhammed adding his own voice to it.



Some people have raised on other posts issues such as the incompleteness of the Koran (Hadith refer to Suras that don't exist in the Koran).

 

I am interested in the authorship of the Koran; it is claimed by some to be only the word-for-word utterances of al-lah

 The very beginning of the Koran states...

1   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚ In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.

2   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚ All the praises and thanks be to Allah, the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists).

3   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚ The Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.

4   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚ The Only Owner (and the Only Ruling Judge) of the Day of Recompense (i.e. the Day of Resurrection)

5   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚ You (Alone) we worship, and You (Alone) we ask for help (for each and everything).

6   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚ Guide us to the Straight Way

7   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚ The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).

Clearly these are the words of Muhammed, speaking to and about Al-lah, they are not the words of al-lah.

 

6:114   ÃƒÆ’‚Â

"Shall I seek a judge other than Allah while it is He Who has sent down unto you the Book (The Qur'an), explained in detail." Those unto whom We gave the Scripture [the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] know that it is revealed from your Lord in truth. So be not you of those who doubt.

These too, are the words of Muhammed.

 

Even more clear, is where Muhammed names himself…

6: 101 ÂÂ  He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. How can He have children when He has no wife? He created all things and He is the All-Knower of everything .

102   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  Such is Allah, your Lord! La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), the Creator of all things. So worship Him (Alone), and He is the Wakil (Trustee, Disposer of affairs, Guardian, etc.) over all things.

103   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  No vision can grasp Him, but His Grasp is over all vision. He is the Most Subtle and Courteous, WellAcquainted with all things.

104   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  Verily, proofs have come to you from your Lord, so whosoever sees, will do so for (the good of) his ownself, and whosoever blinds himself, will do so to his own harm, and I (Muhammad ) am not a watcher over you.

 

Note here the word (Muhammed) is placed there by the Moslems

http://www.quraan.com/index.aspx?tabindex=1&tabid=27&bid=6

Not, by me. Another verse also has Muhammed ….

51: 50 ÂÂ  So flee to Allah (from His Torment to His Mercy Islamic Monotheism), verily, I (Muhammad ) am a plain warner to you from Him.

 

Obviously Muhammed forgot that he’s not meant to be the author of the Koran.

He gets even more confused when it’s angels now narrating…

37: 161 So, verily you (pagans) and those whom you worship (idols).

162   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  Cannot lead astray [turn away from Him (Allah) anyone of the believers],

163   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  Except those who are predestined to burn in Hell!

164   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  There is not one of us (angels) but has his known place (or position);

165   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  Verily, we (angels), we stand in rows for the prayers (as you Muslims stand in rows for your prayers);

166   ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  Verily, we (angels), we are they who glorify (Allah's Praises i.e. perform prayers).

 

Muhammed is the author of the Koran, and occasionally he forgot that he wasn’t supposed to be, but he made a few slip-ups.

[Matthew777]

Don't we believe that the Virgin Mary was in her early teens while Joseph was much older?

[montalban]

Don't we believe that the Virgin Mary was in her early teens while Joseph was much older?

No 'we' don't. How does this anyway relate to Moslems marrying girls who aren't even at puberty anyway?

Have we met before on another forum? I've argued with someone using your icon. I was posting under the same name with the same icon.

[Fr. George]

Well, Orthodoxy does believe she was in her teens when Joseph was much older, but not as a dogmatic principle; and she wasn't pre-pubescent, which puts that situation in a different ballpark.

[montalban]

Well, Orthodoxy does believe she was in her teens when Joseph was much older, but not as a dogmatic principle; and she wasn't pre-pubescent, which puts that situation in a different ballpark.

Do you have a citation?

[Νεκτάριος]

Do you have a citation?

The life of the Theotokos as published by our good friends in buena vista...

[montalban]

[quote author=Νεκτάριος link=topic=8377.msg111117#msg111117 date=1142145217]
The life of the Theotokos as published by our good friends in buena vista...
[/quote]
Do you have a net citation? I can't find this 'book' of yours on the net

[montalban]

As noted earlier the only thing I'm aware on, re Mary's age is an unreliable source...
The Age of Mary
It will not be without interest to recall here, unreliable though they are, the lengthy stories concerning St. Joseph's marriage contained in the apocryphal writings. When forty years of age, Joseph married a woman called Melcha or Escha by some, Salome by others; they lived forty-nine years together and had six children, two daughters and four sons, the youngest of whom was James (the Less, "the Lord's brother"). A year after his wife's death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age, Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old...
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm

[EkhristosAnesti]

1) It's true that according to Jewish cultural norms at the time, girls would have been married in their teens, however we must remember that this was a cultural norm, and not a religious principle. Jewish cultural norms do not dictate Christian standards of living. The fact however that Muhammed, the Prophet of Islam, not only engaged in the practise of marrying a pre-pubescent teen, but was in fact divinely inspired to do so, sets a religious precedent in the islamic world. Thus, we find that such a harmful practise continues till this very day in Islamic societies.

2) The Jewish cultural norm was in fact alot superior to the guideliness to marrying a teen according to Islamic sources. According to Jewish culture at that time, girls were married a few years after they hit puberty, whereas the Islamic tradition dictates that one may marry a girl once she has her first menarche.

[EkhristosAnesti]

Montalban,

Ofcourse an RC source is going to claim that this apocrypha is unreliable with respect to historical issues surrounding Joseph and Mary, since they also reject the very idea that Joseph was previously married (which the Orthodox uphold as true tradition). In any event, I believe certain Church Fathers spoke of St Mary being around 14 years old when betrothed to Joseph; scholarship says 12 at the earliest, and 14 at the latest.

[Νεκτάριος]

Do you have a net citation? I can't find this 'book' of yours on the net

Typical internet apologist... if a quick google search doesn't yield results IT MUST NOT BE REAL!  FWIW http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0944359035/102-0568811-0339369?v=glance&n=283155

There actually is a refrenced to the age of St. Joseph being older in the liturgical texts:

Ἀπεγράφετο ποτέ, σὺν τῶ πρεσβύτη Ἰωσήφ, ὡς ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυϊδ, ἐν Βηθλεὲμ ἡ Μαριάμ, κυοφοροῦσα τὴν ἄσπορον κυοφορίαν, Ἐπέστη δὲ καιρὸς ὁ τῆς Γεννήσεως, καὶ τόπος ἣν οὐδεὶς τῶ καταλύματι, ἀλλ' ὡς τερπνὸν παλάτιον τὸ Σπήλαιον, τὴ Βασιλίδι ἐδείκνυτο, Χριστὸς γεννᾶται τὴν πρὶν πεσοῦσαν, ἀναστήσων εἰκόνα.
 
from http://www.tcgalaska.com/glt/Polytonic/texts/Dec/24.uni.htm

[montalban]

1) It's true that according to Jewish cultural norms at the time, girls would have been married in their teens, however we must remember that this was a cultural norm, and not a religious principle. Jewish cultural norms do not dictate Christian standards of living. The fact however that Muhammed, the Prophet of Islam, not only engaged in the practise of marrying a pre-pubescent teen, but was in fact divinely inspired to do so, sets a religious precedent in the islamic world. Thus, we find that such a harmful practise continues till this very day in Islamic societies.

In defence of the Jews I must note that they agreed to early betrothals.

2) The Jewish cultural norm was in fact alot superior to the guideliness to marrying a teen according to Islamic sources. According to Jewish culture at that time, girls were married a few years after they hit puberty, whereas the Islamic tradition dictates that one may marry a girl once she has her first menarche.

The 'evidence' for Mary's early marriage is minimal

Montalban,

Ofcourse an RC source is going to claim that this apocrypha is unreliable with respect to historical issues surrounding Joseph and Mary, since they also reject the very idea that Joseph was previously married (which the Orthodox uphold as true tradition). In any event, I believe certain Church Fathers spoke of St Mary being around 14 years old when betrothed to Joseph; scholarship says 12 at the earliest, and 14 at the latest.

There's two issues here really, one that Joseph was married earlier, and two the young age of Mary. The evidence that Mary was young stems from one source that is not widely recognised, RCC or Orthodox