Another Hadith disavowed. Lets see: Scandalous and said in Fatwa: DENY (or blame other Islamic sect(Sunni/Shiaa) Scandalous and said in Hadith: DENY Scandalous and said in Qur'an(Beat your wife): Doh, nowhere to run. I guess we beat our wives. In about 100(1000?) years when they come out of the dark ages, they will learn, as Christians have, to refer to those particular texts as allegorical.
Beating wives doesn't mean that kind of hard beating you imagine . BTW it can be beating her at a chess game , Just joking lol , It's our ethics , not yours and women here accept it . I don't know much about such stuff so don't take words on me . But anyway I guess my first question was prove to me that the Hadith is valid , where's the proof ?
well mate , do u think Muslims agree ? no we don't . That Hadith is weak , and their only point is that in Islam if you were a baby and another woman fed you with her breast 5 times you aren't allowed to marry her nor her daughter .
It's the same as the proof that the Quran is "valid" -- nada. They are all just made up stories by a bunch of dead men. But if you're going to buy one, there's no reason not to buy the whole set.
Do you really have to know much about it? Something as obviously wrong as beating your wife does not need much more explanation. Let me be the 9,232,412,513 person to point out your your ethics are f*cked. The fact your women there accept it(like they have a choice) doesn't make it right.
More source data: Sahih Muslim 3424 'Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (May peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, I see on the face of Abu Hudhaifa (signs of disgust) on entering of Salim (who is an ally) into (our house), whereupon Allah's Apostle (May peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She said: How can I suckle him as he is a grown-up man? Allah's Messenger (May peace be upon him) smiled and said: I already know that he is a young man 'Amr has made this addition in his narration that he participated in the Battle of Badr and in the narration of Ibn 'Umar (the words are): Allah's Messenger (May peace be upon him) laughed. See: (The Book of Marriage) CHAPTER: SUCKLING OF A YOUNG (BOY)
@will spencer , I guess you don't know that Hadiths were written 130 - 250 years after the prophet peace be upon him died , It was done by narrators that other man narrated it to him that other man had narrated about the prophet . Quran was collected just after the prophet died , and each verse had to have atleast two witnesses who say it and agree that it's from the Quran, also it was written on skin , walls , etc .. so that's called collection not narration . sorry for my English .
"this was only given permission to Sahla daughter of Suhail." If the Hadith was valid about the prohpet peace be upon him .
Same you do . Prove that these Hadiths you provided are valid about the prophet and get me the explanation of the Hadith from Azhar or any trusted source so I can say yes yes yes .
Now that's what I'm talking about -- absolute unreasoning obedience to dogma. Sura 33:36 And it becometh not a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His messenger have decided an affair (for them), that they should (after that) claim any say in their affair; and whoso is rebellious to Allah and His messenger, he verily goeth astray in error manifest.
Do you accept something as true, just because it's written in the Quran or one of the Hadith's of which your particular branch of Islam approves? Two steps. First, look at this: Sahih Muslim 3424 'Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (May peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, I see on the face of Abu Hudhaifa (signs of disgust) on entering of Salim (who is an ally) into (our house), whereupon Allah's Apostle (May peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She said: How can I suckle him as he is a grown-up man? Allah's Messenger (May peace be upon him) smiled and said: I already know that he is a young man 'Amr has made this addition in his narration that he participated in the Battle of Badr and in the narration of Ibn 'Umar (the words are): Allah's Messenger (May peace be upon him) laughed. See: (The Book of Marriage) CHAPTER: SUCKLING OF A YOUNG (BOY) Second step is your choice. If your second step is to think "Hey, what do I think about breast feeding adult men so that they can get around a rule preventing them from being in the presence of women? What makes that a good idea? What makes that a bad idea?" -- that's reasoning. If your second step is to think "Well, it's in an authentic Hadith, I must accept it." -- that's unreasoning obedience to dogma.
Cyb3rKing I'll refer you to this: The Fatwa of an Al-Azhar scholar Here is where the head of the Hadith Department in Al-Azhar University, Dr. Izzat Atiyya comes into play. Its worth noting, that the Al-Azhar University in Cairo is considered to be the world´s most renowned Islamic university by all Sunni Muslims. Only a few months ago, Dr. Atiyya published a fatwa. According to this verdict the Islamic rules of gender segregation and veiling can be circumvented if a woman suckles a man. Alternatively, a man can also be breast-fed by a sister or the mother of a woman. The idea behind this ruling is that there is no law for adoption in many Islamic societies. However, a mother-son-relationship can be established by breast-feeding. The scholar of Al-Azhar University explained his ruling in an interview given to Al-Watani Al-Yawm, a weekly newspaper published by Egypt's ruling National Democratic Front party. According to this interview it was the prophet himself who confirmed that a man and a woman are allowed to be together in private if the man had been previously breastfed by the woman. It must also be noted that Dr. Abd Al-Mahdi Abd Al-Qadir, another Al-Azhar scholar, wrote and published a book rendering similar ideas based on the same Islamic sources. Please research your religion. You got the head of Hadith department in the most reputable Islamic University in the world confirming this. What is your opinion now? Are you going to continue the ignorance? Please. Be honest with yourself. This is a religion we are talking about.
Imam Al-Qurtubi in his commentary on Qur’an 2:233 notes the following: Imam Malik (may Allah be Merciful to him), his followers and a group of scholars has gathered from this verse that nursing which is treated like blood relation is what takes place in the (first) two years; because after two years, nursing is over and there is no considerable nursing after two years. This is his statement in his Muwatta in the report of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Hakam on his authority. This is the opinion of ?Umar and Ibn ?Abbas and it was reported on authority of Ibn Mas?ood. It was also stated by Az-Zuhri, Qatada, Ash-Shu?abi, Sufyan Ath-Thawri, Al-Awza?i, Ash-Shaf?i, Ahmad, Ishaq, Abu Yusuf, Muhammad and Abu Thawr. Ibn Abdul-Hakam reported on his authority: ?two years with additional few days?. Abdul-Malik, ?like a month?. Ibn-ul-Qasim related on authority of Malik that he said, ?Nursing is (considerable within) two years and two months later?. Al-Walid Ibn Muslim related on his authority that he said, ?Nursing one, two or three months after the two years is still considered within the two years, whatever comes after this is nonsense?. It is reported on authority of (Abu Hanifah) An-Nu?man that he said, ?What is after the two years up to six months is (considered) nursing?. But the authentic (opinion) is the first one due to His saying ?The mothers shall give suck to their offspring for two whole years?. This indicates that there is no significance of whatever the newborn suckles after the age of two years. Sufyan related on authority of ?Amr Ibn Dinar on authority of Ibn ?Abbas that he said, Allah?s Messenger (peace be upon him) said, ?There is no nursing but within the (first) two years?. Ad-Darqatni said, it is related on authority of Ibn ?Uyaiinah but by Al-Haytham Ibn Gamil and he is a trustworthy memorizer. I say: This report in addition to the verse and its meaning disallows nursing of the adult and (indicates) that it has no significance. It was reported on authority of ?Aisha that she endorsed it and it was the opinion of Al-Laith Ibn Sa?d among scholars. It was reported about Abu Musa Al-Ash?ari that he used to validate it and reported that he retracted this opinion. Source Repeating a lie ad nauseam does not make the argument true. Some people really need to learn that.
Trolls like you who suddenly introduce ad hominems in the thread are not going to contribute anything positive. Go and bomb a Muslim country if you hate the Muslims so much.
I hate nobody. I certainly have no desire to see anyone bombed. Is that a common reaction to a discussion you disagree with in your culture to suggest bombing? Oh wait, we know it is as evidence by the behavior of Muslims around the world in reaction to cartoons and such. I was merely pointing out that repeating a lie for 1400 years makes it no more the truth. Simple concepts are much harder to spin your way out of with religious bullshit.
Its more a reaction to your consistent Islamophobic diatribe, rather than anything else. Like I said, if you really hate "Islam" that much, why not do something about it (like bombing countries to smithereens) instead of spewing hate-speech in webmaster forums? That will at least bring some sanity here, with you disappearing from the scene.