JEWISH KING JESUS IS COMING AT THE RAPTURE FOR US IN THE CLOUDS-DON'T MISS IT FOR THE WORLD.THE BIBLE TAKEN LITERALLY- WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE MAKES GOOD SENSE-SEEK NO OTHER SENSE-LEST YOU END UP IN NONSENSE.GET SAVED NOW- CALL ON JESUS TODAY.THE ONLY SAVIOR OF THE WHOLE EARTH - NO OTHER. 1 COR 15:23-JESUS THE FIRST FRUITS-CHRISTIANS RAPTURED TO JESUS-FIRST FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT-23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.ROMANS 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.(THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE)
ISRAEL SATAN COMES AGAINST
1 CHRONICLES 21:1
1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
GENESIS 12:1-3
1
Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from
thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I (GOD) will
shew thee:
2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
3
And I will bless them that bless thee,(ISRAELIS) and curse (DESTROY)
him that curseth thee:(DESTROY THEM) and in thee shall all families of
the earth be blessed.
And here are the bounderies of the land
that Israel will inherit either through war or peace or God in the
future. God says its Israels land and only Israels land. They will have
every inch God promised them of this land in the future.
Egypt east
of the Nile River, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, The
southern part of Turkey and the Western Half of Iraq west of the
Euphrates. Gen 13:14-15, Psm 105:9,11, Gen 15:18, Exe 23:31, Num
34:1-12, Josh 1:4.ALL THIS LAND ISRAEL WILL DEFINATELY OWN IN THE
FUTURE, ITS ISRAELS NOT ISHMAELS LAND.12 TRIBES INHERIT LAND IN THE
FUTURE.
ISLAMIC DEATH CULT AND FAKE MOHAMMAAD AND FAKE MOON GOD ALLAH WHICH IS SIMPLY SATAN IS THE LEADER OF ISLAM.
LEVITICUS 26:16
16
I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you( sudden)
terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes,
and cause sorrow of heart:(WARS AND DEATH) and ye shall sow your seed in
vain, for your enemies shall eat it.(CHINA CONTROLS AMERICAS ECONOMY BY
BUYING UP DEBT)
ISAIAH 33:1,18-19 Woe to thee that
spoilest,(destroys) and thou wast not spoiled;(destroyed) and dealest
treacherously, and they dealt not treacherously with thee! when thou
shalt cease to spoil,(destroy) thou shalt be spoiled;(destroyed) and
when thou shalt make an end to deal treacherously, they shall deal
treacherously with thee.
18 Thine heart shall meditate terror. Where is the scribe? where is the receiver? where is he that counted the towers?
19
Thou shalt not see a fierce people, a people of a deeper speech than
thou canst perceive; of a stammering tongue, that thou canst not
understand.
JOHN 16:2
2 They shall put you out of the
synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think
that he doeth God service.(ISLAM MURDERS IN THE NAME OF THEIR MOON GOD
ALLAH)
GENESIS 16:11-12
11 And the angel of the LORD said unto
her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call
his name Ishmael;(ARAB/MUSLIM) because the LORD hath heard thy
affliction.
12 And he will be a wild man;(RIOTS-BURNING-MURDEROUUS
RAGE) his hand will be against every man,(ISLAM WANTS WORLD DOMINATION)
and every man's hand against him;(DEFENDING THEMSELVES) and he shall
dwell in the presence of all his brethren.(ARAB/MUSLIMS LIVE WITH
ISRAELIS)
The Family Tree of Ishmael
12 This is the family tree of Ishmael son of Abraham, the son that Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah’s maid, bore to Abraham.
13-16
These are the names of Ishmael’s sons in the order of their births:
Nebaioth, Ishmael’s firstborn, Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, Mishma, Dumah,
Massa, Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah—all the sons of Ishmael.
Their settlements and encampments were named after them. Twelve princes
with their twelve tribes.
(ISLAM CLAIMS MOHAMMID IS A OFF SPRING OF
ISHMAEL THE FIRST BASTARD CHILD OF THE ARABS WITH A SLAVE MOTHER TO THE
ISRAELIS.DOES ANY ONE SEE THE NAME OF MOHAMMID IN ISHMAELS FAMILY TREE.
BECAUSE I SURE DON'T. I DOUBT MOHAMMID EVEN EXISTS. AND SATAN IS THE
LEADER OF ISLAM HHIMSELF. SO ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION AT ALL. ISLAM IS
NOTHING BUT A DEATH CULT THAT WORSHIPS DEATH. AND WILL BURN IN HELL
FIRE, THEN THE FINAL JUDGEMENT IN FRONT OF JESUS.ONLY TO BE THROWN IN
THE LAKE OF FIRE FOREVER WITH THEIR NEVER DYING BODIES.ISLAM EXPOSED AS A
FRAUD SATAN LIE AND MURDER DEAT CULT.
GENESIS 6:11-13
11 The
earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with
violence.(WORLD TERRORISM,MURDERS)(HAMAS IN HEBREW IS VIOLENCE)
12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
13
And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the
earth is filled with violence (TERRORISM)(HAMAS) through them; and,
behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
ISAIAH 14:12-14
12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer,(SATAN) son of the
morning!(HEBREW-CRECENT MOON-ISLAM) how art thou cut down to the ground,
which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine
heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars
of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the
sides of the north:
14 I (SATAN HAS EYE TROUBLES) will ascend above
the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.(AND 1/3RD OF
THE ANGELS OF HEAVEN FELL WITH SATAN AND BECAME DEMONS)
JOHN 8:44
44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will
do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth,
because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of
his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
IS MOHAMMED A DESCENDENT OF ISHMAEL? By Dr. Rafat Amari
Muslims
believe that Mohammed is a descendant of Ishmael. As proof of their
position, Muslims refer to genealogies written around 770-775 A.D. by
Ibn Ishak.What he has written is simply not true. Ishmaelite tribes,
especially the tribe of Nebaioth from which, according to Ibn Ishak,
Mohammed is said to have come, were nomadic tribes who lived in the
Sinai and Fertile Crescent deserts. These tribes disappeared after the
7th century B.C.Mohammed's family was a Himyarite Yemeni family, while
the Ishmaelites, who lived in the deserts of the Fertile Crescent,
became extinct many centuries before Mohammed's family left
Yemen.Historians say that the family of Mohammed was a family which
lived in Saba-Yemen. In the 5th century A.D., Qusayy Bin Kilab, the 5th
ancestor of Mohammed, gathered an alliance of many Yemeni families
forming Quraish, the tribe from which Mohammed later came. These
families only came to occupy Mecca in the 5th century A.D. The city of
Mecca was built by the tribe of Khuzaa'h in the 4th century A.D.
Mohammed’s family is not connected to any Ishmaelite tribe because
Mohammed’s family didn’t leave Yemen until the 5th century A.D., and
that’s about 1,100 years after the Ishmaelites disappeared. Mohammed’s
tribe could not have lived in the same locations as the Ishmaelite
tribes at any time throughout history.The genealogy fabricated by
Ibn-Ishak contradicts the sayings of Mohammed, who expressed his
ignorance about his ancestors prior to his 13th ancestor.Ibn Ishak was
considered by the Muslim scholars of his time as being guilty of forgery
and fabricating false genealogies.[i][i]Long before Ibn Ishak, Muslims
who lived in Mohammed’s own time also fabricated genealogies in an
attempt to connect Mohammed to the descendants of Ishmael. Mohammed,
himself, rejected all of these false genealogies, and he put limits
regarding the genealogy of his ancestors. Regarding Mohammed’s own
rejection of the false genealogies, Amru bin al-As wrote: Mohammed
genealogized himself regarding his ancestors until he reached al-Nather
bin Kinaneh, then he said, “anyone who claimed otherwise or added
further ancestors, has lied.”[ii][ii] By this, Mohammed confessed that
neither he, nor anyone else, knew about his ancestors beyond al-Nather
bin Kinaneh. Nather bin Kinaneh is the 13th ancestor in the genealogy
which Mohammed recognized as true. Other narrations of the customs, or
sayings, of Mohammed, called Hadiths, show Mohammed refused to be
genealogized prior to Maad, معدwho some suggested, was the 20th
ancestor of Mohammed.[iii][iii] All the genealogies that appeared at the
time of Mohammed were considered by Mohammed and his close followers to
be false.Many versions of Hadith of Mohammed coming from the followers
of Mohammed all report that Mohammed opposed to be genelogized until
Ishmael. All his closest contemporaries and followers considered the
genealogies appearing at his time to be false. Among the people who
reported Mohammed’s opposition to such genealogies were his wife,
Aisheh, and his cousin, Ibn Abbas, one of the most important reporters
of Mohammed’s Hadith.[iv][iv] Ibn Ishak went against what all these
people had said by creating genealogies which connect the ancestors of
Mohammed with Ishmael.Ibn Ishak altered the genealogies listed by Moses
in Genesis; he inserted Arabic names from his time and contradicted the
history regarding Amalek.The fabrication went beyond this. The
genealogies created by Ibn Ishak and others who came after him inserted
Arabic names into the genealogies which we find in Genesis. For
example, Ibn Ishak inserted the Arabic name “Ya’rab,” which comes from
the word “Arab,” listing him as the son of “ Khahtan.” Ibn Ishak then
replaced Khahtan for Joktan, mentioned in the book of Genesis as the son
of Eber, the son of Arphaxad, and the third son of Shem, the son of
Noah.[v][v] We know that the term “Arab” didn’t exist until the 10th
century B.C. How, then, could it be inserted into history shortly
following Noah, perhaps around 5500 B.C.?Ibn Ishak went still farther.
He changed the name of Lud, the fourth son of Shem, to Luth. He then
made Luth the father of Amalek, who fathered the Amalekites. He also
claimed that Amalek and his tribe lived in Mecca, and he claimed that
the ancient Egyptians were also descendants of Amalek. He then made
Amalek’s original name “Arib,” just to connect him with the
Arabs.[vi][vi] Indirectly, through these false genealogies, Ibn Ishak
claimed that Mecca existed at the time of Noah and his grandson, Lud.
This directly contradicts the historical facts we examined before,
showing that Mecca didn’t exist until the 4th century A.D.Amalek is a
descendant of Esau, the son of Isaac. Genesis 36:12 states that Timma
was a concubine of Eliphaz, the first born of Esau, and that she bore
Amalek to Eliphaz. Amalek became the father of the Amalekites, which was
an Edomite tribe which originally lived in southern Jordan, but moved
to the eastern part of the Sinai, as was attested at the time of Moses.
The Amalekites became extinct after the 10th century B.C. There’s no
mention of Amalek in any inscription or in the writings of any Greek
historian, which would indicate that the tribe lived in central, western
or northern Arabia.Refuting the Claim About Jurhum-Ibn Ishak claimed
that the tribe of Jurhum lived in Mecca as far back as the time of
Abraham. He also claimed that Jurhum was the grandson of Joktan, the son
of Eber. He further claimed that Jurhum’s original name was
“Hathrem.”[vii][vii] The significance of the name “Hathrem” is that it
is characteristic of Arabic-style names used at the time of Ibn Ishak,
which was in the 8th century A.D. The names given in the inscriptions of
Yemen and northern Arabia are totally different from the style of the
names given in Ibn Ishak’s genealogies, which reflect the names of his
generation. It is a fact that no inscription, no Greek or Roman
historian, and no geographer who visited Arabia, ever mentioned a tribe
called Jurhum. The first mention of Jurhum we find it in a poesy of
Ummyya bin Abi al-Salet, the maternal cousin of Mohammed, who also
claimed to be a prophet. The poem attributed to Ummyya says “the Lord of
Ad and Jurhum” [viii][viii]. First of all, the poem most probably was
composed after the event of Islam, because we do not have in Jahiliyah
pre-Islam any mention about Jurhum. The idea that many of the Jahiliyah
poetry were added after Islam is embraced by great scholars such as Tah
Hussein, the famous Egyptian scholar. Secondly, for the case of
argument, if we want to admit the originality of such verse, we could
not build upon it a history that a nation called Jurhum existed in
Arabia since the time of Abraham, because Ummyya was contemporary of
Mohammed, and he can't be a source of documentation about a nation which
would have existed prior to his time by 2700 years. Because there were
no archiving methods and no printing like we have today, it’s commonly
accepted that tradition can be considered accurate only if it was
written within four centuries of the writers. If Jurhum existed as tribe
in Arabia, it could have been a small tribe that appeared some time
after the Christian era. Since no classical writer mentioned this tribe,
if existed, it should have been insignificant. Ummyyia's poems are full
of myths: such as his claim that the Queen of Saba, who visited king
Solomon was his aunt; he claimed this to justify his claim to the role
of prophecy. In addition, Ummyyia had relationship with a Jinn-devil,
who used to instruct him, which proves that he was a part of the occult
religion of Arabia. If we want to accept this poem as composed by him,
how can we rely on poems of such personality to establish history dating
back to 2700 years before his time? Enormous historical mistakes exist
in the Quran, and the genealogies created after the rise of Islam, to
support the Quran. Some examples are the genealogies regarding Thamud
and Nimrod.There are other serious historical mistakes in the Islamic
genealogies regarding the tribe of Thamud. Thamud is an Arabic tribe
which appeared in the 8th century B.C., as was attested at the time of
the Assyrian King Sargon II through his Inscriptions. Thamud later lost
its political power about the 5th century A.D. The Islamic genealogies
attempted to back statements made in the Qur’an which placed Thamud and
Ad – another Arabian tribe which appeared after Thamud-as tribes which
came right after Noah. So they created a father for the tribe of Thamud
and named him “Thamud.” Then they claimed he was the grandson of Shem,
the son of Noah.[ix][ix] All this was created just to fit the narration
of the Qur’an.The Qur’an claims that the tribe of Thamud was the third
generation after Noah, ( The Qur'an made the Arabian tribe of Ad to be
second generation after Noah's generation; then Thamud as the third
generation, See Surah 7:69; 23:31,32;14:8,9) and it was condemned by
Allah to be punished by a wind. (The wind was the god who brought
judgment in Zoroastrianism. We know this is also an enormous historical
mistake. Not only did Thamud not appear until the 8th century B.C., but
the official history, as shown by Assyrian inscriptions, demonstrates
that Thamud continued to exist during the 7th century B.C. Also,
writings by various Greek and Roman geographers who wrote about Arabia,
said Thamud continued until the 5th century A.D. as a
politically-organized tribe which occupied a large part of northern
Arabia. No wind destroyed the tribe, as the Qur’an claims.This should
be enough to convince us, but there’s yet another enormous historical
mistake in the Islamic genealogies. This one concerns Nimrod. According
to Genesis 10:8-11, Nimrod was the first builder of the old cities of
Mesopotamia. He was the son of Cush, the son of Ham, the son of Noah.We
can date him to between 5000 and 4500 B.C. Islamic genealogies
correctly state that Nimrod was the son of Cush, but incorrectly state
that he lived around the time of Abraham.[x][x] This false claim about
Nimrod was made to conform to a mistake in the Qur’an, which made Nimrod
reign at the time of Abraham. The Qur’an says Nimrod persecuted Abraham
and cast him into a fire which did not harm him. We read this in Surah
al-Anbiya' 21:51-70 and Surah al-Safat 37:95. The narration of the
Qur’an is taken from the Jewish book called Midrash Rabbah, chapter
17.We urge Muslims to study history, and to compare the facts to what
they have been told in the Qur’an and in Islamic tradition. The claims
of Mohammed, the Qur’an and Islam are clearly unfounded. Even if such
historical errors were accepted by the followers in Mohammed’s time, we
now have so much more evidence which proves them in error. How can
anyone embrace these enormous mistakes, when a simple study of history
demonstrates how wrong they are.No one has the right to claim he
descended from a specific man who lived 2,000 years before him, unless
he has written documents which testify to his claim. In Mohammed’s case,
those documents simply do not exist. We have no proof that the
ancestors of Mohammed were the descendants of IshmaelI will continue to
analyze the Islamic genealogies which began to appear in the 8th century
A.D., and which endeavor to connect Mohammed with Ishmael. I already
quoted the Hadith of Mohammed, in which he prohibited any genealogy
which described him any further back than Nather bin Kinaneh, who lived
13 generations before him. Other Hadith of Mohammed state that he didn’t
want to be genealogized prior to Maad معد . The many genealogies which
appeared since the 8th century A.D. confirm the same information, that
the genealogy of Mohammed is limited to probably 13 generations before
him, but certainly not more than 20 ancestors.Why is this significant in
our search for Mohammed’s genealogy? In the first place, Mohammed
himself confessed that he didn’t know of any ancestor before his 13th
ancestor. Secondly, after the 13th generation, we begin to notice the
differences in these genealogies. After Maad bin Adnan, number 20, the
genealogies begin to contradict themselves with big differences,
reflecting the fact that the authors of such genealogies couldn’t find
resources on which to build their genealogies. That’s because Mohammed
prohibited his contemporaries from going any further back than his 13th
ancestor. Thus, every one fabricated Mohammed’s genealogy differently
from the other.Another interesting feature of their work is that all of
the biographers used Arabic-style names of the 8th and 9th centuries
A.D., but they applied the names to the generation in which Ishmael
lived. As an example, we find a genealogy mentioned by Tabari, in which
the author of the genealogy said Nebaioth, the first-born of Ishmael,
begot a son under the name of al-Awam العوام , and al-Awam to beget
al-Saboh الصابوح. Notice the Arabic names. In the genealogy,
designations of al-Awam, and al-Saboh, respectively, follow the
names.[xi][xi] We don’t find this style even in the inscriptions of
North Arabia before the Christian era. Instead, we see these names are
of the same style as the Umayyad and Abassid periods, after the 8th and
9th centuries A.D.( the Abassid period began in the year 750 A.D.).When
we return to the genealogy fabricated by Ibn Ishak, on which other
Muslim writers built in more recent times, we notice his Arabization of
the genealogy. As I stated previously, he listed the son of Nabaioth,
first-born of Ishmael, as Yashjub يشجب, his son is Yarob يعرب. Yarob
is, in itself, a word derived from the word Arab. Ibn Ishak did this in
order to make Ishmael appear to be an Arab. Though we know that the word
“Arab” was not known before the 10th century B.C., this style for names
like Yarob and Yashjub is characteristic of the 8th century A.D., in
which Ibn Ishak lived. A common characteristic to all these genealogies
is that they claim Mohammed was descended from Ishmael, and they all
give a limited number of ancestors between Mohammed and Ishmael.There
are 2,670 years between Ishmael and Mohammed; a large span of time which
cannot be covered with only 40 generations.Ibn Ishak listed 40
ancestors. He wasn’t aware, when he fabricated his genealogy, that 40
ancestors are not sufficient to cover the great time span between
Ishmael and Mohammed. Ishmael lived around 2050 B.C., while Mohammed
emigrated to Medina around 620 A.D. Therefore, there are about 2,670
years between Ishmael and Mohammed. How can this great period be covered
by only 40 ancestors?By contrast, the Gospel of Matthew reports the
genealogy of Jesus Christ as far back as Abraham. We find 42 ancestors
between Abraham and Jesus, though it’s a period of only l,950 years. The
genealogy of Mohammed must account for another 720 years.Another thing
to consider is that a Jewish generation is longer than an Arabian
generation. Consider the ancestors of Isaac from Abraham to King David.
Many of these men fathered their first-born when they were 40 or 50
years old. We see that between the captivity in Babylon in 586 B.C., and
the birth of Jesus, there are 14 generations. This shows that the
Jewish generation in that period was around 41 years. But when we come
to the Arabian generations, we can’t allow 41 years for each generation.
Scholars consider an Arabian generation to have been about 20 years,
because Arabians married when they were about 17-20 years old, due to
weather and their cultural environment.The Archaeology of Arabia
Confirmed the Relative Brevity of an Arabian GenerationArchaeology
confirms the lower figures for the generations in Arabia. If we study
the series of kings in Arabia, both in northern Arabia and Yemen, we
come to verify the shortness of Arabian generations when compared to
generations in other places, such as Israel. For example, the series of
rulers in Saba and Himyar of Yemen begin with the Karibil A. in the 9th
century B.C., and run through Maadikarib III, King of Himyar, who was
number 102, the last one in the series. He reigned between 575- 577
A.D.[xii][xii] We see 102 generations of kings in a span of about 1,400
years. Remembering that a few of these rulers were brothers of other
kings in the same generation, we find between 75 to 80 generations, and
we conclude that the average Arabian generation was about 17-20
years.Considering the shortness of the Arabian generation, let’s suppose
that each generation in Mohammed’s genealogy is 20 years. Since
Mohammed is separated from Abraham and Ishmael by 2,670 years, there
must have been a little over 133 generations between them. When we do
the math, we have 2,670 years divided by 20 years, which equals 133 and
one-half generations, not 35 or 40, as claimed by Ibn Ishak and the
others who fabricated genealogies for the ancestors of Mohammed. We see
how unprepared and unwise they were to claim Mohammed is descended from
Abraham and his son, Ishmael.Except for the lineage of Jesus, which was
documented by written books of the Bible through the centuries, no other
family in history has ever accounted for their ancestors over a period
of 2,000 years.Let’s look at this another way. If we assume that the
20th ancestor of Mohammed is known, and if we make a generation 25
years rather than 20 years, then ancestor number 21 would still be 525
years distant from Mohammed. This means that the 21st ancestor of
Mohammed lived between 50-70 A.D. This would make the gap between him
and Ishmael about 2,000 years.Except for the linage of Jesus, no family
in history had ever verified their ancestors over a period of 2,000
years. The family of Joseph, who was from the royal lineage of Judah,
and the family of Mary, who was from the same tribe, could account for
their ancestors as far back as Abraham. Because there have been
documented, written books of the Bible in each generation, the facts are
verified again and again. They give testimony to the promise God made
to Abraham and to Isaac, son of Abraham, which God then confirmed to
almost every member of the Messianic genealogy. God’s divine promise
accompanied others in the Messianic line, such as Isaac, his son, Jacob,
and Jacob’s son, Judah, as it was recorded by Moses in the book of
Genesis, the first book of the Bible.The genealogy continued to be
recorded in many other books of the Bible. For example, we see God
confirming the continuity of the Messianic line in the book of Ruth
through Boaz, one of the ancestors of King David. The promise of God
concerning the birth of a divine child as Savior was confirmed to David
and his son, Solomon, then to many other kings, until we reach the last
king who governed Judah at the time of Babylon’s captivity, around 586
B.C. The confirmation of God’s promise continued after the captivity of
Babylon. In fact, God renewed His promise to another ruler in David’s
royal line, Zerubbabel, who became governor of Judah around 538 B.C.Many
prophets prophesied God’s incarnation in human form after Zerubbabel
was governor. The series of prophesies continue until we reach the
prophet Malachi, who wrote the last book of the Old Testament around 436
B.C. The first chapter of Malachi begins with these words:Behold I send
my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. And the Lord, whom
you seek, will suddenly come to His temple.It is clear that the God of
the Old Testament, who spoke to Malachi and to all the prophets, was the
One who promised to come, announcing the sending of a messenger to
prepare the way for Him as a sign of His coming. This messenger was John
the Baptist, whom God called in the same generation in which Christ was
incarnated, and who testified in John 1:26, 27 concerning Jesus. He
said:I baptize with water, but there stands one among you whom you do
not know. It is he who, coming after me, is preferred before me, whose
sandal strap I am not worthy to untie.Later, when John was asked by the
Jews if He was the Messiah, said in Matthew 3:2 that he was “the voice
of one crying in the wilderness.” He was the one who came to prepare
the way before the Lord, fulfilling the prophecy of Isaiah 40:3. John
the Baptist pointed to Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God, and the
Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.There is a complete
continuity of documented records and historical testimonies regarding
the Messianic genealogy of Jesus.The royal lineage continued to be
well-known between the time of Malachi and Jesus. In fact, rulers in
Judah continued their rule in Jerusalem at the time of the Maccabees
during the 2nd century B.C. This means that the period, which was
covered only by oral tradition until we reached Mary and Joseph, doesn’t
exceed 120-140 years. That was a short time in which families would
know about the father of their grandfather who lived 140 years
earlier.When we consider John the Baptist, of whom there is a written
testimony, not just in the New Testament, but also in historical
literature, such as the writings of Josephus Flavius , the Jewish-Roman
historian, we have a complete continuity of documented records and
historical testimonies regarding the Messianic genealogy of Jesus.The
absence of any record between Mohammed and Ishmael which would support
the Islamic claim that Mohammed is descended from Ishmael.On the other
hand, when we come to the family of Mohammed, whose oldest disputable
ancestor was 21 people distant from him, and who lived in Yemen in the
first century A.D., how can we connect Mohammed’s 20th ancestor with
Ishmael who lived in Sinai 2,000 years before him? No Arabian documents
written before Mohammed even allude to such a claim.Islam also claims
that Abraham and Ishmael founded the city of Mecca, but Mecca was not in
existence prior to the 4th century A.D. There’s no historical document
written during the 2,000 years between Mohammed’s 21st ancestor and the
time of Ishmael, which claims the 20th ancestor of Mohammed was a
descendent of Ishmael. And there is no credible document written between
the time of Mohammed’s 21st ancestor and his own time.As if this were
not enough evidence that Mohammed couldn’t have descended from Ishmael,
we have the testimony of thousands of inscriptions, annals and
archaeological records which speak about hundreds of rulers in Arabia
who belonged to many different tribes, but no inscription or record
includes material on any of the ancestors of Mohammed. This can only
confirm that Mohammed’s family was an ordinary and unknown family like
any other family in Yemen, and that it never ruled in any city in
western Arabia, even though Islamic tradition claims it ruled in
Mecca.The Impossibility of the 20th Ancestor of Mohammed Claiming to be
Descended from Ishmael-Because Mohammed came from an average Yemeni
family, how can his 20th ancestor possess information about ancestors
who lived at the time of Abraham? Although printing was invented in the
15th century, and archiving and documentation has since become more
organized, and easier, than in previous centuries, none of the families
in our generation know the names of their ancestors who lived 1,000
years ago. How, then, could an ordinary man, such as the 20th ancestor
of Mohammed, who lived around the 1st century A.D., know anything about
an ancestor who lived 2000 years before him?From Assyrian records dated
between the 9th and 7th century B.C., we know that Ishmaelite tribes
lived as nomads in Sinai and the Fertile Crescent. But none of these
records include the name Ishmael. No inscription shows that they called
any person by that name. This demonstrates to us that they didn’t know
their lineage from Ishmael. Otherwise, they would certainly have been
proud to be his descendants, and they would have recorded Ishmael in
each subsequent generation, just as the Israelites recorded Isaac as
part of their Israelite religious heritage in every ancient book they
wrote. Because Ishmael received no spiritual call from God, his only
historical descendants were the twelve tribes which descended from his
sons. In consequent generations, even his sons' descendents forgot about
him, including his name, even though the time between Ishmael and these
tribes was only about 1,200 years (between the 7th and 9th century
B.C.). Since this is the case for the true descendants of Ishmael, how
can a man who lived in Yemen, far from where Ishmael lived, conclude he
descended from Ishmael who lived 2,000 years before him? If the
Ishmaelites themselves were not aware of their ancestry from Ishmael,
who would have told the 21st ancestor of Mohammed that he was descended
from Ishmael? There is no proof that Mohammed’s ancestors, number 13 or
number 20, ever claimed to be descendants from Ishmael. There’s no
written document before Mohammed that make such a claim. Even if such
document were to have existed, still this ancestor would have no right
to claim descendancy from a man who lived 2,000 years before him,
without written documents in each generation to prove his case. It is
clear that the claim of Islam about Mohammed coming from Ishmael progeny
is farther from the truth than if I claimed that I came from the line
of Julius Cesar who lived 2,000 years before my time. Though I would
claim that my 20th ancestor was from Julius Cesar, I have nothing to
confirm my claim. Such a claim is impossible to verify by anyone living
in our generation. That’s why no one today, even in Rome itself, claims
descendancy from Julius Cesar, nor did any Italian who lived 1,000 years
ago dare to make such a claim. It’s understood that even 1,000 years
without any documented testimony renders the claim ridiculous.It was a
common custom in Arabia at the time of Mohammed for many who claimed to
be prophets to claim that they were descended from Biblical figures.Such
claim, if anyone would embrace it, would be considered as transgressing
honesty and logic. Yet, there were those people in Arabia, specifically
at the time of Mohammed, who knowingly held to the claim that they were
descendents of Biblical figures. Men who claimed to be prophets often
claimed to descend from known figures in history, or from people
mentioned in the Bible. Umayya bin abi al-Salt, a maternal cousin of
Mohammed, claimed to be a prophet. He said the Queen of Sheba, who
visited Solomon, was his aunt.[xiii][xiii] He said this to establish
that he was from the line of her brother. Also Tubb'a (the Yemeni leader
who ruled between A.D. 410 and 435 and occupied Mecca) claimed to be a
prophet and claimed that the Queen of Sheba was his aunt.[xiv][xiv]
Throughout history we have had people like Umayya bin Abi al-Salt, who
wanted to be prophets over their people. They made their claims
because knew that many around them were naive and ignorant and wouldn’t
refute their claims. Although false prophets in Arabia had the audacity
to claim they were offspring from a man who lived 1,000 years before
them, Mohammed claimed to descend from Ishmael who lived 2,700 years
before him, yet without any historical written document. My heart goes
out to our Muslims friends who continue to trust their eternal destiny
to a claim which is against logic and history.Mohammed claimed to have
ascended to heaven, met Abraham, and learned that he was a true copy of
Abraham, so as to convince his followers that he was descended from
Abraham.We saw how Mohammed claimed that Ishmael was his ancestor. He
claimed this, even though the time between Mohammed and Ishmael was
about 2,700 years, and there were no written documents at any time to
support this claim.But there is more involved than supporting an
unhistorical claim. Mohammed connected himself to Abraham by saying he
was a physically-true copy of Abraham, because he had ascended to heaven
where he encountered many Biblical figures – and among them was
Abraham.He also claimed that heaven has seven layers, copying the idea
embraced by many religions and sects of his time, such as Gnosticism,
Manicheism and Zoroastrianism. Gnostic literature makes man responsible
for each of the sky’s seven layers. Mohammed claimed the same. Mohammed
placed Abraham in the sky’s seventh layer,[xv][xv] where he ruled over
believers who did more works, and performed more religious rites, than
the inhabitants of the lower layers.In order to persuade his followers
that he was the offspring of Abraham, Mohammed claimed that he was a
true copy of Abraham. When his followers asked Mohammed what Abraham
looked like, he told them that Abraham was a copy of Mohammed himself.
He told them:I did not see a man similar to him like your friend, nor is
your friend likened to any person like him.[xvi][xvi] (By “friend,”
Mohammed meant himself.) Al-Bukhari, the authoritative book of
Mohammed’s Hadith, quotes Mohammed as saying, “I am the most likened son
to Abraham.”[xvii][xvii] Mohammed wanted to persuade his followers that
he was the offspring of Abraham, so he claimed that physically he was a
copy of Abraham. Isaac did not dare to make such a claim, though he was
Abraham’s son, and his mother was Abraham’s step sister. Neither did
Jacob, or any of his descendents who were close to Abraham’s time, claim
that they were a physical copy of Abraham. How could a man who lived
2,700 years after Abraham make such claim?
[i][i] Halabieh, I, page 93 ; comments on Ibn Hisham, page m
[ii][ii] Halabieh I, page 36
[iii][iii] Masudi, Muruj al-Thahab, Beirut-Lebanon, 1991, II, pages 280-282
[iv][iv] Halabieh, I, page 35, 36
[v][v] Tarikh al-Tabari, I , page 127
[vi][vi] Tarikh al-Tabari, I, page 127
[vii][vii] Tarikh al-Tabari, I, page 127
[viii][viii] Diwan Ummiah bin Abi al-Salt, ( Beirut-1938), page 58
[ix][ix] Tarikh al-Tabari, I, page 128
[x][x] Tarikh al-Tabari, I, page 128
[xi][xi] Tarikh al-Tabari, I, page 516
[xii][xii] K.A. Kitchen, Documentation For Ancient Arabia, Part I, pages 90-222
[xiii][xiii] Diwan Ummiah, page 26
[xiv][xiv] Tarikh al-Tabari, I, page 429
[xv][xv] Sahih al-Bukhari, I, page 92
[xvi][xvi] Ibn Hisham, 2, page 32; Halabieh, 2, page 91
[xvii][xvii] Sahih al-Bukhari, 4, page 125
Study
of Cairo’s synagogues reveals an Egyptian Jewish ‘Golden Age’ abruptly
ended-In ‘Sacred Places Tell Tales,’ Ben-Gurion University Prof. Yoram
Meital examines the modern history of Cairo’s Jews and its thriving
pre-1948 community-By Gavriel Fiske-Today, 7:44 am
Israel’s
neighbor Egypt once had a thriving Jewish community dating back to
ancient times. Today, only a handful of Jews remain — the result of mass
emigration caused by the tumultuous events and changes of the 20th
century, including the establishment of the State of Israel.In the
sprawling capital of Cairo, old Jewish synagogues are tended to by the
few remaining community members and the Egyptian government itself.
These buildings and the documents and Judaica preserved under their
roofs are the subject of a new book, “Sacred Places Tell Tales: Jewish
Life and Heritage in Modern Cairo,” published last month by the
University of Pennsylvania Press.The book’s author, Prof. Yoram Meital
of the Department of Middle Eastern Studies at Ben-Gurion University of
the Negev, was granted unprecedented access to the Cairo synagogues from
2017 to 2021 in his role as historical consultant to Cairo’s Jewish
community.One of the main goals of the book is to show how “the Jewish
community was part and parcel of Egyptian society, culture and history,”
Meital said, speaking with The Times of Israel from the United States,
where he has been spending the year as a member of Princeton
University’s Institute for Advanced Study.Much of the book deals with
what Meital calls “the Golden Age of Egyptian Jewry,” a period
stretching from the late 19th century until the 1950s. This period
largely coincided with British rule over Egypt, which brought greater
rights and opportunities for minorities.During the late 19th century and
the beginning of the 20th century, Jewish life in Cairo was transformed
by an influx of Ashkenazi Jews from Eastern Europe, who were distinct
from the local Mizrahi and Karaite Jews. During the same period, new
neighborhoods were being built, enabling Jews for the first time to set
up new centers and synagogues beyond the confines of ancient Cairo.Most
of Cairo’s Ashkenazi community immigrated from Eastern Europe and
Russia, “mainly escaping from very poor environments. Some of them were
running for their lives and they ended up in Egypt,” Meital said, adding
that in synagogue records he found “specific letters and testimonies”
describing escapes from the 1903 Kishinev pogrom, among other
calamities.The “colonial regime” of British rule gave European
minorities benefits and legal and economic rights if they immigrated, he
said, and so “Egypt became a magnet… Egypt was a major commercial and
economic hub at the turn of the 20th century, [so they could] find work
and a safe place.”Tycoons and ‘sons of the earth’These new arrivals
integrated themselves into “the very strong Jewish community that
existed in Egypt” at the time, Meital said.The Sephardic community,
whose members spoke both French and Arabic, was run by close-knit
families of “Jewish tycoons,” who were “pioneers in establishing modern
Egyptian industry and agriculture. [They were] very rich. They ran a
significant part of the Egyptian economy,” Meital said, though he
stressed that the Sephardic community had a range of socioeconomic
levels.These wealthy families were also involved in the economy of
Ottoman (and then British Mandate) Palestine, buying properties and
sending donations to Jewish concerns there. In the various synagogue
archives, Meital found “a lot of requests” for donations from the Jewish
Yishuv, the pre-state Zionist community in Palestine, including a
letter from Hebrew University leader Judah Magnes, asking the Egyptian
chief rabbi to beseech the community for donations to the fledgling
university.The third Cairo Jewish community, the Karaites, rejected
rabbinical rules and literature, including the Talmud, and therefore
were “a completely different denomination from the rabbinic Jews, a
schism that goes back to ancient times,” Meital said.“The Karaite
religious rituals are completely different. The Karaite calendar is
lunar, and the names for the holidays are different. There are many
customs totally different from what is commonly associated with halachic
rabbinical Jews,” he said.The Karaites mainly spoke and kept records in
Arabic and “lived very similarly to their Egyptian fellows,” Meital
said. “They saw themselves, and were perceived by Egyptians, as ‘sons of
the land.’”“The Karaites kept their beliefs and customs but they built a
new synagogue. They also left their sections in the Jewish Quarter and
settled in new neighborhoods, [so] the social dynamic became similar for
the different denominations,” Meital said.New communities, new
buildings-In Cairo’s old Jewish neighborhoods, there are many ancient
synagogues such as Ben Ezra in the Fustat neighborhood. The Ben Ezra
synagogue is the source of the famed Cairo Geniza, a treasure trove of
historical and religious documents.However, “at the end of the 19th
century, Jews began to leave the old quarters and settled in the new
neighborhoods of Cairo. Until that time, the vast majority of Jews lived
in the Jewish Quarter, there was this kind of segregation,” Meital
said.Wealthy families bought land and built villas in new upscale
neighborhoods such as Maadi or Heliopolis, while families of modest
means bought apartments in other areas, even as many Jews remained in
the old Jewish Quarter where they had lived for generations.This change
was part of “facing modernity,” Meital said, where “religious
affiliation was no longer the criterion for where you lived.” Other
minorities, including the Coptic Christians and Armenians, went through a
similar process.The Jews “established new synagogues close to the
places where they moved,” Meital said. “If you look at the architecture
and items that these synagogues stored, if you look at the nonreligious
activities they hosted, all this reveals the social heterogeneity and
the diverse ways in which modern Jewish social-cultural identity was
constructed.”For example, in less affluent synagogues, each seat would
have a plaque with a number, not a name, because community members
couldn’t donate enough to afford a permanent seat. But in well-off
communities, “you have a metal plaque with specific names, and if you
look into the names carefully, you have a social map of the Jewish elite
of the time,” Meital said.His research into synagogue records enabled
him to reconstruct how the different Cairo Jewish communities would hold
weddings and other life-cycle events, offering a window into “social
and class divisions, through the synagogues.”The last generation-This
“Golden Age” would end within a generation after the 1948 Israeli War of
Independence.“The 1948 war was a major event in the history of the
region, of course. But Egypt was directly involved in the war with
newborn Israel. The Jewish community found itself in an extremely
difficult situation,” Meital said.As the war began, “several hundred
Jews were arrested, some properties confiscated, and the rhetoric
against Jews got much worse,” he said.As a result, thousands of Jewish
families left Egypt. Between 1948 and 1951, “about a quarter of the
total community emigrated. Less than half of those decided to arrive in
Israel,” Meital said.A 1952 military coup deposed the monarchy and
brought pan-Arabist leader Gamal Abdel Nasser to power. Four years
later, Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal and the resulting crisis led
to the 1956 Suez War with Israel, France and Britain. “Thousands of
Jewish men aged 18 to 60 were imprisoned and many properties were
confiscated,” Meital said, which led to more Jewish emigration.In the
period from 1956 and 1962, the Jewish community in Egypt “emptied out…
Only a few thousand remained after 1962, and they suffered after the
1967 war. Many men were imprisoned and tortured, marking the end of the
community. Most of those still in Egypt eventually left the country,” he
said.“In general, in the 1950s and ’60s, only a small portion of the
community, mainly the younger generations, were Zionists. The vast
majority were not. But they saw they had no future in Egypt. About half
of the community ended up in Israel, others went all over, [mostly] to
France and North America,” Meital said.Egypt today-“The historical
context in our time is that very few Jewish communities are left in the
Middle East and North Africa, and these were very rich, historic
communities, some millennia old. In the middle of the prevailing focus
on the Israel-Gaza war and the geopolitical turmoil in the Middle East,
it’s easy to forget that it hasn’t always been this way,” Meital
said.Encouraged by its military rulers, Egyptian society, especially
since the 1967 war, has regarded Israelis and Jews alike as enemies, but
recently there has been a “fascinating” renewed interest in this rich
history, he said.“In recent years Egyptians conversed about the Jewish
past to make a point in a highly contested political debate in Egypt
about social, political and cultural issues,” Meital noted. “And this
debate is one of the significant outcomes of what is known as the Arab
Spring.”After the Arab Spring mass protest movement of 2010-2012, which
in Egypt toppled longtime strongman Hosni Mubarak from power, “millions
of Egyptians were exposed to revisionist representations of the Jewish
past” through a series of Jewish-focused TV series, documentaries,
novels and books produced in Egypt, Meital said.These new works provided
“a different, highly positive description” of Egyptian Jewry that
differed from the “hegemonic nationalist narrative” of the government
and was also in contrast to the “widespread Islamic narrative,” Meital
explained.Additionally, during the post-Arab Spring period, the Egyptian
government and the Cairo Jewish community sponsored the restoration of
several historical synagogues and cemeteries, some of which had been
deeply neglected for decades. The grand Eliyahu Hanavi synagogue in
Alexandria, which dates from the 14th century, was officially
inaugurated in 2020 with a gala ceremony that received extensive media
coverage.However, the current war and regional turmoil have completely
halted what had been a “positive trend of reevaluation of the Jewish
past of Egypt during the first two decades of the 21st century,” Meital
lamented.This reevaluation had enabled the Egyptian public to begin to
see Egyptian Jewry as part of their own culture, and to distinguish
between Jews, Judaism, and Zionists, something that wasn’t always
possible in previous periods, he said.But since October 7, he said,
general “anti-Jewish voices and sentiments within Egyptian society,
unfortunately, have significantly increased.”
THE TORAH CONDEMNS MUHAMMAD PT. 1
MUHAMMAD’S MISTREATMENT OF HIS WIVES
God’s
Word, the Torah, indicates that YHWH permitted a man to have more than
wife under the condition that he treated them all fairly and equally.
YHWH warned men that if they failed to give a wife her conjugal rights
and necessary provisions then they were in violation of their marital
vows. As such, the wife was free to go since the marriage was now
dissolved/terminated:“And if a man sells his daughter as a female slave,
she is not to go free as the male slaves do.If she is displeasing in
the eyes of her master who designated her for himself, then he shall let
her be redeemed. He does not have authority to sell her to a foreign
people because of his treachery to her. And if he designates her for his
son, he shall do to her according to the custom of daughters. If he
takes for himself another woman, he may not reduce her food, her
clothing, or her conjugal rights. And if he will not do these three
things for her, then she shall go out for nothing, without payment of
money.” Exodus 21:7-11 Legacy Standard Bible (LSB)-Muhammad’s deity, on
the other hand, permits his followers to mistreatment their wives and
gives the women the option of remaining in such an unfair situation if
they so choose! And if a woman fears cruelty or desertion on her
husband’s part, there is no sin on them both if they make terms of peace
between themselves; and making peace is better. And human inner-selves
are swayed by greed. But if you do good and keep away from evil, verily,
Allah is Ever Well Acquainted with what you do. You will never be able
to do perfect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so
do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time
and provision) so as to leave the other hanging (i.e. neither divorced
nor married). And if you do justice, and do all that is right and fear
Allah by keeping away from all that is wrong, then Allah is Ever
Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. But if they separate (by divorce), Allah
will provide abundance for everyone of them from His Bounty. And Allah
is Ever All-Sufficient for His creatures’ need, All-Wise. S. 4:128-130
Hilali-Khan-According to the Muslim sources, Q. 4:128-130 specifically
v. 128, was addressing Muhammad’s failure as a husband, particularly in
reference to his treatment of Sauda bint Zam’ah.The Islamic references
indicate that Sauda was one of his first wives after Khadijah’s death.
And yet, shamefully, Muhammad decided to divorce and desert her when he
was no longer attracted to her due to her old age.Not wanting to be
divorced, Sauda decided to strike a deal with Muhammad that she would
forfeit the day assigned to her and give it to Aisha instead, provided
he would still keep her as his wife. Muhammad and his god accepted
Sauda’s proposal! For example, here’s what the renowned Sunni
commentator Ibn Kathir wrote in this respect: Making peace is better
than separation. An example of such peace can be felt in the story of
Sawdah bint Zam’ah who WHEN SHE BECAME AGED, THE PROPHET WANTED TO
DIVORCE HER, but she made peace with him by offering the night he used
to spend with her to A’isha so that he would keep her. The Prophet
accepted such terms and kept her. Abu Dawud At-Tayalisi recorded that
Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Sawdah feared that the Messenger of Allah might
divorce her and she said, ‘O Messenger of Allah! Do not divorce me; give
my day to ‘A’ishah.’ And he did…In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that
‘A’ishah said that when Sawdah bint Zam’ah BECAME OLD, she forfeited her
day to ‘A’ishah and the Prophet used to spend Sawdah’s night with
‘A’ishah…<And making peace is better>. IT REFERS TO THE WIFE
RELINQUISHING SOME OF HER MARITAL RIGHTS and his acceptance of the
offer. Such compromise is better than total divorce, as the Prophet did
when retained Sawdah bint Zam’ah. By doing so, the Prophet set an
example for his Ummah to follow as it is a lawful act … (the preceding
citation taken and adapted from Tafsir Ibn Kathir – Abridged, Volume 2,
Parts 3, 4 & 5, Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, Verse
147 [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New
York, Lahore; first edition March 2000], pp. 599-601, and Tafsir Ibn
Kathir, Part 5, Sura An-Nisa, ayat 24-147, abridged by Sheikh Muhammad
Nasib Ar-Rafa’i [Al-Firdous Ltd., London, 2000 first edition], pp.
193-194; bold and capital emphasis mine)-One recent Muslim author says
in a caption that: Muhammad’s personal and family life were not always
smooth. His wives sometimes bickered amongst themselves and even once
engaged in a petty plot against him. A’ishah, for example, disliked her
Jewish co-wife, Safiyah, and insulted her periodically. Muhammad had to
defend her status and honor a number of times and scold the youthful
A’ishah. Hafsah became jealous of her co-wife, Maria, when she found her
and Muhammad resting[sic] in her apartment one day. Sawdah gave up her
allotted day with the Prophet WHEN SHE REALIZED HE WAS NOT REALLY
ATTRACTED TO HER. As for the conspiracy, A’ishah agreed with two other
co-wives to convince the Prophet that eating honey made him unpleasant
to be around. When Muhammad vowed to never eat honey again, she
privately repented to her co-conspirators. Though these incidents were
not the norm, they demonstrate that the women in Muhammad’s life were as
human as the rest of us. (Yahiya Emerick, Critical Lives: Muhammad
[Alpha Books, A Member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc., 2002], p. 263;
capital emphasis mine) {2} Muslim historian and commentator Al-Tabari
stated that: Umra bin Ali & Zaid bin Ahram said: second by Abu
Dawud, said: second by Sulaiman bin Mu’ath, from Simak bin Harb, from
Ikrimah, from Ibn Abbas, said: Saudah feared divorce by the messenger of
Allah, so she said: Do not divorce me, and do not share with me! And he
did, and this verse was revealed: And if a woman fears ill usage or
desertion on the part of her husband. Muhammad bin Husain said: He
claimed that this verse came down in reference to the messenger of
Allah, and Saudah bint Zama’h who became old, then the messenger of
Allah wanted to divorce her, but they agreed that he will keep her but
give her day to Ai’sha. (Translated by Mutee’a Al-Fadi)-Another
reputable Muslim expositor Al-Qurtubi wrote: In this verse there are
four issues: the first, Al-Tirmidhi told that Ibn Abbas said: Saudah
feared that the messenger of Allah will divorce her so she said, “Do not
divorce me and keep me, and give my day with you to Ai’sha.” He did and
this verse came down: “there is no blame on them, if they effect a
reconciliation between them, and reconciliation is better.” He said:
this is a good and strange hadith. (Translated by Mutee’a Al-Fadi)-The
two Sahih collections provide additional corroboration for Sauda
relinquishing her day to Aisha:Narrated Aisha: Whenever Allah’s Apostle
wanted to go on a journey, he would draw lots as to which of his wives
would accompany him. He would take her whose name came out. He used to
fix for each of them a day and a night. But Sauda bint Zam’a gave up her
(turn) day and night to ‘Aisha, the wife of the Prophet in order to
seek the pleasure of Allah’s Apostle (by that action). (Sahih
al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 47, Number 766
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2593) ‘A’isha reported: Never did I find any
woman more loving to me than Sauda bint Zam’a. I wished I could be
exactly like her who was passionate. As she became old, she had made
over her day (which she had to spend) with Allah’s Messenger to ‘A’isha.
She said: I have made over my day with you to ‘A’isha. So Allah’s
Messenger allotted TWO DAYS to ‘A’isha, her own day (when it was her
turn) and that of Sauda. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3451
https://sunnah.com/muslim:1463a) The Salafi scholars that write for
http://www.islamqa.com cite references agreeing that Q. 4:128 referred
to Muhammad’s mistreatment of Sauda:Al-Tirmidhi reported via Sammaak
from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbaas that he said: “Sawdah was afraid that the
Messenger of Allaah would divorce her, so she said: ‘O Messenger of
Allaah, do not divorce me; give my day to ‘Aa’ishah.’ So he did so. Then
this aayah was revealed.” Al-Tirmidhi said: “(This is) hasan ghareeb.” I
say: there is corroborating evidence in a hadeeth from ‘Aa’ishah
narrated by al-Bukhaari and Muslim, without referring to the revelation
of the aayah. (From Fath al-Baari).The hadeeth mentioned by al-Haafiz
ibn Hijr is in Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 2966, where it is reported that Ibn
‘Abbaas said: “Sawdah was afraid that the Prophet (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him) would divorce her, so she said: ‘Do not divorce
me. Keep me and give my day to ‘Aa’ishah.’ So he did so, then Allaah
revealed the aayah: ‘… there is no sin on them both if they make terms
of peace between themselves; and making peace is better…’ [al-Nisaa’
4:128]. So whatever they agreed upon was permissible.” It is as if the
last sentence was the comment of Ibn ‘Abbaas. Abu ‘Iesa said: this is a
hasan ghareeb hadeeth.Al-Mubaarakpoori said, commenting on this
hadeeth:‘Sawdah was afraid…’ This refers to Sawdah bint Zam’ah ibn Qays
al-Qurashiyyah al-‘Aamiriyyah. The Messenger of Allaah married her in
Makkah after Khadeejah had died, and consummated the marriage there. The
scholars agree that he consummated his marriage to her before he
consummated his marriage to ‘Aa’ishah, and she migrated to Madeenah with
him. She died at the end of the khilaafah of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab.‘…
was afraid that the Prophet would divorce her, so she said…’ Al-Bukhaari
and Muslim reported from ‘Aa’ishah that Sawdah bint Zam’ah gave her day
to ‘Aa’ishah, so the Prophet used to give ‘Aa’ishah her own day and
that of Sawdah. Al-Haafiz said in al-Fath: Abu Dawood reported this
hadeeth (from ‘Aa’ishah): ‘The Messenger of Allaah never used to prefer
any of us over others in sharing his time (i.e., he was fair in dividing
his nights among his wives, and each one of them had her allotted
night). When Sawdah bint Zam’ah grew old and feared that the Messenger
of Allaah might divorce her, she said: ‘O Messenger of Allaah, my day is
for ‘Aa’ishah,’ and he accepted this from her. Then concerning this and
similar cases, the aayah was revealed (interpretation of the meaning):
‘And if a woman fears cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part…’
[al-Nisaa’ 4:128]. These reports agree that she feared divorce and so
gave her day to ‘Aa’ishah.Then al-‘Allaamah al-Mubaraakpoori said: The
aayah may be explained thus: ‘If a woman fears’ means if she expects.
‘Cruelty’ means that he spurns her by refusing to sleep with her or by
spending less on her than he should, because he dislikes her and wants
to marry someone more beautiful. ‘Desertion’ means that he turns his
face away from her. ‘There is no sin on them both if they make terms of
peace between themselves’ means with regard to the sharing of his time
and his spending on her, i.e., he should still give her something in
this regard (sharing time or spending) in order to preserve the
relationship: if she accepts, this is OK, otherwise the husband must
either give her full rights or divorce her. ‘Making peace is better’
means better than separation, cruelty and desertion. Whatever they agree
upon between themselves is permissible.(Tuhfat al-Ahwadi Sharh Jaami’
al-Tirmidhi). (Question #2218: A man doesn’t want to live with his wife
but doesn’t want to divorce her for the sake of the children
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/2218/a-man-doesnt-want-to-live-with-his-wife-but-doesnt-want-to-divorce-her-for-the-sake-of-the-children;
bold emphasis ours) Not only was Sauda said to be old, but other
narrations mention her being overweight as well:Narrated Aisha:Sauda
(the wife of the Prophet) went out to answer the call of nature after it
was made obligatory (for all the Muslims ladies) to observe the veil.
She was a fat huge lady, and everybody who knew her before could
recognize her. So ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her and said, “O Sauda! By
Allah, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you
should not be recognized on going out.” Sauda returned while Allah’s
Apostle was in my house taking his supper and a bone covered with meat
was in his hand. She entered and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I went out to
answer the call of nature and ‘Umar said to me so-and-so.” Then Allah
inspired him (the Prophet) and when the state of inspiration was over
and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put in down, he said
(to Sauda), “You (women) have been allowed to go out for your needs.”
(Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Numebr 318
https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=60&translator=1&start=0&number=318)-How
despicable and cruel! The foregoing makes it embarrassingly obvious
that Muhammad wanted to divorce Sauda because she had gotten old and had
become unattractive, a point confirmed by the above hadith’s graphic
depiction of her as “a fat huge lady.” Sauda, in order to prevent this
from happening, chose to make certain concessions such as relinquishing
her day with Muhammad, to which Allah gave his divine approval!
Moreover, this handing over of Sauda’s visitation to Aisha meant that
Muhammad preferred the latter and loved her more than the rest of his
spouses. After all, Muhammad ended up spending two days with Aisha
whereas all the rest of his wives only had one day to spend with him
(with the exception of Sauda). Thus, Muhammad was being quite
intentional in his unfair treatment of his wives and display of love.A
further indication of Muhammad’s inability to treat his wives fairly is
seen from his separating them into two groups. One group of wives he
would sleep with more often, while the other group he would put off
having sex with them. He would only have sex with this other group
whenever he wished, not when they wished. Noted linguist and commentator
Al-Zamakhshari wrote the following regarding this issue:It is related
that the Prophet (refrained from sexual intercourse and) put off
temporarily the following wives: Sauda, Juwairiya. Safiyya, Maimuna, and
Umm Habiba. In so doing he used to grant them a share (of sexual
intercourse) according TO HIS WISH. Among the wives whom the Prophet
preferred to take to himself belong ‘A’isha, Hafsa, Umm Salama, and
Zainab (bint Jash). Thus, he used to put five off temporarily in order
to take four to himself. (On the other hand) it is related that,
disregarding divorce and the selection concerned with it, the Prophet
treated (all his wives) the same, with the exception of Sauda, who
relinquished the night belonging to her to ‘A’isha and said (to the
Prophet): ‘Do not divorce me but let me remain in the company of your
wives!’… (Helmut Gätje, The Qur’an and Its Exegesis, translated and
edited by Alford T. Welch [Oneworld Publications, Oxford England], pp.
90-91; bold and capital emphasis mine) Even the wives noticed Muhammad’s
partial and unfair treatment, being clearly aware that he loved one
particular wife more than the others. This moved them to jealousy and
strife:Narrated ‘Urwa from ‘Aisha:The wives of Allah’s Apostle were in
two groups. One group consisted of ‘Aisha, Hafsa, Safiyya and Sauda; and
the other group consisted of Um Salama and the other wives of Allah’s
Apostle. The Muslims knew that Allah’s Apostle loved ‘Aisha, so if any
of them had a gift and wished to give to Allah’s Apostle, he would delay
it, till Allah’s Apostle had come to ‘Aisha’s home and then he would
send his gift to Allah’s Apostle in her home. The group of Um Salama
discussed the matter together and decided that Um Salama should request
Allah’s Apostle to tell the people to send their gifts to him in
whatever wife’s house he was.Um Salama told Allah’s Apostle of what they
had said, but he did not reply. Then they (those wives) asked Um Salama
about it. She said, “He did not say anything to me.” They asked her to
talk to him again. She talked to him again when she met him on her day,
but he gave no reply. When they asked her, she replied that he had given
no reply. They said to her, “Talk to him till he gives you a reply.”
When it was her turn, she talked to him again. He then said to her, “Do
not hurt me regarding Aisha, AS THE DIVINE INSPIRATIONS DO NOT COME TO
ME ON ANY OF THE BEDS EXCEPT THAT OF AISHA.” On that Um Salama said, “I
repent to Allah for hurting you.”Then the group of Um Salama called
Fatima, the daughter of Allah’s Apostle and sent her to Allah’s Apostle
to say to him, “Your wives request to treat them and the daughter of Abu
Bakr ON EQUAL TERMS.” Then Fatima conveyed the message to him. The
Prophet said, “O my daughter! Don’t you love whom I love?” She replied
in the affirmative and returned and told them of the situation. They
requested her to go to him again but she refused. They then sent Zainab
bint Jahsh who went to him AND USED HARSH WORDS SAYING, “Your wives
request you TO TREAT THEM and the daughter of Ibn Abu Quhafa ON EQUAL
TERMS.” On that she raised her voice AND ABUSED ‘Aisha TO HER FACE so
much so that Allah’s Apostle looked at ‘Aisha to see whether she would
retort. ‘Aisha started replying to Zainab till she silenced her. The
Prophet then looked at ‘Aisha and said, “She is really the daughter of
Abu Bakr.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 47, Number 755
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2581) Umar gave this advice to his daughter
Hafsa, one of Muhammad’s wives:… Then ‘Umar went on relating the
narration and said. “I and an Ansari neighbor of mine from Bani Umaiya
bin Zaid who used to live in ‘Awali Al-Medina, used to visit the Prophet
in turns. He used to go one day, and I another day. When I went I would
bring him the news of what had happened that day regarding the
instructions and orders and when he went, he used to do the same for me.
We, the people of Quraish, used to have authority over women, but when
we came to live with the Ansar, we noticed that the Ansari women had the
upper hand over their men, so our women started acquiring the habits of
the Ansari women. Once I shouted at my wife and she paid me back in my
coin and I disliked that she should answer me back. She said, ‘Why do
you take it ill that I retort upon you? By Allah, the wives of the
Prophet retort upon him, and some of them may not speak with him for the
whole day till night.’ What she said scared me and I said to her,
‘Whoever amongst them does so, will be a great loser.’Then I dressed
myself and went to Hafsa and asked her, ‘Does any of you keep Allah’s
Apostle angry all the day long till night?’ She replied in the
affirmative. I said, ‘She is a ruined losing person (and will never have
success)! Doesn’t she fear that Allah may get angry for the anger of
Allah’s Apostle and thus she will be ruined? Don’t ask Allah’s Apostle
too many things, and don’t retort upon him in any case, and don’t desert
him. Demand from me whatever you like, and don’t be tempted to imitate
your neighbor (i.e. ‘Aisha) in her behavior towards the Prophet), for
she (i.e. Aisha) IS MORE BEAUTIFUL THAN YOU, AND MORE BELOVED to Allah’s
Apostle. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 43, Number 648
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2468) Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:that ‘Umar entered
upon Hafsa and said, “O my daughter! Do not be misled by the manners of
her who is proud of her beauty because of the love of Allah’s Apostle
for her.” By ‘her’ he meant ‘Aisha. ‘Umar added, “Then I told that to
Allah’s Apostle and he smiled (on hearing that).” (Sahih al-Bukhari,
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 145 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:5218)
Muhammad’s wives complained about his preferential treatment of Aisha
and demanded to be treated equally. Instead of acquiescing to their
demands, Muhammad justified his preferential treatment by claiming that
divine revelations came to him on no other bed except Aisha’s! If
Muhammad was correct this meant that Allah himself distinguished Aisha’s
bed from the rest, thereby implying that it was actually Allah who
caused Muhammad to expressly break the supposed divine command of being
fair with all of one’s wives.More importantly, Muslims claim that
Muhammad’s marriages were, for the most part, consummated for political
reasons, to solidify relationships with his companions or certain
tribes. Yet this is not the reason stated by some of the older Muslim
references:… Sahl at-Tustari said, “Women were loved by the Master of
the Messengers, so how could we abstain from them?” Ibn Uyayna says
something to the same effect.The most ascetic of the Companions had a
lot of wives and salve-girls and had much sexual intercourse with them.
More than one of them disliked the idea of meeting Allah unmarried.
(Qadi ‘Iyad Musa al-Yahsubi, Muhammad Messenger of Allah (Ash-Shifa of
Qadi ‘Iyad), translated by Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley [Madinah Press,
Inverness, Scotland, U.K. 1991; third reprint, paperback], p. 46; bold
emphasis mine)-He said, “He made me love, in this world of yours, WOMEN
and scent, and the coolness of my eye (i.e. my delight) is in the
prayer,” and then he indicated that his love was for women and scent
which are worldly things for other people whereas his occupation with
them was not for this worldly life, but rather for the life of the Next
World because of the otherworldly benefits of marriage already mentioned
and his desire to come to the angels wearing scent. Scent also
encourages intercourse, assists it and stimulates it. He loved these two
qualities for the sake of others and for the restraint of his appetite.
His true love, particular to him, lay in witnessing the Jabarut of his
Lord and intimate conversation with Him. That is why he made a
distinction between the two loves and separated the two conditions,
saying, “and the delight of my eye is in the prayer.”Yahya and ‘Isa were
on the same level regarding the trial of women. However, there is an
extra virtue in satisfying women’s needs. The Prophet was among those
who have given the ability to do so and he was given it in abundance.
This is why he was allowed a greater number of wives than anyone else.It
is related from Anas, “The Prophet used to visit his wives in one hour
of the day or night, and there were eleven of them.”Anas said, “We used
to say he had been given the power of thirty men.” Something similar was
related from Abu Rafi’. Tawus said, “The Prophet was given the power of
forty men in intercourse.” A similar statement came from Safwan ibn
Sulaym.Salama, the female client of the Prophet, said, “The Prophet
would go around in the night to nine wives and purify himself from each
of them before going to the next. He said, ‘This is better and
purer.’”The Prophet Sulayman said, “I went around in the night to a
hundred or ninety-nine women.” So he had that capacity as well. Ibn
‘Abbas said, “There was the semen of a hundred men in the loins of
Sulayman, and he had three hundred wives and three hundred slave-girls.”
An-Naqqash and others related that he had seven hundred wives and three
hundred slave-girls.In the hadith of Anas, the Prophet said, “I have
been preferred over people in four things: generosity, courage, MUCH
INTERCOURSE and great power.” (Ibid., pp. 47-48; bold and capital
emphasis mine)The above reference unashamedly admits that the reason
Muhammad was permitted to have more wives is because of his very strong
sex drive! The preceding factors present Allah as a deity who had
nothing better to do than to please Muhammad’s desires. Allah’s primary
focus, it seems, was to grant Muhammad his desires and wishes, an
observation which even Muhammad’s child bride made. Aisha said by way of
mocking:Narrated Aisha:I used to look down upon those ladies who had
given themselves to Allah’s Apostle and I used to say, “Can a lady give
herself (to a man)?” But when Allah revealed: “You (O Muhammad) can
postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may
receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you
invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).” (33.51) I said
(to the Prophet), “I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your
wishes and desires.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 311
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4788) In light of all the data which we have
presented, it is very hard to disagree with Aisha’s assessment of
Muhammad’s special privileges.Aisha also made an interesting comment
which helps reveal her true feelings and the sadness she felt because of
Muhammad’s conjugal favors:Narrated Muadha:‘Aisha said, “Allah’s
Apostle used to take the permission of that wife with whom he was
supposed to stay overnight if he wanted to go to one other than her,
after this Verse was revealed:–‘You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn
of) whom you will of them (your wives) and you may receive any (of them)
whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose
turn you have set aside (temporarily).'” (33.51) I asked Aisha, “What
did you use to say (in this case)?” She said, “I used to say to him, ‘If
I could deny you the permission (to go to your other wives) I would not
allow your favor to be bestowed on any other person.'” (Sahih
al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 312
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4789)-The foregoing clearly highlights the
fact that Muhammad was a failure as a husband whose god allowed him to
both ignore and mistreat any of his wives he so desired.As such,
Muhammad stands condemned by the true God of Moses as an immoral,
sensual misogynist and son of Belial.
THE TORAH CONDEMNS MUHAMMAD PT. 2
THE ABOMINATION CALLED MUHALLIL
The
true God YHWH utterly forbade the Israelite men from remarrying women
whom they had divorced and ended up marrying other men that either
divorced them or left them widowed. YHWH called such remarriages an
abomination, something detestable and heinous in his sight:“If a man
takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in
his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a
certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from
his house, and she goes out of his house and goes and becomes another
man’s wife, and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a
certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his
house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, then
her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to
be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination
before Yahweh, and you shall not bring sin on the land which Yahweh your
God gives you as an inheritance.” Deuteronomy 24:1-4 Legacy Standard
Bible (LSB)-“God says, ‘If a husband divorces his wife And she goes from
him And belongs to another man, Will he still return to her? Will not
that land be completely polluted? But you are a harlot with many lovers;
Yet you turn to Me,’ declares Yahweh. ‘Lift up your eyes to the bare
heights and see; Where have you not been ravished? By the roads you have
sat for them Like an Arab in the wilderness, And you have polluted a
land With your harlotry and with your evil.’” Jeremiah 3:1-2
LSB-Muhammad goes against Moses by allowing divorcees to remarry one
another only after they have been married to someone else!“A divorce is
only permissible twice: after that, the parties should either hold
together on equitable terms, or separate with kindness. It is not lawful
for you, (men), to take back any of your gifts (from your wives),
except when both parties fear that they would be unable to keep the
limits ordained by Allah. If ye (judges) do indeed fear that they would
be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah, there is no blame on
either of them if she give something for her freedom. These are the
limits ordained by Allah. So do not transgress them if any do transgress
the limits ordained by Allah, such persons wrong (themselves as well as
others). So if a husband divorces his wife (irrevocably), he cannot,
after that, re- marry her until after she has married another husband
and he has divorced her. In that case there is no blame on either of
them if they re-unite, provided they feel that they can keep the limits
ordained by Allah. Such are the limits ordained by Allah, which He makes
plain to those who understand.” S. 2:229-230-Muslim tradition even goes
so far as to say that the woman must engage in sexual intercourse with
the man before she can return to her former husband:Narrated
‘Aisha:Rifa’a Al-Qurazi divorced his wife irrevocably (i.e. that divorce
was the final). Later on ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Az-Zubair married her after
him. She came to the Prophet and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I was
Rifa’a’s wife and he divorced me thrice, and then I was married to
‘Abdur-Rahman bin AzZubair, who, by Allah has nothing with him except
something like this fringe, O Allah’s Apostle,” showing a fringe she had
taken from her covering sheet. Abu Bakr was sitting with the Prophet
while Khalid Ibn Said bin Al-As was sitting at the gate of the room
waiting for admission. Khalid started calling Abu Bakr, “O Abu Bakr! Why
don’t you reprove this lady from what she is openly saying before
Allah’s Apostle?” Allah’s Apostle did nothing except smiling, and then
said (to the lady), “Perhaps you want to go back to Rifa’a? No, (it is
not possible), unless and until you enjoy the sexual relation with him
(‘Abdur Rahman), and he enjoys the sexual relation with you.” (Sahih
al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 107
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6084)-Yahya related to me from Malik from
al-Miswar ibn Rifaa al-Quradhi from az-Zubayr ibn Abd ar-Rahman ibn
az-Zubayr that Rifaa ibn Simwal divorced his wife, Tamima bint Wahb, in
the time of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him
peace, three times. Then she married Abd ar-Rahman ibn az-Zubayr and he
turned from her and could not consummate the marriage and so he parted
from her. Rifaa wanted to marry her again and it was mentioned to the
Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and he
forbade him to marry her. He said, “She is not halal for you until she
has tasted the sweetness of intercourse.” (Malik’s Muwatta, Book 28,
Number 28.7.17 https://sunnah.com/urn/511110)-Yahya related to me from
Malik from Yahya ibn Said from al-Qasim ibn Muhammad that A’isha, the
wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said when
asked whether it was permissible for a man to marry again a wife he had
divorced irrevocably if she had married another man who divorced her
before consummating the marriage, “Not until she has tasted the
sweetness of intercourse.” (Malik’s Muwatta, Book 28, Number 28.7.18
https://sunnah.com/urn/511120)The man who makes the woman lawful for her
former husband is called Muhallil:Yahya related to me from Malik that
he had heard that when asked whether it was permissible for a man to
return to his wife if he had divorced her irrevocably and then another
man had married her after him and died before consummating the marriage,
al-Qasim ibn Muhammad said, “It is not halal for the first husband to
return to her.”Malik said, about the muhallil, that he could not remain
in the marriage until he undertook a new marriage. If he had intercourse
with her in that marriage, she had her dowry.(Malik’s Muwatta, Book 28,
Number 28.7.19 https://sunnah.com/urn/511130)-Hence, Muhammad’s Allah
calls permissible what Yahweh calls shameful and detestable! Muslims
are, therefore, again confronted with the inescapable fact that their
god cannot be the one true God of Moses. Rather the God who sent Moses
exposes Muhammad as a false prophet and tool of Satan.
THE TORAH CONDEMNS MUHAMMAD PT. 3
RAPE AND ADULTERY
The
God of Moses expressly prohibited the Israelites from raping captive
women, especially those who were still married. Rather, God commanded
that if a man found a woman among the captives he was to honor her by
marrying her after giving her a full month to mourn the loss of family
members:“If you go out to battle against your enemies, and Yahweh your
God gives them over into your hands and you take them away captive, and
see among the captives a beautiful woman and set your affection on her
and would take her as a wife for yourself, then you shall bring her home
to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails. She
shall also remove the clothes of her captivity and shall remain in your
house and weep for her father and mother a full month; and after that
you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. And
it will be that, if you do not desire her, then you shall let her go
wherever she wishes; but you shall certainly not sell her for money; you
shall not mistreat her because you have humbled her.” Deuteronomy
21:10-14-Besides it being a sign of mourning, it seems evident that the
woman shaving off her hair would serve as a deterrent for the man who
may have merely lusted after, and not loved, his captive. By seeing this
woman shaven for a full month this would ensure that the man was
marrying her out of love, and not due to his sexual cravings.What makes
this command all the more remarkable in light of its historical and
cultural context is that the women must be set free, and not sold off as
slaves, in cases where the men ended up divorcing them.Now contrast
with the god of Muhammad who permitted Muhammad and his followers to not
only rape captive women, but also to do so with any married women whom
they captured in war. Allah further permitted the women to be sold off
slave as chattel: Also (forbidden are) women already married, except
those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has
Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek (them
in marriage) with Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at
the time of marriage) from your property, desiring chastity, not
committing illegal sexual intercourse, so with those of whom you have
enjoyed sexual relations, give them their Mahr as prescribed; but if
after a Mahr is prescribed, you agree mutually (to give more), there is
no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise. S. 4:24
Hilali-Khan-Here’s the “historical” background for the “revelation” of
this wicked, satanic verse: 9) Chapter: It is permissible to have
intercourse with a female captive after it is established that she is
not pregnant, and if she has a husband, THEN HER MARRIAGE IS ANNULLED
WHEN SHE IS CAPTURED-Abu Sa’id al-Khudri reported that at the Battle of
Hanain Allah’s Messenger sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy
and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the
Companions of Allah’s Messenger seemed to refrain from having
intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being
polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: “And women
already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)”
(i.e. they were lawful for them when their ‘Idda period came to an
end).Reference: Sahih Muslim 1456a-In-book reference: Book 17, Hadith
41-USC-MSA web (English) reference: Book 8, Hadith 3432 (sunnah.com
https://sunnah.com/muslim:1456a; bold and capital emphasis mine)-Abu
Said al-Khudri said: The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to
Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and
fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the
Companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse
with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were
unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, ‘And
all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom
your right hands possess’. That is to say, they are lawful for them when
they complete their waiting period.Grade: SAHIH (Al-Albani) (Sunan Abu
Dawud, Volume 2, Number 2150 https://sunnah.com/abudawud/12/110; bold
emphasis mine) It is narrated on the authority of Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri
that he said: We got female captives from Awtas who had husbands. It
seemed that some of the companions of the Messenger of Allah felt it
difficult upon themselves to have sexual relations with them on account
of their husbands are from the infidels. We asked The Messenger of Allah
about that thereupon Aallah revealed (what means): {Also (forbidden for
marriage) are the married women, except those whom your right hand
possess}. By this, they became lawful for us (once the term of their
‘iddah elapsed). [Abu Dawud; At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa’i] It is narrated
on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas that he said: When it was the day of
Hunayn (battle) and Allah Almighty helped the Muslims conquer Hunayn,
the Muslims got female captives from the people of the Scripture. If a
man liked to have sexual intercourse with any woman (of them whom his
right hand possessed) SHE WOULD SAY TO HIM: “I HAVE A HUSBAND”. The
Messenger of Allah was asked about that, thereupon Allah revealed this
Qur’anic Verse. [Al-Tabarani] (Jalal Al-Din Al-Suyuti, Reasons and
Occasions of Revelation of the Holy Qur’an (Lubab An-Nuqul Fi Asbab
An-Nuzul), translated by Dr. Muhammad Mahdi Al-Sharif [Dar Al-Kotob
Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut 2015], pp. 101-102; capital emphasis mine)-And
forbidden to you are wedded women those with spouses that you should
marry them before they have left their spouses be they Muslim free women
or not; save what your right hands own of captured slave girls whom you
may have sexual intercourse with even if they should have spouses among
the enemy camp but only after they have been absolved of the
possibility of pregnancy after the completion of one menstrual cycle…
(Tafsir al-Jalalayn
https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.aspMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=4&t
AyahNo=24&tDisplay=yes& UserProfile=0& LanguageId=2; bold
emphasis mine)-Instead of telling his murdering thugs that they were
right for feeling uncomfortable about having sex with captives whose
husbands were still alive, Muhammad and his god encouraged this grossly
immoral and perverted act by permitting Muslim men to rape any and all
married women whom they had enslaved.In other words, Muhammad and his
deity allow Muhammadans to not only attack and murder unsuspecting
folks, but also to capture married women, rape them and then sell them
off as property! Just as shocking is the fact that Muhammad and his
companions are reported to have taught that Allah has actually
predetermined and fixed all the rape and adultery that must necessarily
take place! Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:I did not see anything so resembling
minor sins as what Abu Huraira said from the Prophet, who said, “Allah
has written for the son of Adam his INEVITABLE share of adultery whether
he is aware of it or not: The adultery of the eye is the looking (at
something which is sinful to look at), and the adultery of the tongue is
to utter (what it is unlawful to utter), and the innerself wishes and
longs for (adultery) and the private parts turn that into reality or
refrain from submitting to the temptation.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8,
Book 77, Number 609)-Verily Allah has fixed the very portion of
adultery which a man will indulge in, and which he OF NECESSITY MUST
COMMIT (or there would be no escape from it). (Sahih Muslim, Book 033,
Number 6421; see also Number 6422)-Ibn Umar said: ‘A man came to Abu
Bakr and asked: ‘Do you believe that adultery is from God?’ He (Abu
Bakr) replied: ‘YES’. He said: ‘God will make me do it and then will
punish me?’ He (Abu Bakr) replied: ‘Yes, O son of Khena, by Allah if
there was a man with me I would order him to smash your nose’. (Sharh
Usool Etiqad Ahlulsunnah, Volume 3 page 246 Tradition 964)-The foregoing
once again illustrates that Muhammad’s ilah cannot be the one true God
who spoke to and through Moses. Unlike Allah, Moses’ God never
sanctioned rape or adultery.
TALMUD, MUHAMMAD & PEDOPHILIA
MARRIAGEABLE AGE IN RABBINIC JUDAISM
In
this post I will cite leading rabbinic sources and authorities to show
that a female was considered mature enough for marriage only after she
had reached puberty, which the rabbis interpreted as taking place after
the age of twelve. All emphasis shall be mine.Note what one of the
leading medieval rabbis Rashi wrote in regards to Exodus 21:7:Now if a
man sells his daughter as a maidservant: Scripture is referring [here]
to a minor girl. I might think that even if she develops signs [of
initial puberty, the father may sell her]. [But] you must agree that a
kal vachomer [the inference of a major rule from a minor rule] applies
here namely if she who is already sold goes free with signs [that is,
when she has signs of initial puberty], as it is written: “she shall go
out for nothing, without money” (Exod. 21:11), which we interpret as
referring to the signs of initial puberty, does it not make sense that
she who is not sold [and has initial signs of puberty] should not be
sold [at all]? -[From Mechilta, Arachin 29a] [At the moment when a
female has two pubic hairs, usually when she is twelve years old, she is
no longer considered a minor. She is then called נַעִרָה (naarah). She
is, however, still under her father’s jurisdiction until six months
later, when her breasts have developed to a certain stage. Then she is
called בּוֹגֶרֶת (bogeret) a mature girl. In the case of a Hebrew
maidservant, the father may sell her only when she is a minor, not after
she has become a נַעִרָה (Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary
https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9882/showrashi/true#v7)-The
Talmud concurs by stating that the marriageable age for a girl takes
place sometime after she has passed her twelfth birthday and is mature
enough to desire marriage:With regard to a girl, it was urged that the
father’s duty was to secure a husband for her at an early age. The
verse, ‘Profane not thy daughter to make her a harlot’ (Leviticus 19:29)
was applied to a man ‘who delays in arranging a marriage while she is
of suitable age’ (Sanhedrin 76a). She was considered to have arrived at
this stage when she passed her twelfth birthday. According to Talmudic
law, ‘A man is forbidden to give his daughter in marriage while she is a
minor, until she is grown up and says, I wish to marry so-and-so’ (Kid.
41a). If he married her in her minority she could repudiate the
marriage on reaching the age of twelve, and have it annulled without a
divorce. (Abraham Cohen, Everyman’s Talmud – The Major Teachings of the
Rabbinic Sages [Schoken Books, New York 1995], Chapter V. Domestic Life,
II. Marriage and Divorce, pp. 162-163; bold emphasis mine)-The mishna
teaches: A man can betroth his daughter to a man when she is a young
woman. The Gemara infers: When she is a young woman, yes, he can betroth
her; when she is a minor, NO, he cannot betroth her. This statement
supports the opinion of Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says, and some
say it was said by Rabbi Elazar: It is prohibited for a person to
betroth his daughter to a man when she is a minor, until such time that
she grows up and says: I want to marry so-and-so. If a father betroths
his daughter when she is a minor and incapable of forming an opinion of
the husband, she may later find herself married to someone she does not
like. (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 41a
https://www.sefaria.org/Kiddushin.41a.8?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)-Here
is what Muhammad is reported to have said about these rabbinic
injunctions:Abu Sa‘id and Ibn ‘Abbas reported God’s messenger as saying,
“He who has a son born to him should give him a good name and a good
education and marry him when he reaches puberty. If he does not marry
him when he reaches puberty and he commits sin, its guilt rests only
upon his father.”‘Umar b. al-Khattab and Anas b. Malik reported God’s
messenger as saying that it is written in the Torah, “If anyone does not
give his daughter in marriage when she reaches twelve and she commits
sin, the guilt of that rests on him.” Baihaqi transmitted both
traditions in Shu’ab al-Iman. (Mishkat Al-Masabih English Translation
With Explanatory Notes by Dr. James Robson, [Sh. Muhammad Ahsraf
Publishers, Booksellers & Exporters, Lahore-Pakistan, Reprint 1990],
Volume I, Book XIII. – Marriage, Chapter III. The Guardian in Marriage,
and asking the Woman’s consent, section III, pp. 666-667; bold emphasis
mine)Here’s the online version:13 Marriage-(2c) Chapter: The Guardian
in Marriage, and asking the Woman’s consent – Section 3‘Umar b.
al-Khattab and Anas b. Malik reported God’s Messenger as saying that it
is written in the Torah, “If anyone does not give his daughter in
marriage when she reaches twelve and she commits sin, the guilt of that
rests on him.”Baihaqi transmitted in Shu’ab al-iman.Reference: Mishkat
al-Masabih 3139-In-book reference: Book 13, Hadith 59
(https://sunnah.com/mishkat:3139)-Muhammad confuses the Talmud with the
Torah! The Talmud further condemns marrying off a mature, post-pubescent
maiden to an old man:The Gemara answers: If so, and that is the sole
derivation from the verse, let the verse say: Do not profane [taḥel].
What is the reason that the verse uses the more complex form: Do not
profane [teḥalel]? Conclude two derivations from it. The Gemara asks:
And according to Abaye and Rava, who derive the prohibition against
engaging in intercourse with one’s daughter from a different source,
what do they do with this verse: “Do not profane your daughter by
causing her to act licentiously”? Rabbi Mani says: This verse is
referring to one who marries his daughter to an old man. Since she will
not be satisfied with him, it will ultimately lead her to engage in
adultery, and her father is responsible for causing that situation.This
derivation is as it is taught in a baraita: “Do not profane your
daughter by causing her to act licentiously.” Rabbi Eliezer says: This
is referring to one who marries his daughter to an old man. Rabbi Akiva
says: This is referring to one who delays the marriage of his daughter
who is A GROWN WOMAN. Since she finds no permissible outlet for her
sexual desire, she is apt to engage in licentiousness.Rav Kahana says in
the name of Rabbi Akiva: You do not have a pauper among the Jewish
people other than one who is a conniving wicked person, who seeks to
conceal his true nature, and one who delays the marriage of his daughter
who is a grown woman. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that one who
delays the marriage of his daughter who is A GROWN WOMAN is not a
conniving, wicked person? He connives to delay her marriage to ensure
that she will stay at home and do the housework, sparing him the cost of
domestic help, and thereby causes her to sin. (Babylonian Talmud,
Sanhedrin 76a
https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.76a.24?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)-Here’s
another rendering:Now, how do Abaye and Raba utilize the verse, Do not
profane thy daughter to cause her to be a whore? — R. Mani said:
[According to them] this refers to one who marries his [young] daughter
to an old man.32 As it has been taught: Do not profane thy daughter to
cause her to be a whore; R. Eliezer said: This refers to marrying one’s
[young] daughter to an old man. R. Akiba said: This refers to the delay
in marrying off a daughter who is already a bogereth.33-R. Kahana said
on R. Akiba’s authority: The only poor in Israel is the subtly wicked
and he who delays in marrying off his daughter, a bogereth.34 But is not
one who thus delays himself subtly wicked?35 Abaye answered: This is
its meaning: Which poor man is subtly wicked? He who delays marrying off
his daughter, a bogereth.(32) Since she cannot willingly accept him,
she may be led to adultery. (33) Having attained puberty, she may become
unchaste if not married. Marriage, of course, was then at a far earlier
age than now.-(34) This is explained further on.(35) Why ‘and he who
delays etc.’: the two are identical. His wickedness consists in that he
keeps her unmarried, that he may profit by her labour whilst endangering
her chastity. (Rabbi Dr. H. Freedman and Jacob Shachter, Babylonian
Talmud, Sanhedrin, pp. 335-336
https://halakhah.com/pdf/nezikin/Sanhedrin.pdf)-This is where it gets
interesting. The allegedly sound Islamic reports state that Muhammad
married Aisha when she was around 6-7 years old, and had sex with her to
consummate their marriage when she was nine.The disgusting part about
all this is that Muhammad was around 54 years old when he chose to
deflower a premature, prepubescent girl who was still playing on swings
and dolls. He even left her as a childless widow from the age of
eighteen till she died! Narrated Aisha:The Prophet engaged me when I was
a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of
Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. 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 Apostle 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. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58,
Number 234 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3894)-Narrated ‘Aisha:Allah’s
Apostle said to me, “You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I
married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and
I said to him, ‘Uncover (her),’ and behold, it was you. I said (to
myself), ‘If this is from Allah, then it must happen.’ Then you were
shown to me, the angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I
said (to him), ‘Uncover (her), and behold, it was you. I said (to
myself), ‘If this is from Allah, then it must happen.'” (Sahih
Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 87, Number 140
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7012; see also Number 139)‘A’isha reported:
Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six
years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine. She
further said: We went to Medina and I had an attack of fever for a
month, and my hair had come down to the earlobes. Umm Ruman (my mother)
came to me and I was at that time on a swing along with my playmates.
She called me loudly and I went to her and I did not know what she had
wanted of me. She took hold of my hand and took me to the door, and I
was saying: Ha, ha (as if I was gasping), until the agitation of my
heart was over. She took me to a house, where had gathered the women of
the Ansar. They all blessed me and wished me good luck and said: May you
have share in good. She (my mother) entrusted me to them. They washed
my head and embellished me and nothing frightened me. Allah’s Messenger
came there in the morning, and I was entrusted to him. (Sahih Muslim,
Book 008, Number 3309 https://sunnah.com/muslim:1422a; see also
3310)‘A’isha reported that Allah’s Apostle married her when she was
seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was
nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died
she was eighteen years old. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3311
https://sunnah.com/muslim:1422c)-Yunus b. Bukayr stated, from Hisham b.
‘Urwa, from his father who said, “The Messenger of God married ‘A’isha
three years after (the death of) Khadija. At that time (of the contract)
‘A’isha had been a girl of six. When he married her she was nine. The
Messenger of God died when ‘A’isha was a girl of eighteen.”This
tradition is considered gharib (unique in this line).Al-Bukhari had
related, from ‘Ubayd b. Isma‘il, from Abu Usama, from Hisham b. ‘Urwa,
from his father, who said, “Khadija died three years before the
emigration of the Prophet (SAAS). He allowed a couple of years or so to
pass after that, and then he contracted marriage with ‘A’isha when she
was six, thereafter consummating marriage with her when she was nine
years old.”What ‘Urwah stated here is mursal, incomplete, as we
mentioned above, but in its content it must be judged as muttasil,
uninterrupted.His statement, “He contracted marriage with ‘A’isha when
she was six, thereafter consummating marriage with her when she was
nine” IS NOT DISPUTED BY ANYONE, and is well established in the sahih
collections of traditions and elsewhere.He consummated marriage with her
during the second year following the emigration to Medina.His
contracting marriage with her took place some three years after
Khadija’s death, though there is disagreement over this.The hafiz Ya‘qub
b. Sufyan stated, “Al-Hajjaj related to us, that Hammad related to him,
from Hisham b. ‘Urwa, from his father, from ‘A’isha, who said, ‘The
Messenger of God, contracted marriage with me (after) Khadija’s death
and before his emigration from Mecca, when I was six years old. After we
arrived in Medina some women came to me while I was playing on a swing;
my hair was like that of a boy. They dressed me up and put make-up on
me, then took me to the Messenger of God, and he consummated our
marriage. I was a girl of nine.’”The statement here “muttawaffa
Khadija“, “Khadija’s death” has to mean that it was shortly thereafter.
Unless, that is, the word, ba‘da, “after”, originally preceded this
phrase and had been omitted from the account. The statement made by
Yunus b. Bukayr and Abu Usama from Hisham b. ‘Urwa, from his father, is,
therefore, not refuted. But God knows best. (Ibn Kathir, The Life of
the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), Volume II, translated by
professor Trevor Le Gassick, reviewed by Dr. Muneer Fareed [Garnet
Publishing Limited, 8 Southern Court, south Street Reading RG1 4QS, UK;
The Center for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, first paper edition,
2000], pp. 93-94)Therefore, Muhammad stands condemned as a wicked old
man for committing pedophile with a young minor. There’s simply no way
around this fact.
UNDRESSING ALLAH’S GARMENTS
There are
specific hadiths that are deemed to be sound (sahih) according to Sunni
standards, which teach that Allah literally wears a robe/cloak and has a
garment (izhar) covering his waist/loins. For instance, specific
narrations claim that Allah’s cloak happens to be his pride and that his
lower garment/waist wrapper (izhar) is his greatness/majesty/might:34
Clothing (Kitab Al-Libas)-(1530) Chapter: What Has Been Reported About
Pride-Narrated AbuHurayrah: The Prophet said: Allah Most High says:
Pride is my cloak and majesty is my lower garment (izhari), and I shall
throw him who view with me regarding one of them into Hell.Grade: Sahih
(Al-Albani)-Reference: Sunan Abi Dawud 4090-In-book reference: Book 34,
Hadith 71English translation: Book 33, Hadith 4079
(https://sunnah.com/abudawud:4090; emphasis mine)-And:30 General
Behavior-(251) Chapter: Pride-Abu Hurayra reported that the Prophet said
that Allah Almighty said, “Might is My wrapper (izhari) and pride is My
cloak. I will punish anyone who contends with Me over either of
them.”Grade: Sahih (Al-Albani)-Reference: Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 552-In-book
reference: Book 30, Hadith 15-English translation: Book 30, Hadith 552
(https://sunnah.com/adab:552; emphasis mine)Finally:On the authority of
Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Messenger of Allah said: Allah (mighty
and sublime be He) said:Pride is my cloak and greatness My robe
(izhari), and he who competes with Me in respect of either of them I
shall cast into Hell-fire. It was related by Abu Dawud (also by Ibn
Majah and Ahmad) with sound chains of authority. This Hadith also
appears in Muslim in another version.Reference: Hadith 19, 40 Hadith
Qudsi (https://sunnah.com/qudsi40:19; emphasis mine) According to one of
Salafi Islam’s greatest modern scholars, the late Muhammad ibn Saleh
al-Uthaymin, the robe and lower garment of Allah cannot be explained
away as simply metaphors but must be taken literally:The decrees
(fatwas)-What is the interpretation of the people of the Sunnis about
the Hadith Qudsi “Glory is my cloak.”? Sheikh Muhammad bin Saleh
Al-Uthaymeen-Sheikh: What does Allah say? Student: … What is the
interpretation of the people of the Sunnis to this? Sheikh: They believe
in it as it came in the Hadith.Student: … Allah to him the glory and
the majesty.Sheikh: Yes, they affirm what Allah affirmed to
Himself.Student: what is said that this is a style of many of the Arab
styles that the glory He wears it? Sheikh: Do you mean that it is a
spiritual garment (izhara) (to wear as underpants) and a spiritual cloak
(something to wear over the underpants)? If someone, or even if Allah,
to him be the glory and the majesty, on the Day of Resurrection asks you
what would you say? What would you say to Allah? The issue is what is
the possibility of the meaning of the word? The issue is how will you
meet Allah, to him be the glory and the majesty, on the Day of
Resurrection, if the apparent meaning of His words is that it is a real
garment (izhar haqiqi) and a real cloak? But how did He wear it? How did
He wrap Himself with it? Thknowledge of this is with Allah, do you
understand? Note this, Oh people. The issue is what is the cleverness of
the human who can interpret the texts as he wishes or as he
understands? The issue is not pure news that Allah has informed us about
Himself. It is not possible on the Day of the Resurrection for us to
say, “Our Lord, you have neither a garment nor a cloak.” It Is
impossible. Yes. (LINK:
https://al-fatawa.com/fatwa/39720/%D9%85%D8%A7-%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%AC%D9%8A%D9%87-%D8%A7%D9%87%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%86%D8%A9-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AB-D8%A7%D9%
84% D9%
82%D8%AF%D8%B3%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B2%D8%A9-%D8%B1%D8%AF% D8%A7%
D8% A6%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%86-%D8%B9%D8%AB%D9%8A%D9%85%D9%8A%D9%86;
emphasis mine)-Interestingly, there are “authentic” traditions
attributed to Muhammad that confirm al-Uthaymin’s position.For instance,
Muhammad is reported to have seen Allah appearing to him in the shape
of a beardless youth dressed in a red robe/garment: I saw my Lord in
the form of a young man, beardless (amrad) with short curly hair (ja’d)
and clothed in a red garment. (Narrated by Ahmad b. Hanbal in Tabarani;
AUTHENTICATED BY AHMAD B. HANBAL in Creed 3 citing isnad, ‘Abd al-Samad
b. Yahya in Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 1:218, al-Marrudhi (d. 888) in Tabaqat,
3:81, Ibn ‘Aqil in Makdisi, Ibn ‘Aqil, 130; Ibn ‘Adi al-Qattan,
al-Kamil fi du’afa’ al-rijal, 3:49-50, al-Daraqutni, Kitab al-Ru’ya,
332-333, 356-357; al-Tabarani, al-Mu’jam al-Kabir, 25:143; SAHIH BY ABU
L-HASAN B. BASHSHAR in Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat, 2:59; Abu Ya’la,
al-Muta’mad, 85; ACCEPTED BY IBN TAYMIYYA in Bayan Tablis al-Jahmiyya,
7:192-198, 290)-One of Sunni Islam’s greatest hadith scholars named
Ahmad b. Hanbal said about the above hadith: “Report it because the
‘ulama have reported it.” (‘Abd al-Samad b. Yahya reported in Tabaqat
al-Hanabila, 1:218)-In case the readers are unaware of Ibn Hanbal, he
not only was a compiler of hadiths whose massive collection of
narrations is called Musnad Ahmad, but also has a school of Islamic
jurisprudence named after him. I.e., the Hanbali madhab.What this
supposedly authentic hadith establishes is that Muhammad’s god does
indeed wear clothing, even though the Salafis will say that he does so
in a manner befitting his majesty which is unlike anything in creation!
No comments:
Post a Comment