<!--quoteo(post=3727032:date=Jun 20 2011, 12:53 PM:name=Pyrmon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pyrmon @ Jun 20 2011, 12:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=3727032"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I refuse to say the Qur'an is wrong about saying slavery is OK because it doesn't say so. Every criticism has an answer. As a non-Muslim I was giving you the point of view of a Muslim. It had little to do with me. Even if I had agreed to something you said, to present a Muslim's point of view I had to ignore it and find what a Muslim would respond. Which wasn't very hard considering I was practically Muslim.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, let me make it easier for you then. The Qu'ran says it's alright to strike your wife if she's disobedient. Is the Qu'ran wrong for stating this? Should a husband have the right to strike his wife?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). (4:129) I don't see how it can get much clearer than that. Besides, that site doesn't give the full quote, so here it is: <b>If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans,</b> marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or that which your right hands possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (3)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It could get clearer by saying "Unless these circumstances apply". lol As it stands that verse is open to a multiple amount of interpretations, as is evidenced by the sheer number of interpretations. Suggesting someone can't do something isn't the same as telling someone not to do something.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I could care less of what is preached in mainstream Islam and in the Hadith.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you could care less what Mohammed taught? Because Mohammed most definitely did not teach that polygamy was only to be followed under those circumstances.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I agree that there were very drastic measures taken, it doesn't change the fact that they were compiled, for the eldest, over 200 years after Muhammad's death. Do you know how a word can be deformed in a chain of 30 person playing Telephone? Here the chain is big and lasts three lifetimes. Whatever measure was taken to know were a Hadith came from, it doesn't mean they are authentic or even remotely reliable. There is a very very big difference between 19 years and two centuries. When the compilation of the Qur'an started, many of those who had memorized the Qur'an during the time of the Prophet were still alive. Verses were written down on parchment and palm leaves, a little everywhere. There were partial compilations in existence. For the Hadith, there was nothing. Oral transmission doesn't work well.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's where you're wrong about the Hadiths. Yes they were compiled over 200 years later but they were not however written then. There are many many many hadiths written from prior and just after Mohammeds death. The first attempt at collecting the Hadiths was by Uthman himself during the compilation of the Qu'ran.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The absence of something better doesn't make it good. What Muslims are taught today is wrong. Muhammad was the embodiment of the ideals of the Qur'an. Following his Sunna or emulating him means to follow the Qur'an. Ah, the missing info. You see, us Muslim believe Islam and all it's teachings have existed since Adam. The five pillars were given to Abraham and, thus, existed in pre-islamic times. Salat, Zakat, Hajj, Shahada and Sawn were practices that already existed before Muhammad. To get the real form of Salat, one must simply remove the parts that don't make sense. Like including Muhammad in the Shahada. It goes against the commandment to consider all prophets equal. And the five times of prayer are mentioned in the Qur'an along with the basic positions(bowing, prostrating, etc).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And how are you so sure that what Muslims are taught today is wrong? What makes you so sure that your Islam is the right one? You're not following what Mohammed taught, you're making your own interpretation of the Qu'ran and following that. As for all prophets being equal, that's not entirely true. The Qu'ran states that Mohammed is a special prophet with privileges that no other prophet has/had.
If Mohammed is also the embodiment of the ideals of Islam then it means that the Wahabbi/Salafi are correct in their interpretation of the Qu'ran. They attempt to follow Islam as preached about by Mohammed and the companions. This means killing people who speak out against Mohammed (Qu'ran 9:24), it means sex with slaves without marriage is fine (Chapter Al-Tahrim). marrying pre-pubescent girls is fine (his marriage to Aisha), hitting a woman is acceptable (Mohammed struck Aisha for spying on him), slaughtering an entire tribe of people through beheading is fine (Bani Qurayzi) and the list goes on. Do you think it's acceptable to marry a 6 year old girl, if not then why not?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You didn't post all the verses that mention slaves, here:<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I didn't. I posted the ones relevant to showing that Islam accepts slavery as a social norm.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, it says to free a slave as punishment for going back on your word.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, so once again it's telling Muslims to free a slave as a punishment for something they've done wrong.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, and what happens if the master decides that there is nothing good and honest in the slave? It doesn't say that they if a slave asks for freedom it must be granted, it leaves it up to the discretion of the slave owner.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Read the Tafsirs of this verse. What it's talking about here are the slaves who have entered into a contract to buy their freedom and supplying money towards it and this is in the hope of encouraging them to become Muslim. So any slave who looks like he will never embrace Islam will not be party to this "charity".
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Once again when you consult the teachings of Mohammed and his companions you find that what it's talking about here is manumitted slaves who are likely to become Muslim.
Now show me the verses that talk about unconditional release of all slaves and that owning a slave is immoral.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It was an example of how a Muslim could have gotten possession of them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And Mohammed also promoted the taking of female captives as war booty. This was a privlege not just for him but for anyone that fought in battle. This is how most slaves came to be in the Muslims posession at the time.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Read Al-Tahrim and then tell me that no sexual contact is authorised unless a marriage has taken place. Also verse 23:6 says "Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed -"
Notice how the wives and slaves are an 'or" situation. In otherwords no marriage with the slave needs to take place for the slave owner to have sex with them. Show me the passage that states that a man must marry his slave to be able to have sex with her.
The Qu'ran also states that a slave girl should be treated like a wife. And what does the Qu'ran say about a wife refusing sex with her husband?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It just means that you can have sex with slaves and prisoners of war. But the condition for sex is and always was: marriage. Which requires the consent of both parties. So if a captive wants to marry him, it is ok.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's a very noble thought, and I congratulate you for wanting it to say that but the fact of the matter is that it doesn't.
Ok, let me make it easier for you then. The Qu'ran says it's alright to strike your wife if she's disobedient. Is the Qu'ran wrong for stating this? Should a husband have the right to strike his wife?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). (4:129) I don't see how it can get much clearer than that. Besides, that site doesn't give the full quote, so here it is: <b>If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans,</b> marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or that which your right hands possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (3)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It could get clearer by saying "Unless these circumstances apply". lol As it stands that verse is open to a multiple amount of interpretations, as is evidenced by the sheer number of interpretations. Suggesting someone can't do something isn't the same as telling someone not to do something.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I could care less of what is preached in mainstream Islam and in the Hadith.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you could care less what Mohammed taught? Because Mohammed most definitely did not teach that polygamy was only to be followed under those circumstances.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I agree that there were very drastic measures taken, it doesn't change the fact that they were compiled, for the eldest, over 200 years after Muhammad's death. Do you know how a word can be deformed in a chain of 30 person playing Telephone? Here the chain is big and lasts three lifetimes. Whatever measure was taken to know were a Hadith came from, it doesn't mean they are authentic or even remotely reliable. There is a very very big difference between 19 years and two centuries. When the compilation of the Qur'an started, many of those who had memorized the Qur'an during the time of the Prophet were still alive. Verses were written down on parchment and palm leaves, a little everywhere. There were partial compilations in existence. For the Hadith, there was nothing. Oral transmission doesn't work well.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's where you're wrong about the Hadiths. Yes they were compiled over 200 years later but they were not however written then. There are many many many hadiths written from prior and just after Mohammeds death. The first attempt at collecting the Hadiths was by Uthman himself during the compilation of the Qu'ran.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The absence of something better doesn't make it good. What Muslims are taught today is wrong. Muhammad was the embodiment of the ideals of the Qur'an. Following his Sunna or emulating him means to follow the Qur'an. Ah, the missing info. You see, us Muslim believe Islam and all it's teachings have existed since Adam. The five pillars were given to Abraham and, thus, existed in pre-islamic times. Salat, Zakat, Hajj, Shahada and Sawn were practices that already existed before Muhammad. To get the real form of Salat, one must simply remove the parts that don't make sense. Like including Muhammad in the Shahada. It goes against the commandment to consider all prophets equal. And the five times of prayer are mentioned in the Qur'an along with the basic positions(bowing, prostrating, etc).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And how are you so sure that what Muslims are taught today is wrong? What makes you so sure that your Islam is the right one? You're not following what Mohammed taught, you're making your own interpretation of the Qu'ran and following that. As for all prophets being equal, that's not entirely true. The Qu'ran states that Mohammed is a special prophet with privileges that no other prophet has/had.
If Mohammed is also the embodiment of the ideals of Islam then it means that the Wahabbi/Salafi are correct in their interpretation of the Qu'ran. They attempt to follow Islam as preached about by Mohammed and the companions. This means killing people who speak out against Mohammed (Qu'ran 9:24), it means sex with slaves without marriage is fine (Chapter Al-Tahrim). marrying pre-pubescent girls is fine (his marriage to Aisha), hitting a woman is acceptable (Mohammed struck Aisha for spying on him), slaughtering an entire tribe of people through beheading is fine (Bani Qurayzi) and the list goes on. Do you think it's acceptable to marry a 6 year old girl, if not then why not?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You didn't post all the verses that mention slaves, here:<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I didn't. I posted the ones relevant to showing that Islam accepts slavery as a social norm.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
But those who divorce their wives by Zihar, then wish to go back on the words they uttered― (it is ordained that such a one) <b>should free a slave</b> before they touch each other: this are ye admonished to perform: and Allah is well-acquainted with (all) that ye do. (3)
Ok, it says to free a slave as punishment for going back on your word.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Allah will not call you to account for what is void in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed then indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or <b>give a slave his freedom</b>. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth Allah make clear to you His Signs, that ye may be grateful. (89)
Ok, so once again it's telling Muslims to free a slave as a punishment for something they've done wrong.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allâh enriches them of His Bounty. <b>And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allâh which He has bestowed upon you.</b> And force not your maids to prostitution, if they desire chastity, in order that you may make a gain in the (perishable) goods of this worldly life. But if anyone compels them (to prostitution), then after such compulsion, Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to those women, i.e. He will forgive them because they have been forced to do this evil act unwillingly). (33)
Ok, and what happens if the master decides that there is nothing good and honest in the slave? It doesn't say that they if a slave asks for freedom it must be granted, it leaves it up to the discretion of the slave owner.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and <b>to free the slaves</b> and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise. (60)
Read the Tafsirs of this verse. What it's talking about here are the slaves who have entered into a contract to buy their freedom and supplying money towards it and this is in the hope of encouraging them to become Muslim. So any slave who looks like he will never embrace Islam will not be party to this "charity".
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and <b>to set slaves free</b>; and observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are they who are sincere. Such are the God-fearing. (177)
Once again when you consult the teachings of Mohammed and his companions you find that what it's talking about here is manumitted slaves who are likely to become Muslim.
Now show me the verses that talk about unconditional release of all slaves and that owning a slave is immoral.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It was an example of how a Muslim could have gotten possession of them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And Mohammed also promoted the taking of female captives as war booty. This was a privlege not just for him but for anyone that fought in battle. This is how most slaves came to be in the Muslims posession at the time.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Prisoners of war are to be treated kindly and most definitely NOT used as sexual toys. No sexual contact is authorized unless a marriage has taken place. And marriage requires the consent of both parties.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Read Al-Tahrim and then tell me that no sexual contact is authorised unless a marriage has taken place. Also verse 23:6 says "Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed -"
Notice how the wives and slaves are an 'or" situation. In otherwords no marriage with the slave needs to take place for the slave owner to have sex with them. Show me the passage that states that a man must marry his slave to be able to have sex with her.
The Qu'ran also states that a slave girl should be treated like a wife. And what does the Qu'ran say about a wife refusing sex with her husband?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It just means that you can have sex with slaves and prisoners of war. But the condition for sex is and always was: marriage. Which requires the consent of both parties. So if a captive wants to marry him, it is ok.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's a very noble thought, and I congratulate you for wanting it to say that but the fact of the matter is that it doesn't.