It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)?

Is this practise still in operation today, in the more enlightened Muslim societies around the world? Have you demanded it of your spouse?

I look forward to explanation!

You might perhaps find this website able to explain things for you, Adamant...   ;D

Adamant wrote on Jul 10^th, 2014 at 7:11pm:

It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)? Is this practise still in operation today, in the more enlightened Muslim societies around the world? Have you demanded it of your spouse? I look forward to explanation!

Source?

Adamant wrote on Jul 10^th, 2014 at 7:11pm:

It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)?

Really? I'm joining my local mosque  ;) ;)

Praise be Allah

John Smith wrote on Jul 10^th, 2014 at 10:21pm:

Adamant wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 7:11pm: It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)? Really? I'm joining my local mosque  ;) ;) Praise be Allah

This is the reject shop version of the 72 virgins - clowns like you would convert in exchange for a pair of tatas being pressed in your face.


What hope for civilisation?

Soren wrote on Jul 10^th, 2014 at 11:19pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 10:21pm: Adamant wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 7:11pm: It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)? Really? I'm joining my local mosque  ;) ;) Praise be Allah This is the reject shop version of the 72 virgins - clowns like you would convert in exchange for a pair of tatas being pressed in your face. What hope for civilisation?

There’s always the hope that atheist Lutherans will save the day.

We must stay positive, no?

Karnal wrote on Jul 10^th, 2014 at 11:26pm:

Soren wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 11:19pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 10:21pm: Adamant wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 7:11pm: It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)? Really? I'm joining my local mosque  ;) ;) Praise be Allah This is the reject shop version of the 72 virgins - clowns like you would convert in exchange for a pair of tatas being pressed in your face. What hope for civilisation? There’s always the hope that atheist Lutherans will save the day. We must stay positive, no?

No.

Mar'n Luther is no protection against the masses selling out for tatas in faces.

Cheap.

Soren wrote on Jul 10^th, 2014 at 11:29pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 11:26pm: Soren wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 11:19pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 10:21pm: Adamant wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 7:11pm: It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)? Really? I'm joining my local mosque  ;) ;) Praise be Allah This is the reject shop version of the 72 virgins - clowns like you would convert in exchange for a pair of tatas being pressed in your face. What hope for civilisation? There’s always the hope that atheist Lutherans will save the day. We must stay positive, no? tatas in faces

One of Mormor’s delicasies, eh?

Sounds divine, old chap.

Apparently there was a 12 year-old kid who drank some breast milk that the Prophet's wife had expressed into a cup.

Bigots usually try and twist the story and tell people that the Prophet's wife suckled a grown man. Rather pathetic of them isn't it?

Typically, bigots rely on falsehoods to further their agenda of hate.

Soren wrote on Jul 10^th, 2014 at 11:19pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 10:21pm: Adamant wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 7:11pm: It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)? Really? I'm joining my local mosque  ;) ;) Praise be Allah This is the reject shop version of the 72 virgins - clowns like you would convert in exchange for a pair of tatas being pressed in your face. What hope for civilisation?

you never did like tits did you? Not enough hair on them  :D :D

Abbott Lies wrote on Jul 11^th, 2014 at 2:46am:

Apparently there was a 12 year-old kid who drank some breast milk that the Prophet's wife had expressed into a cup. Bigots usually try and twist the story and tell people that the Prophet's wife suckled a grown man. Rather pathetic of them isn't it? Typically, bigots rely on falsehoods to further their agenda of hate.

I don't think you know your Sunni from Shi'ite. No cup involved according to Sahih Muslim "The Book of Suckling"

It really disgust that all apologists of islam change history for its benefit, what is it with you racist bigots?

They have breasts?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2014 at 8:17pm:

Adamant wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 7:11pm: It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)? Is this practise still in operation today, in the more enlightened Muslim societies around the world? Have you demanded it of your spouse? I look forward to explanation! Source?

As this is a personal request from the Sharia enforcer I the lowly kufr acquiesce humbly ;D


' A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be eupon him) and said:

Messengerof Allah, I see on the face of Abu Hudhaifa (signs of disgust) on entering of Salim (who is an ally) into (our house), whereupon Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) said: Suckle him. She said: How can I suckle him as he is a grown-up man? Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) smiled and said: I already know that he is a young man 'Amr has made this addition in his narration that he participated in the Battle of Badr and in the narration of Ibn 'Umar (the words are): Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) laughed.


http://sunnah.com/muslim/17 

First it was one suckle then ten then five why cant god get it right the first time?

P/S Would you please refrain from altering titles to threads as it is so petty.

Adamant wrote on Jul 12^th, 2014 at 12:21pm:

P/S Would you please refrain from altering titles to threads as it is so petty.

I have already said I will not be accepting any more "personalised" thread titles. So yes, I will be altering them if you persist with them.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 12^th, 2014 at 12:25pm:

Adamant wrote on Jul 12th, 2014 at 12:21pm: P/S Would you please refrain from altering titles to threads as it is so petty. I have already said I will not be accepting any more "personalised" thread titles. So yes, I will be altering them if you persist with them.

And on the matter of suckling?

Abbott Lies wrote on Jul 11^th, 2014 at 2:46am:

Apparently there was a 12 year-old kid who drank some breast milk that the Prophet's wife had expressed into a cup. Bigots usually try and twist the story and tell people that the Prophet's wife suckled a grown man. Rather pathetic of them isn't it? Typically, bigots rely on falsehoods to further their agenda of hate.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Adamant wrote on Jul 12^th, 2014 at 12:30pm:

And on the matter of suckling?

Well it seems Abbott Lies might be closer to the mark....


Quote:

The first thing that must be clarified is that there was no physical contact between Sahla bin Suhail and Salim –may Allah be pleased with them both. Meaning of the Arabic word أَرْضِعِيهِ: The Hadith actually uses the word أَرْضِعِيهِ to show what the Prophet –may Allah bless him- asked Sahla to do. The word is a derivative of رضاع (Radhha) and it does not basically meaning suckling i.e. drinking from the breasts.

Quote:

“He did Raddha (from the) breasts of his mother.” So the basic, original meaning of Raddha cannot be “suckling” but it has to be “feeding.” Had it been “suckling” there was no need to add “from the breasts …” The real meaning is “feeding” and the context or explicit information alone can clarify if it means, “suckling” i.e. “feeding from the breasts” or it was some other way.

Quote:

While the context does not say anything explicitly, we have to look for the answer elsewhere. Qadhi Ayyaz said: “It is possible that she (Sahla) poured (her milk) and then he (Salim) drank it without having to touch her breast.” al-Nawawi said, “It is a fair possibility.” (Fath al-Bari 14/346) Infact one narration gives us the explicit answer. We read; Muhammad bin 'Umar (al-Waqidi) told us: Muhammad bin 'Abdullah, al-Zuhri's nephew, told us on authority of his father that he said, “An amount of a drink milk was collected in a pot or a glass, and Salim used to drink it every day, for five days. After this, he used to enter upon her while her head was uncovered. This was permission from Messenger of Allah to Sahla bint Suhail." (Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat al-Kubra 8/271 Quoted by Ibn Hajr in al-Isabah 4/11)

http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/06/there-is-no-adult-breastfeeding-in.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxodEBPoHPI

;D ;D ;D :D

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 12^th, 2014 at 3:28pm:

Adamant wrote on Jul 12th, 2014 at 12:30pm: And on the matter of suckling? Well it seems Abbott Lies might be closer to the mark.... Quote: The first thing that must be clarified is that there was no physical contact between Sahla bin Suhail and Salim –may Allah be pleased with them both. Meaning of the Arabic word أَرْضِعِيهِ: The Hadith actually uses the word أَرْضِعِيهِ to show what the Prophet –may Allah bless him- asked Sahla to do. The word is a derivative of رضاع (Radhha) and it does not basically meaning suckling i.e. drinking from the breasts. [quote]“He did Raddha (from the) breasts of his mother.” So the basic, original meaning of Raddha cannot be “suckling” but it has to be “feeding.” Had it been “suckling” there was no need to add “from the breasts …” The real meaning is “feeding” and the context or explicit information alone can clarify if it means, “suckling” i.e. “feeding from the breasts” or it was some other way.

Quote:

While the context does not say anything explicitly, we have to look for the answer elsewhere. Qadhi Ayyaz said: “It is possible that she (Sahla) poured (her milk) and then he (Salim) drank it without having to touch her breast.” al-Nawawi said, “It is a fair possibility.” (Fath al-Bari 14/346) Infact one narration gives us the explicit answer. We read; Muhammad bin 'Umar (al-Waqidi) told us: Muhammad bin 'Abdullah, al-Zuhri's nephew, told us on authority of his father that he said, “An amount of a drink milk was collected in a pot or a glass, and Salim used to drink it every day, for five days. After this, he used to enter upon her while her head was uncovered. This was permission from Messenger of Allah to Sahla bint Suhail." (Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat al-Kubra 8/271 Quoted by Ibn Hajr in al-Isabah 4/11)

http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/06/there-is-no-adult-breastfeeding-in.html[/quote]

You have to be kidding me Gandalf, you offer a blogger as proof that Mo did not say what he did say? A blogger since 2007 knows more than Sunnah.com when they refer to Sahih Muslim. I realize you are suffering temporary privations but get off the grass.

I have more questions for you on this matter but will wait till you have broken your fast as you seem a little light headed at the mo!

personal attack - removed

Yeah ya have to give Brian toss an A for efart.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 12^th, 2014 at 7:45pm:

Resorting to ad hominem again, Adamant?

You trot that out ad nauseam, you do it every time you lose the plot. To emphasise this you proceed by adding childish glyphs.   

Adamant wrote on Jul 12^th, 2014 at 5:50pm:

You have to be kidding me Gandalf, you offer a blogger as proof that Mo did not say what he did say?

I offer the arguments said blogger presented.

Shame you are seemingly  incapable of objectively considering an argument.

Adamant wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 9:24am:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 12th, 2014 at 7:45pm: Resorting to ad hominem again, Adamant? You trot that out ad nauseam, you do it every time you lose the plot. To emphasise this you proceed by adding childish glyphs.

Poor adamant.  You appear particularly truculent today.   ::)

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 10:32am:

Adamant wrote on Jul 12th, 2014 at 5:50pm: You have to be kidding me Gandalf, you offer a blogger as proof that Mo did not say what he did say? I offer the arguments said blogger presented. Shame you are seemingly  incapable of objectively considering an argument.

I considered it, albeit fleetingly.

On this forum you have to have proof, that is an opinion. Not backed by an Imam therefore unacceptable even to you.

Adamant wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 12:00pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:32am: Adamant wrote on Jul 12th, 2014 at 5:50pm: You have to be kidding me Gandalf, you offer a blogger as proof that Mo did not say what he did say? I offer the arguments said blogger presented. Shame you are seemingly  incapable of objectively considering an argument. I considered it, albeit fleetingly.

Yes, objectivity seems sadly lacking from your posts, Adamant.  Not surprising really.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 11:45am:

Adamant wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 9:24am: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 12th, 2014 at 7:45pm: Resorting to ad hominem again, Adamant? You trot that out ad nauseam, you do it every time you lose the plot. To emphasise this you proceed by adding childish glyphs.    Poor adamant.  You appear particularly truculent today.   ::)

As usual you say nothing. Silly glyphs don't count.

Found a Fatwa on how to breast feed a warrior yet Gadalf?

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 12:07pm:

Adamant wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 12:00pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:32am: Adamant wrote on Jul 12th, 2014 at 5:50pm: You have to be kidding me Gandalf, you offer a blogger as proof that Mo did not say what he did say? I offer the arguments said blogger presented. Shame you are seemingly  incapable of objectively considering an argument. I considered it, albeit fleetingly. Yes, objectivity seems sadly lacking from your posts, Adamant.  Not surprising really.   ::)

Cherry picking threads is a favourite method of intimidation of yours is it not Brian. You also resort to "ad hominem"  when it suits your purpose. Oh and the glyphs haha.

Adamant wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 12:00pm:

On this forum you have to have proof, that is an opinion.

Proof of what exactly?

Interpreting islamic jurisprudence is 100% opinion.

Adamant wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 12:47pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 11:45am: Adamant wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 9:24am: Brian Ross wrote on Jul 12th, 2014 at 7:45pm: Resorting to ad hominem again, Adamant? You trot that out ad nauseam, you do it every time you lose the plot. To emphasise this you proceed by adding childish glyphs.    Poor adamant.  You appear particularly truculent today.   ::) As usual you say nothing. Silly glyphs don't count.

And your personal attacks contribute...what...exactly, Adamant?   ::)

Adamant wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 12:56pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 12:07pm: Adamant wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 12:00pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 10:32am: Adamant wrote on Jul 12th, 2014 at 5:50pm: You have to be kidding me Gandalf, you offer a blogger as proof that Mo did not say what he did say? I offer the arguments said blogger presented. Shame you are seemingly  incapable of objectively considering an argument. I considered it, albeit fleetingly. Yes, objectivity seems sadly lacking from your posts, Adamant.  Not surprising really.   ::) Cherry picking threads is a favourite method of intimidation of yours is it not Brian. You also resort to "ad hominem"  when it suits your purpose. Oh and the glyphs haha.

I answer the points that I feel need answering, Adamant.  The same as every other poster but seem to feel intimidated when I do it.  I wonder why?   You also seem to feel intimidated when I point out you've resorted to ad hominem argument...again.  I wonder why?  Are you really that insecure in your opinions?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 3:07pm:

I answer the points that I feel need answering

No you do not, you troll! You answer no points, obfuscation along with racism  is the weapon of choice heralded by your insignificant self.


Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 3:07pm:

ad hominem argument

Try something else Brian LP's went out of fashion yonks ago.

In my humble opinion you are nothing more than an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur so will have nothing more to say to you traitor. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :-/ :-/ :-/ :-* :-* :-* :'( :'( :D :D :D :D :D :D ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) :) :) :) :) :)

I do hope that your limited intelligence allows you to appreciate the true meanings of the glyphs, unfortunately I very much doubt it!

Ah, we've now moved to the "Agent Provocateur " stage, now have we, Adamant, having gone through "liar" to "troll" and "ad hominem" stages to get there.  I suppose the attack thread is the next stage?

Why do you feel this has to be about personalities and in particular me?   I'm flattered that you believe it all revolves around me but really...  ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 5:44pm:

Ah, we've now moved to the "Agent Provocateur " stage, now have we, Adamant, having gone through "liar" to "troll" and "ad hominem" stages to get there.  I suppose the attack thread is the next stage? Why do you feel this has to be about personalities and in particular me?   I'm flattered that you believe it all revolves around me but really...  ::)

You have called me Bigot Racist and Troll. What does that make you. Ignorant of the rules of posting I suggest.

Ever been threatened with a ban? No of course not possum!

PS how is your Spanish History going, getting better at it are you? Would not be difficult all you would have to do is raise your IQ above 60.

Adamant wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 7:17pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 5:44pm: Ah, we've now moved to the "Agent Provocateur " stage, now have we, Adamant, having gone through "liar" to "troll" and "ad hominem" stages to get there.  I suppose the attack thread is the next stage? Why do you feel this has to be about personalities and in particular me?   I'm flattered that you believe it all revolves around me but really...  ::) You have called me Bigot Racist and Troll. What does that make you. Ignorant of the rules of posting I suggest.

When you post in a Trollish manner, I call you a Troll.
When you post with racist arguments, I call you a Racist.
When you post in a bigoted way, I call you a Bigot.

If the cap fits, why are you so afraid to wear it, Adamant?  ::)


Quote:

Ever been threatened with a ban? No of course not possum!

Here?  I don't believe so.  Why should I be?  I am invariably polite and don't sink to the use of ad hominem, unlike yourself.   ::)


Quote:

PS how is your Spanish History going, getting better at it are you?

My knowledge of Spanish history is reasonable, but I must admit not perfect.  It isn't my period of speciality.  You appear to be questioning something.  What?


Quote:

Would not be difficult all you would have to do is raise your IQ above 60.

Again, a resort to ad hominem.  Why?  Why do you feel it is necessary?  Does it make you feel superior in some way when you can't win an argument?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 5:44pm:

Ah, we've now moved to the "Agent Provocateur " stage, now have we, Adamant, having gone through "liar" to "troll" and "ad hominem" stages to get there.  I suppose the attack thread is the next stage? Why do you feel this has to be about personalities and in particular me?   I'm flattered that you believe it all revolves around me but really...  ::)

Because all you do is troll. Don't get sooky over being called one.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 7:33pm:

When you post in a Trollish manner, I call you a Troll.When you post with racist arguments, I call you a Racist.When you post in a bigoted way, I call you a Bigot.

And when we do this to you we are banned without explanation.

I have asked Gandalf twice to stop Stalking me.

I have asked him if it is time I sought advice from a solicitor.

The muslim has gone to ground.

You tell me who is the troll person of ill repute?

So there was an orphan boy who the Prophet's wife a woman became rather attached to. When he approached puberty, she became concerned that she would no longer be able to maintain the relationship with the orphan boy as the Islamic religion advises adherents to restrict themselves from mingling with the opposite sex after puberty. So the Prophet told the woman to establish a legal maternal relationship with the boy by feeding him her breast milk.

The feeding requires no physical contact, and only requires that the boy drank his fill five times. The milk could be drunk from a cup. In this way, the woman sort of adopted the orphan boy.

Is there anything sinister about it? Not that I can see.

Abbott Lies wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 7:48pm:

So there was an orphan boy who the Prophet's wife became rather attached to. When he approached puberty, she became concerned that she would no longer be able to maintain the relationship with the orphan boy as the Islamic religion advises adherents to restrict themselves from mingling with the opposite sex after puberty. So the Prophet told his wife to establish a legal maternal relationship with the boy by feeding him her breast milk.The feeding requires no physical contact, and only requires that the boy drank his fill five times. The milk could be drunk from a cup. In this way, the Prophet's wife sort of adopted the orphan boy.

The "boy" had fought in battles, he was deemed a warrior, he was a MAN.

In no place that is authentic does it say "the man drank from a cup". It does say "I suckled him".

Go back to what the muslims call "AUTHENTIC" they all love that, but perhaps they will hate this one.

PS I do not know who's wife was told this!

Abbott Lies wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 7:48pm:

So there was an orphan boy who the Prophet's wife became rather attached to. When he approached puberty, she became concerned that she would no longer be able to maintain the relationship with the orphan boy as the Islamic religion advises adherents to restrict themselves from mingling with the opposite sex after puberty. So the Prophet told his wife to establish a legal maternal relationship with the boy by feeding him her breast milk. The feeding requires no physical contact, and only requires that the boy drank his fill five times. The milk could be drunk from a cup. In this way, the Prophet's wife sort of adopted the orphan boy. Is there anything sinister about it? Not that I can see.

Drunk from a CUP  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Good one  ;D ;D :D

Adamant wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 7:47pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 7:33pm: When you post in a Trollish manner, I call you a Troll.When you post with racist arguments, I call you a Racist.When you post in a bigoted way, I call you a Bigot. And when we do this to you we are banned without explanation.

And I am responsible?  Really?   ::)


Quote:

I have asked Gandalf twice to stop Stalking me. I have asked him if it is time I sought advice from a solicitor. The muslim has gone to ground. You tell me who is the troll person of ill repute?

You, Adamant?   I don't troll, despite what you claim.  I provide (usually) substantial answers to other's questions, which are on topic and pertinent.   I am not bigoted against any religion.  I treat all equally.    Perhaps that is why I don't get banned without warning?   ::)

HA HA HA  ;D

You troll all the time and are bigoted against anyone that's not muslim and any other religion that isn't Islam.
You just come across as an angry ill informed atheist to be honest that just trolls for a reaction.

I haven't seen you post one serious informed thing yet.

Adamant wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 8:35pm:

Abbott Lies wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 7:48pm: So there was an orphan boy who the Prophet's wife became rather attached to. When he approached puberty, she became concerned that she would no longer be able to maintain the relationship with the orphan boy as the Islamic religion advises adherents to restrict themselves from mingling with the opposite sex after puberty. So the Prophet told his wife to establish a legal maternal relationship with the boy by feeding him her breast milk.The feeding requires no physical contact, and only requires that the boy drank his fill five times. The milk could be drunk from a cup. In this way, the Prophet's wife sort of adopted the orphan boy. The "boy" had fought in battles, he was deemed a warrior, he was a MAN. In no place that is authentic does it say "the man drank from a cup". It does say "I suckled him". Go back to what the muslims call "AUTHENTIC" they all love that, but perhaps they will hate this one. PS I do not know who's wife was told this!

Ok, so I looked up the authentic from a book called Sahih Muslim. The story was not even about the Prophet's wife, but another woman named Sahla bint Suhail.

Here is what the authentic book of Sahih Muslim says:


Quote:

Book 008, Number 3426: 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail b. 'Amr came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, Salim (the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa) is living with us in our house, and he has attained puberty as youths attain it and has acquired knowledge as youths acquire, whereupon he said: Suckle him so that he may become unlawful (in regard to marriage) for you

and


Quote:

Book 008, Number 3427: Umm Salama said to 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her): A young boy who is at the threshold of puberty comes to you. I, however, do not like that he should come to me, whereupon 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) said: Don't you see in Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) a model for you? She also said: The wife of Abu Hudhaifa said: Messenger of Allah, Salim comes to me and now he is a (grown-up) person, and there is something that (rankles) in the mind of Abu Hudhaifa about him, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him (so that he may become your foster-child), and thus he may be able to come to you (freely).

So the story is about a young orphan boy maybe 11 or 12 or even younger, who had been brought up by the woman as a foster child. And it is unclear whether the milk was drunk from a cup or not.

Brian seems to have added a few new members to his fan club.  How do you do it?   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

Abbott Lies wrote on Jul 13^th, 2014 at 11:59pm:

Adamant wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 8:35pm: Abbott Lies wrote on Jul 13th, 2014 at 7:48pm: So there was an orphan boy who the Prophet's wife became rather attached to. When he approached puberty, she became concerned that she would no longer be able to maintain the relationship with the orphan boy as the Islamic religion advises adherents to restrict themselves from mingling with the opposite sex after puberty. So the Prophet told his wife to establish a legal maternal relationship with the boy by feeding him her breast milk.The feeding requires no physical contact, and only requires that the boy drank his fill five times. The milk could be drunk from a cup. In this way, the Prophet's wife sort of adopted the orphan boy. The "boy" had fought in battles, he was deemed a warrior, he was a MAN. In no place that is authentic does it say "the man drank from a cup". It does say "I suckled him". Go back to what the muslims call "AUTHENTIC" they all love that, but perhaps they will hate this one. PS I do not know who's wife was told this! Ok, so I looked up the authentic from a book called Sahih Muslim. The story was not even about the Prophet's wife, but another woman named Sahla bint Suhail. Here is what the authentic book of Sahih Muslim says: Quote: Book 008, Number 3426: 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail b. 'Amr came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, Salim (the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa) is living with us in our house, and he has attained puberty as youths attain it and has acquired knowledge as youths acquire, whereupon he said: Suckle him so that he may become unlawful (in regard to marriage) for you and [quote]Book 008, Number 3427: Umm Salama said to 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her): A young boy who is at the threshold of puberty comes to you. I, however, do not like that he should come to me, whereupon 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) said: Don't you see in Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) a model for you? She also said: The wife of Abu Hudhaifa said: Messenger of Allah, Salim comes to me and now he is a (grown-up) person, and there is something that (rankles) in the mind of Abu Hudhaifa about him, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him (so that he may become your foster-child), and thus he may be able to come to you (freely).

So the story is about a young orphan boy maybe 11 or 12 or even younger, who had been brought up by the woman as a foster child. And it is unclear whether the milk was drunk from a cup or not.[/quote]

He fought in the battle of ? then classed as a?

Many of the "JEW BOYS" were killed for having pubic hair due to the fact that MO wanted to shag all the females,.

Have you read about the battle of the trench's? Ask Gandalf if not, I feel sure he will accommodate a person who knows little about Islam.

Noticed how Gandalf has left this thread. Why?

Because he has no answer to the legitimate claim. MO ordered lactating mothers to SUCKLE adults.

|dev|null wrote on Jul 14^th, 2014 at 11:02am:

Brian seems to have added a few new members to his fan club.  How do you do it?   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

Dunno.  They just seem to hate me so much.  Perhap it's 'cause I won't be a part of their mob mentality?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 12:04am:

troll

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 12:06am:

I am awake to your bigotry and hatred

Adamant wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 11:17am:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 16th, 2014 at 12:04am: troll Brian Ross wrote on Jul 16th, 2014 at 12:06am: I am awake to your bigotry and hatred

Look like factual statements about you!   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

Adamant wrote on Jul 15^th, 2014 at 6:34pm:

Noticed how Gandalf has left this thread. Why?

Its just all the intellectual stimulation your discussions create adamant - I can't handle it.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 2:09pm:

Adamant wrote on Jul 15th, 2014 at 6:34pm: Noticed how Gandalf has left this thread. Why? Its just all the intellectual stimulation your discussions create adamant - I can't handle it.

You must delete your comment as it is not on topic!

Your rules of course, cant you handle them?

see what I mean?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 3:07pm:

see what I mean?

You apply rules but refuse to live by them, do you see what I mean?

|dev|null wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 1:10pm:

Look like factual statements about you

Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Unless you are a muslim ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)troll ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D or A.W.A.N.K.E.R :D :D :D :D :D :D Bigot :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P Racist ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

Adamant wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 3:27pm:

|dev|null wrote on Jul 16th, 2014 at 1:10pm: Look like factual statements about you Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Yet you engage in them all the time.  Hypocrite!  ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

|dev|null wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 3:42pm:

Hypocrite

pot?

Adamant wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 2:58pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 16th, 2014 at 2:09pm: Adamant wrote on Jul 15th, 2014 at 6:34pm: Noticed how Gandalf has left this thread. Why? Its just all the intellectual stimulation your discussions create adamant - I can't handle it. You must delete your comment as it is not on topic! Your rules of course, cant you handle them?

It is still a bit of struggle to work out being on topic, given the vast majority of posts are nothing to do with the OP.

Let's face it, I did not note anywhere in the OP mention of Brian or Trolls for that matter, yet both those words turned up in a few posts, sometimes simultaneously. Perhaps all the off topic posts should be removed. Then we will have the OP and maybe (and this is a stretch) two or three other posts...

Of course another thought, you may need to start your own board mate, given you seem pretty hung up on the rules and how they need to be adhered to. Show us all how that is done... Clearly you haven't been to date.

Breast feeding is nothing to titter about...

Phemanderac wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 5:30pm:

Let's face it, I did not note anywhere in the OP mention of Brian or Trolls for that matter, yet both those words turned up in a few posts, sometimes simultaneously. Perhaps all the off topic posts should be removed. Then we will have the OP and maybe (and this is a stretch) two or three other posts

Good idea Gandalf has stated this but when his trolls post this rule is conveniently forgotten.


Phemanderac wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 5:30pm:

Of course another thought, you may need to start your own board mate, given you seem pretty hung up on the rules and how they need to be adhered to

These are Gandalf's rules. He enforces them like the Sharia, unless you are one of the trolls.

Adamant wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 5:43pm:

Phemanderac wrote on Jul 16th, 2014 at 5:30pm: Let's face it, I did not note anywhere in the OP mention of Brian or Trolls for that matter, yet both those words turned up in a few posts, sometimes simultaneously. Perhaps all the off topic posts should be removed. Then we will have the OP and maybe (and this is a stretch) two or three other posts Good idea Gandalf has stated this but when his trolls post this rule is conveniently forgotten. Phemanderac wrote on Jul 16th, 2014 at 5:30pm: Of course another thought, you may need to start your own board mate, given you seem pretty hung up on the rules and how they need to be adhered to These are Gandalf's rules. He enforces them like the Sharia, unless you are one of the trolls.

ROFL, I love that, "unless you are one of the trolls" line. That's awesome.

It's pretty simple really though, if you don't like it move along....

That has been the stance about things I have not "liked" and, in the cold light of day when I take the time to reflect, I agree (galling I know) that it is the only control we posters have in the place.

So, the offer is still there, set your own nest up and set the rules up that you will adhere to and enforce.

Or, failing that, keep thrashing about here accusing people like me of (maybe) being trolls... And whining about rules being applied...

It doesn't change the fact its piss poor.

That's opinion and not fact....

Opinions rarely change though, even in the face of facts.

I agree just like your opinion right there.

Phemanderac wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 4:40pm:

Adamant wrote on Jul 16th, 2014 at 5:43pm: Phemanderac wrote on Jul 16th, 2014 at 5:30pm: Let's face it, I did not note anywhere in the OP mention of Brian or Trolls for that matter, yet both those words turned up in a few posts, sometimes simultaneously. Perhaps all the off topic posts should be removed. Then we will have the OP and maybe (and this is a stretch) two or three other posts Good idea Gandalf has stated this but when his trolls post this rule is conveniently forgotten. Phemanderac wrote on Jul 16th, 2014 at 5:30pm: Of course another thought, you may need to start your own board mate, given you seem pretty hung up on the rules and how they need to be adhered to These are Gandalf's rules. He enforces them like the Sharia, unless you are one of the trolls. ROFL, I love that, "unless you are one of the trolls" line. That's awesome. It's pretty simple really though, if you don't like it move along.... That has been the stance about things I have not "liked" and, in the cold light of day when I take the time to reflect, I agree (galling I know) that it is the only control we posters have in the place. So, the offer is still there, set your own nest up and set the rules up that you will adhere to and enforce. Or, failing that, keep thrashing about here accusing people like me of (maybe) being trolls... And whining about rules being applied...

Are you one of his trolls, maybe even one of his sock puppets that he claims are all around?

I have no problem with "rules" as long as they are applied equally. they are NOT THO. They are gandalfs rules and he changes them according to who is making the comment!

Adamant, you seem to be coming increasingly paranoid.  Do you need to increase your medication?   ::)

Its amazing what socks roll out at the same time.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 7:25pm:

Adamant, you seem to be coming increasingly paranoid.  Do you need to increase your medication?   ::)

Nothing to add as usual Brian, oh well its just normal for you, carry on none will notice.

Except for his timing along with a certain other id  ;D ;D ;D

I think we can conclude this thread is a factual statement, that is Muhammad demanded another persons wife to breastfeed a MAN.

What has not been explained other than she will not be able to have a relationship with That man is Why.

For the lesser mortal ( non muslim ) I think the legitimate response would be "why the FvUck rR uU sUCKING mY Wife's TIT.   

I am too busy being a Smart Ass intimidating people so they get banned by backward little old ladies like Annie Anthrax with Free Divers Divers BALLS in my mouth.

Let me guess - thats definitely *NOT* a mahdi sock right?  ;D

www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/

some light reading...

Quote:

n a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. - See more at: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/#sthash.cb5dZ6BN.dpuf

explains a lot.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2014 at 8:17pm:

Adamant wrote on Jul 10th, 2014 at 7:11pm: It would be most appreciated by myself if you could explain why your Prophet commanded a lactating wife to "suckle" a man unknown to her (Not her husband/child)? Is this practise still in operation today, in the more enlightened Muslim societies around the world? Have you demanded it of your spouse? I look forward to explanation! Source?

www.sunnah.com/search/suckling

There are many sahih hadeeth that say the suckling verse was abrogated and found in the Quran, where is this verse in the Quran the sahih hadeeth refers to,muslims claim the Quran has never been corrupted so surely this verse must be in there.

So the verses on suckling and stoning to death in the Quran were eaten by a sheep, so much for the claim the Quran has never been corrupted.
www.sunnah.com/urn/1262630

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 19^th, 2014 at 10:00am:

Quote: n a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. - See more at: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/#sthash.cb5dZ6BN.dpuf explains a lot.

Interesting. Totally off topic of course, where are you going to move your answer to Gandalf?

Adamant wrote on Jul 19^th, 2014 at 10:18pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 19th, 2014 at 10:00am: Quote: n a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. - See more at: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/#sthash.cb5dZ6BN.dpuf explains a lot. Interesting. Totally off topic of course, where are you going to move your answer to Gandalf?

Explains you and your ilk's attitudes though, doesn't it, Matty?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D