Australian Politics Forum - did Muhammed err?

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #75 - Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:46am

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:26am:

6/1-5 is about banging his sex slave maria the copt,do you think the threats of divorce were over honey,is that a trivial thing to divorce all your wives and replace them with obedient virgins over honey?

Wait Baron, its obvious you don't even know the two stories.

Please confirm for me this so I know we're on the same page:

are you aware that the two stories refer to two different women - the Bukhari version refers to Zanab bint Jahsh - his wife, while the Al-Nasa'i version refers to Maria al-Qibtiyya - the coptic slave?

Thats a pretty critical point Baron.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18630
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #76 - Jul 7^th, 2015 at 12:00pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:40am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:26am:

abudawud mentioning honey in relation to sex is a point Gandalf,you are trying to wriggle out of that one everyone can see that.

Its a point - and an irrelevant one.

But if this is you acknowledging that 66:1-5 does not refer to the coptic sex slave, then we're making progress. If you are now saying that the narration is a metaphor for some of The Prophet's wives being jealous of him having sex with another one of his wives (ie not a coptic sex slave) - then I'm fine with that.

Just so long as you are abandoning your BS about 66:1-5 referring to Muhammad wanting to have sex with a sex slave against the wishes of his wives. So are you abandoning that now Baron?

It is relevant that abudawud mentioned honey in regards to sex,i see you have tried to dodge that by claiming it's irrelevant.

66/1-5 is about Mo banging his Coptic Christian sex slave, here is an Islamic source that confirms I am right.
Quote:

O Prophet! Why did you prohibit what god has made lawful for you,in terms of your Coptic handmaiden maria...
altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?MadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=66&tAyahNo=2&tDisplay=yes...

For some reason the page isn't linking,try this click on tafsirs and go to sura 66 verse 1-5
altafsir.com

That 100% Islamic link says 66/1-5 is about Mo banging his Coptic slave maria I will go with that.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 7^th, 2015 at 12:13pm by Baronvonrort »

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18630
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #77 - Jul 7^th, 2015 at 6:17pm

Anyone who clicks on the altafsir link I provided can see they say sura 66 verses 1 to 5 are about Maria the Coptic Christian sex slave Muhammad had.

If you try sura 33 verse 21 does it say to emulate Muhammad in combat,is that what the pious muslims are doing in the Islamic state in taking women as captives.

Gandalf claims he is right,i reckon my sh1t is Akbar,perhaps we need a vote on this.

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #78 - Jul 7^th, 2015 at 6:39pm

Baron do you know anything about this particular tafsir? Do even know what a tafsir is?

Do you know how many different tafsirat there are? Have you considered that there are many other tafsirat that disagrees with this tafsir on this particular matter?

What about the opinion of the guy who found and recorded that hadith - does that count?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49321
At my desk.

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #79 - Jul 7^th, 2015 at 8:40pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:46am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:26am:

6/1-5 is about banging his sex slave maria the copt,do you think the threats of divorce were over honey,is that a trivial thing to divorce all your wives and replace them with obedient virgins over honey?

Wait Baron, its obvious you don't even know the two stories.

Please confirm for me this so I know we're on the same page:

are you aware that the two stories refer to two different women - the Bukhari version refers to Zanab bint Jahsh - his wife, while the Al-Nasa'i version refers to Maria al-Qibtiyya - the coptic slave?

Thats a pretty critical point Baron.

You keep citing learned Islamic scholars who insist it was not about Maria.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:04am:

freediver wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 9:26am:

I think it was a euphemism for sex.

The two ahadith are contradictory. One talks about a visit to Mary the coptic slave, the other talks about a visit to his wife Zaynab bint Jaysh. Scholars are unanimous in agreement that verse 66:1-5 refers to the latter account, and that the former is an unreliable narration.

I have given Baron the opportunity to provide a shred of scholarly evidence to demonstrate that any Islamic school or scholar agrees with his version. Usually Baron tries to support his prejudiced views with some supposedly reputable Islamic scholar - often the islamqa guy from Saudi Arabia (always with a little spiel about how qualified he is). Now, based on his last post he seems to be attempting to ridicule Islamic scholarship as somehow irrelevant.

Baron's double standards are on display for all to see.

I think it was a euphemism for sex.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:19am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:10am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:02am:

Can you cite that 5529 from quran.com I cannot see it or do you expect us to take your word for it?

You're a smacking genius Baron - quran.com doesn't contain the footnotes of Yusuf Ali. My book does.

But do you know what I just did right now? I googled "yusuf ali footnote 5529". Here is the very first hit:

http://www.al-islam.org/tahrif/yusufali/

you'll find footnote 5529 about 3/4 way down. (reccommend ctrl+f - "5529")

How pathetic can you get Baron. Feel free to keep embarrassing yourself, its hilarious.

how convenient quran.com doesn't have this footnote eh Gandalf.
Why do translators have to put footnotes on translations is the translation insufficient despite allah saying he perfected islam in 5/3.
quran.com/5/3

Why would $Profit Mo stay away from his wives for 29 days and pork maria the Coptic slave during this time if it was about eating honey.
$Profit Mo stayed away from his wives for 29 days to punish them over whinging about his porking of maria.

You still haven't explained why abudawud refers to tasting her honey in relation to sex.

He didn't pork her. It is haram to pork sex slaves. He honeyed her.

Quote:

Here's another question you can slime away from

Don't let him do that Gandalf. I know how you feel about not answering questions.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 7^th, 2015 at 8:46pm by freediver »

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: did Muhammed err? Reply #80 - Jul 7^th, 2015 at 8:43pm FD if you can't keep up, best stay out of it.
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18630
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #81 - Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:25pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 6:39pm:

Baron do you know anything about this particular tafsir? Do even know what a tafsir is?

Do you know how many different tafsirat there are? Have you considered that there are many other tafsirat that disagrees with this tafsir on this particular matter?

What about the opinion of the guy who found and recorded that hadith - does that count?

Yes that's why I used altafsir.com,they have a nice reference from Al Azhar University.
When you click on The Tafsirs put in sura 66 verses 1-5 what does it say, if you change schools to sunni/sufi/salafi do they change what it says?
They are the oldest and most used tafsir website on the internet it says so on the bottom of that page.

Getting back to honey even Bukhari can't make up his mind on whether Mo enjoyed the honeypot with Zainab or Hafsa,or did he enjoy the honeypot with both of them.
There are only 12 verses half of them say Mo enjoyed the honeypot at Zainabs house the other half say he enjoyed the honeypot at Hafsa's house.
Is that a serious contradiction can Bukhari make up his mind or did Mo enjoy the honeypot at both their houses?
sunnah.com/search/?q=maghafir

So we have Mo erring once or is it twice over banning honey,according to Bukhari he enjoyed the honeypot at both Zainab and Hafsa's houses.
Then Mo erred again in trying to ban sex slaves.

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18630
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #82 - Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:32pm

freediver wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 8:40pm:

He didn't pork her. It is haram to pork sex slaves. He honeyed her.

Quote:

Here's another question you can slime away from

Don't let him do that Gandalf. I know how you feel about not answering questions.

Abu Dawud did mention tasting her honey,perhaps Zainab/Hafsa glazed his pork sword with her honey and that was the smell the wives complained about.

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #83 - Jul 8^th, 2015 at 8:40am

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:25pm:

Yes that's why I used altafsir.com,they have a nice reference from Al Azhar University.
When you click on The Tafsirs put in sura 66 verses 1-5 what does it say, if you change schools to sunni/sufi/salafi do they change what it says?
They are the oldest and most used tafsir website on the internet it says so on the bottom of that page.

Its one tafsir - out of probably hundreds. It was completed in the 15th century. I wonder how many other tafsir's you had to sift through before you finally found one that gives your version. How about we look at tafsir's that are actually considered the most classic and reliable - like ibn kathir.

Quote:

http://www.islamwb.com/tafsir-ibn-kathir-pdf

Do you think the opinion regarding its authenticity of the scholar who recorded the hadith counts?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18630
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #84 - Jul 8^th, 2015 at 12:46pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 8^th, 2015 at 8:40am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 10:25pm:

Yes that's why I used altafsir.com,they have a nice reference from Al Azhar University.
When you click on The Tafsirs put in sura 66 verses 1-5 what does it say, if you change schools to sunni/sufi/salafi do they change what it says?
They are the oldest and most used tafsir website on the internet it says so on the bottom of that page.

Its one tafsir - out of probably hundreds. It was completed in the 15th century. I wonder how many other tafsir's you had to sift through before you finally found one that gives your version. How about we look at tafsir's that are actually considered the most classic and reliable - like ibn kathir.

Quote:

http://www.islamwb.com/tafsir-ibn-kathir-pdf

Do you think the opinion regarding its authenticity of the scholar who recorded the hadith counts?

All the tafsirs at altafsir.com mention Maria the copt for 66/1-5,click on the other schools.

Allah said he perfected Islam is 5/3, for some reason muslims never agree on anything from the Niqab to Islamic terror, so much for the absurd claim allah made with Islam being perfected, the amusing part is they disagree with others on books written hundreds of years after the quran,books which have no claims to be sent by allah.
quran.com/5/3

So what page in the Nasai book is this allegation?

You have dodged the question on why Bukhari said the honey incident happened at Zainab's and Hafsa's house, can Bukhari make his mind up on which wives house Mo enjoyed the honeypot or did it happen at both houses on separate days?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 8^th, 2015 at 12:52pm by Baronvonrort »

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 96347	Re: did Muhammed err? Reply #85 - Jul 8^th, 2015 at 1:34pm freediver wrote on Jul 7^th, 2015 at 8:40pm: Quote: Here's another question you can slime away from Don't let him do that Gandalf. I know how you feel about not answering questions. How do you feel about not answering questions, FD? Oh. You won't answer. Sorry about that.
Back to top	IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #86 - Jul 8^th, 2015 at 6:59pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 8^th, 2015 at 12:46pm:

All the tafsirs at altafsir.com mention Maria the copt for 66/1-5,click on the other schools.

They are not "schools" Baron. They are tafsirs.

The only other tafsir in altasfir.com is Asbab Al Nuzul which mentions 3 sources - 2 of which are the honey story, one is the sex slave story. The last one (honey story) which is cited as the context of 66:1-5 on authority of Ibn Abbas (a companion of The Prophet) Read it again - there are 3 pages by the way.

Selective much Baron?

Sorry but thats just another fail.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 8^th, 2015 at 7:09pm by polite_gandalf »

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49321 At my desk.	Re: did Muhammed err? Reply #87 - Jul 9^th, 2015 at 12:45pm I agree with Gandalf that the correct translation is honey, which is a euphemism for sex.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18630
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #88 - Jul 9^th, 2015 at 1:06pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 8^th, 2015 at 6:59pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 8^th, 2015 at 12:46pm:

All the tafsirs at altafsir.com mention Maria the copt for 66/1-5,click on the other schools.

They are not "schools" Baron. They are tafsirs.

The only other tafsir in altasfir.com is Asbab Al Nuzul which mentions 3 sources - 2 of which are the honey story, one is the sex slave story. The last one (honey story) which is cited as the context of 66:1-5 on authority of Ibn Abbas (a companion of The Prophet) Read it again - there are 3 pages by the way.

Selective much Baron?

Sorry but thats just another fail.

You are the one being selective Gandalf,Bukhari covers the honey incident which he contradicts himself on whether it happened at zainab's house or hafsa's house.
which house did it happen in Gandalf was it zainabs or hafsa's or did the same incident happen twice with different wives?

altafsir.com,click on the tafsirs then what does it say for sura 66 verses 1-5?

Can you cite a single reputable scholar that says muslim men having sex with their slaves is haram?

If honey is halal according to your version of 66/1 then why do Capilano Honey pay for halal certification in Australia?

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18630
Gender: male

Re: did Muhammed err?
Reply #89 - Jul 9^th, 2015 at 3:36pm

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2015 at 12:45pm:

I agree with Gandalf that the correct translation is honey, which is a euphemism for sex.

Abu Dawud agrees with you FD.

Quote:

The $Profit replied-

She is not lawful for the first husband until she tastes the honey of the other husband and he tastes her honey.
sunnah.com/abudawud/13/135

That is a sahih hadith,watch the mental gymnastics in spinning that one.

No other verses mention honey smelling bad
sunnah.com/search/?q=honey

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Quran 66/1-5 context
Gandalf is right it's about honey 3 (42.9%) Baron is right it's about banging his slave 4 (57.1%) Total votes: 7 « Created by: Baronvonrort on: Jul 7^th, 2015 at 6:17pm »