C
CEDRIK
Guest
Thanks for the advice.Actually,I started studying the Qur’an more than twenty years ago, I also took Arabic classes and I’m still at it.
I’m a little weak in the prayer department though.
- Status
I’m a little weak in the prayer department though.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
al-Tabari said concerning this story:
*Muhammad Ibn Yahya Ibn Hayyan narrated, "The Messenger of God came to Zaid Ibn Haritha’s house seeking him. Perhaps the Messenger of God missed him at that time, that is why he said, ‘Where is Zaid?’
He went to his house seeking him and, when he did not find him, Zainab Bint Jahsh stood up to [meet] him in a housedress, but the Messenger of God turned away from her.
She said, ‘He is not here, Messenger of God, so please come in; my father and mother are your ransom.’
The Messenger of God refused to come in. Zainab had hurried to dress herself when she heard that the Messenger of God was at her door, so she leapt in a hurry, and the Messenger of God liked her when she did that. **The heart of the Prophet was filled with admiration for her. **
He went away muttering something that was hardly understandable but for this sentence: ‘Praise be to God who disposes the hearts.’
When Zaid came back home, she told him that the Messenger of God came. Zaid asked, ‘You asked him to come in, didn’t you?’
She replied, ‘I bade him to, but he refused.’
He said, ‘Have you heard [him say] anything?’
She answered, 'When he had turned away, I heard him say something that I could hardly understand. I heard him say, “Praise be to God who disposes the hearts.” ’
Zaid went out to the Messenger of God and said, ‘O Messenger of God, I learned that you came to my house. Did you come in? O Messenger of God, my father and mother are your ransom. Perhaps you liked Zainab. I can leave her.’
The Messenger of God said, ‘Hold on to your wife.’ Zaid said, ‘O Messenger of God, I will leave her.’
The Messenger of God said, ‘Keep your wife.’
So when Zaid left her, she finished her legal period after she had isolated herself from Zaid.
While the Messenger of God was sitting and talking with Aisha,** he was taken in a trance, and when it lifted, he smiled and said, ‘Who will go to Zainab to tell her that God wedded her to me from heaven?’ **
The Messenger of God recited; 'Thus you told someone whom God had favoured and whom you yourself have favoured: “Hold on to your wife.” ’
Aisha said, **'I heard much about her beauty and, moreover, about how God wedded her from heaven, and I said, “For sure she will boast over this with us.” ’ **
Salama, the slave of the Messenger of God, hurried to tell her about that. She gave her some silver jewellery that she was wearing." *
More help from Allah - so, this charge leveled against Muhammad necessitated the revelation of more Qur’anic verses:
*(Sura al-Ahzab Q.33: 40): “Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but [he is] God’s Messenger and the Seal of the Prophets. God is Aware of everything!”
(Sura al-Ahzab Q.33: 37): “We married her off to you so that there would be no objection for believers in respect to their adopted sons’ wives once they have accomplished their purpose with them. God’s command must be done!” *
There is a considerable moral problem with such a self-serving revelation. It is quite clear that Prophet Muhammad was attracted to Zainab before Zaid divorced her and it might well have been the true reason for the divorce itself.
And Qur’anic verses do make clear that there was something going on before Zaid divorced Zainab.
The entire melodrama: Zaid’s divorce of Zainab, Muhammad’s marriage with Zainab and subsequent revelations of several Qur’anic Ayats from Allah to purify this scandalous happening is something to ponder very seriously.
There is more in this strange story. That this action is immoral and this revelation/justification of it self-serving and not fitting for a true word of God is an important aspect, but not a contradiction within the Quran - even though contradicting the true character of God, who is moral purity.
Prohibiting adoption is no way a moral action. Prohibitions of alcohol drinking, smoking, gambling, sorceries, killing, etc., could be a moral action. But why was there prohibition of adoption?
**The logical difficulty is that Allah (?) causes a scandal and then sends Gabriel to officially justify the scandalous action of Prophet Muhammad with Qur’anic revelations is morally incorrect and too much of a coincidence. **
Pre-Islamic Arab Custom: Adoption of orphan/helpless child was a very popular and moral practice amongst pre-Islamic Arabs. By adopting orphan/helpless child, they used to consider adopted child as their own. And they used to pass onto them the adopter’s genealogy and name, his investment of them with all the rights of the legitimate son including that of inheritance and the prohibition of marriage on grounds of consanguinity.
How and why was this noble custom of adopting a child among human being prohibited?
Islam prohibits adopting children. Period. Adoption in the technical sense is not allowed in Muslim Shriah law. This is because Allah does not like this gesture of adopting orphan children.
These incidents are not in harmony with the ethics and conventions that Muhammad introduced to mankind, as Muslims claim. Abdullah Ibn Umar narrated: **"We have always called him Zaid Ibn Muhammad till the verse ‘Muhammad is not the father of any of your men’ was revealed.’ " **
M
Mount_Carmel
Guest
If that is the case, then I suspect like me you have found the Qur’an to be somewhat chaotic in timeline and content. It seems there is only one really complete surah, that of ‘Joseph’. Unlike the Bible can for Jews and Christians, the Qur’an on its own cannot fully support even one Pillar of Islam. It also seems that there is only a narrow sense of the ‘Golden Rule’, that of how a Muslim should treat a fellow Muslim.Thanks for the advice.Actually,I started studying the Qur’an more than twenty years ago, I also took Arabic classes and I’m still at it.
I’m a little weak in the prayer department though.
M
Matthew_Light
Guest
We have to understand that “marriage”, “family” and other concepts mean very different things in different cultural contexts. What made sense in the culture and time of Abraham does not make sense today.
Are we supposed to believe that “Servants, obey in all things your masters” - Colossians 3:22 is an eternal Divine precept? God forbid!
At the time of Muhammad, in a culture where tribal warfare was rampant, men were often killed in battle. A woman who was not protected by a man (either by marriage or by her father) was subject to rape and assault with very little consequence or ability to resist (there were no pistols then, or policemen, or jails). And so reducing the number of women who could not find a man to protect them, through marriage, was a very important thing!
Those small, insular tribal societies were also subject to genetic bottlenecks. It was very important to maintain knowledge of biological parentage, to avoid close biological relatives (those sharing 25% or more of their gene inheritance) from marrying and producing children.
In a society of small tribes like that, the only way to prevent inappropriately close biological relations from marrying and having children with one another was to say that biological parentage could not be “overcome” through adoption.
Rather than assuming the worst about Muhammad and his motivations, consider the possibility that Muhammad’s rules might have been appropriate for the culture and time in which he lived. Just as it was right and moral for the Jewish patriarchs to marry more than one woman in their day and age.
Some of our own cultural practices regarding “adoption” are themselves problematic. It’s very important for children to know who their biological parents are, and today we ought to make certain that every child knows that information, for their own health and that of their children. And, of course, we don’t do that, even hide that information from them via closed adoptions and many of the artificial reproduction strategies used today.
M
mamlukman
Guest
ReubenJ–You’ve gone above and beyond!
The problem with all the hadith and biographies of Muhammad is that it’s hard if not impossible to tease out historical facts beyond certain battles and so on. If you have a story about a private conversation or Muhammad visiting someone (as you have here), how can we vouch for its historical accuracy? Certainly there have always been competing factions in Islam, and clearly it was in their self interest to promote certain stories and suppress others to strengthen their own points of view and weaken the cases of their opponents. So we don’t find objective historians (at least in the early centuries) trying to find “truth.”
Tabari is writing about 300 years after the events he’s describing. Presumably he came across those verses in the Qur’an about adoption and realized there must be a story behind them. Did he copy the story from an earlier author? Did he make it up? Who knows. What we do know is that a prominent Muslim historian thought it was worthwhile to include it in his history.
When non-Muslims interpret certain aspects of Islam, Muslims inevitably say “You don’t understand the real meaning. Only a Muslim can understand the real meaning.” I disagree, but it is helpful to go off to Muslim sources–there are a LOT on the internet, for example al-islam.org or answering-christians.com and see what they have to say on the subject. Inevitably they try to make whatever the subject is acceptable in modern terms–either by saying Muhammad was trying to “improve” on something accepted at the time, or by saying Muhammad was addressing a certain specific situation at that time and it doesn’t apply now, or that the ends justify the means (they don’t say it that way, of course, but that’s how it works out), or that there was some hidden meaning. And of course there’s a lot of a priori reasoning.
The problem with all the hadith and biographies of Muhammad is that it’s hard if not impossible to tease out historical facts beyond certain battles and so on. If you have a story about a private conversation or Muhammad visiting someone (as you have here), how can we vouch for its historical accuracy? Certainly there have always been competing factions in Islam, and clearly it was in their self interest to promote certain stories and suppress others to strengthen their own points of view and weaken the cases of their opponents. So we don’t find objective historians (at least in the early centuries) trying to find “truth.”
Tabari is writing about 300 years after the events he’s describing. Presumably he came across those verses in the Qur’an about adoption and realized there must be a story behind them. Did he copy the story from an earlier author? Did he make it up? Who knows. What we do know is that a prominent Muslim historian thought it was worthwhile to include it in his history.
When non-Muslims interpret certain aspects of Islam, Muslims inevitably say “You don’t understand the real meaning. Only a Muslim can understand the real meaning.” I disagree, but it is helpful to go off to Muslim sources–there are a LOT on the internet, for example al-islam.org or answering-christians.com and see what they have to say on the subject. Inevitably they try to make whatever the subject is acceptable in modern terms–either by saying Muhammad was trying to “improve” on something accepted at the time, or by saying Muhammad was addressing a certain specific situation at that time and it doesn’t apply now, or that the ends justify the means (they don’t say it that way, of course, but that’s how it works out), or that there was some hidden meaning. And of course there’s a lot of a priori reasoning.
H
hasantas
Guest
There are two Tabari. One is the Imam of Sunnah and other is a historical book which was written by a Shi’i. There are many untrusty and baseless events in that historical books. That story about prophet, Zaid and Zainab is not a Hadiths. It is a faked up story and it is not obvious by whom it was established. You cannot see that story in a Hadiths book. These story appear in historical book and in book of commontary on the Qur’an. That story is not a valid and trusty Hadiths indeed it is not a Hadithds. Unfortunately some Islamic scholars recited that baseless story into their commontary book on the Qur’an. I will explain why that story cannot be true when I have enough time.
A
arthra
Guest
Well I think the thread was entitled “Study the Qur’an” which I feel should be encouraged! Just as study of the Bible and comparing the stories in theBible and the Qur’an can be instructive…
The issue of Zanabe and Zaid and the subsequent marriage with the Prophet …has a long history and unfortunately is over used in my view.
The issue of Zanabe and Zaid and the subsequent marriage with the Prophet …has a long history and unfortunately is over used in my view.
H
hasantas
Guest
Islam do not prohibit adoption. Islam(Qur’an, Allah) notice that the adoption is not a real children as blood. An adoption cannot be heritor. But in custom of that times an adoption were used to be treatment as a true in same blood children. Verses were to correct that.
Muhammed got married at about 25. There were no so moral rules. Every one could commit adultery if he wished. But we see that Muhammed had never commit such a thing while He was young and very healty as biological(I cannot use some words because of respect for prophet). Muhammed was symbol of purity and honour and everybody had known that. He got a marriage with an relatively older woman(Hadija was 40 when got married) and made do until about 53. Nobody had seen a wrong behaviour from Him as moraly during His life. There are many good reasons of marriages of prophet Muhammed for Islam. Marriages of Muhammed was not because of lust. Muhammed lived very purity. I think you must ask the reasons of marriages and you will get exact answers.
Muhammed was a prophet. A prophet never sin and lie. Ofcourse a prophet is human and have desires just like others. But prophets always can control excess and sinful desires with helping of Allah. Remember prophet Joseph and Zulayha. Islam respect purity very much and prohibit commit adultery and look at foreign women with desire and lust. Now all these were taught by prophet Muhammed. If Sahabas had seen or realised an immoral thing from Muhammed would they hold and follow His disciplines?
That story about Zainab, Zaid and prophet is baseless. Islam spread to very vast countries. non-muslims became part of Muslim society. Some non-muslim story, knowledge were joined with Islamic knowledges. Some of those were unintentional but some were intentional to attack and harm Islam. That story maybe one of them.
The crucial point of the story is “unclothed” or “nude”. If a man see a unclothed woman then man desire woman because of lust and that is impermanent. Man do not fall in love. Allah do not allow a prophet to look at a nude woman because that is a sin and Allah prevent prophets to commit sin. Seeing a woman with a house dress cannot be a reason to fall in love. Muhammed might see Zainab in that stuation before Islam because she was His aunt’s daughter( to show absurdity of history, otherwise we do not know the exact case).
There is no any implication in verse that Muhammed has a love for Zainab. Muhammed was informed about marriage before verses came. Muhammed shy away from people to say that and hold that knowledge for himself. Allah notice that He(Muhammed ) sould shy away from Allah. There is no any romantic statements in verses.
There is no an Allah who reveal immoral laws. Zainab thought that she was above Zaid and she caused Zaid to perceive that. Zaid divorced her. She was a wideower not married anymore. And there is no any immoral circumstances with that. If there had been such thing Zaid would declare that in anyway. Anyhow that took long. Salam!
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Thank you, hasantas, for making the effort to explain. I appreciate that.
I may not agree with you in some of it, but an overview from a Muslim’s perspective is valuable to me. I hope you understand that from a spectator who is not a Muslim, the revelation which supported Muhammad seemed to be self-serving to free him to marry her (Zaynab). I agree that he did not have to love her, but it is possible that he was attracted to her sexually. She was a very beautiful woman, as Aisha did imply.
But I can understand that the revelation needed to come to make clear on something, but in this case where Muhammad was ordered by Allah to marry his adopted son’s wife, and that did not necessarily have to happen.
As for seeing her naked, according to that story, she was not but in a house dress. Probably a housedress is more revealing than a formal clothing that women would wear outside their homes. I agree with you though, seeing her in a house dress should not necessarily a reason for Muhammad to be attracted to her.
Peace.
Reuben
C
CEDRIK
Guest
Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.
Obviously,tendencies to what I would call closed-mindedness can be found among people from many different backgrounds.
However, just so we keep things in perspective,it seems to me that only one religion considers converting from group X to group Y, as well as writing a “bad book” (or drawing a bad picture, shooting a bad movie,etc,etc), capital offences.
M
Mount_Carmel
Guest
Catholics as Christians are People of the Book, and Muhammad called for us to convert, endure submission and dhimmitude, or feel the ‘edge of the sword’ {expressed on the Saudi flag].
M
Matthew_Light
Guest
Where did Muhammad do this?
M
Matthew_Light
Guest
What is the context of those verses? When were they revealed? What was happening to Muhammad and the companions at that time? Are they universally applicable 1000+ years later, or limited in scope to a specific event?
Z
Zachary
Guest
You cant just read it. Like I tell all atheists i know who think that they’ve read the bible so are experts. You cant just read it.I don’t know if you took the time to read Dr. Pipes’ article, but the question wasn’t whether or not a Christian should read the Qur’an. It was actually whether anyone who wants to understand current events connected to Islam should.
You are raising a completely different issue. Ironically enough, your advice though more tactfully worded, reminds me of things I heard time and again when I was a Muslim, e.g. Sunnis advising me against reading philosophy or books written by Shiites, Sufis warning me against Salafis, Salafis warning me against jihadists and so on and so forth.
The thing is, since I’ve always been very inquisitive,when I was given this kind of advice, I would usually do just the opposite.
Wouldn’t it be better to tell Christians interested in reading the Qur’an to go ahead, regardless of their level of faith and knowledge, and let them know that if it raises questions, they should feel free to ask those questions without fear of being judged?
You need a guide.
Whether that’s Robert Spencer or Anjem Choudry…well, that’s another issue.
Anyway, jump in and read it if you want, but you won’t know HOW to read it, HOW it fits into context within history etc. or even how it was put together (not chronologically like you’d expect.)
It’s not a novel that you can read and just say “I get it” and move on.
Z
Zachary
Guest
…and a casual reading will NEVER answer this.
M
mamlukman
Guest
In the last week I found three web sites that are extremely good and helpful.
There are a lot of other helpful features. Between this site and the Leeds U. site, you have everything you need.
- corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=33&verse=39 This is sponsored by the Language Research Group, U. of Leeds (UK). You go sura by sura (chapter by chapter). For each sura it gives you the original Arabic, a sound version so you can hear it recited, and 7 different translations (Sahih International, Pickhall, Yusuf Ali, Mohammed Sarwar, Shakir, Mohsin Khan, JA Arberry). At the bottom under “morphology” it gives each Arabic word in the sura, in Arabic, English transcription, English translation, part of speech, and grammatical note. In other words, it makes it very easy to read several translations at once to see the problematical words, then go to the word in Arabic and investigate further.
- wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Holy_Quran_-_Abdullah_Yusuf_Ali Gives you the Yusuf Ali translation, but also tells you the chronological number of the sura (was it first, second, etc.), whether it was Meccan or Medinan, whether a verse was abrogated, etc. All verse by verse. The site also has a helpful chart of abrogated verses wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Abrogations_in_the_Qur%27an
There are a lot of other helpful features. Between this site and the Leeds U. site, you have everything you need.
- skepticsannotatedbible.com/Quran/ This is a translation, but with comments in the right margin and little icons that mark violence, sex, etc. Some might find it helpful since it gives context and commentary.
- Status