Rebuttal to Mohammed Fareeduddin Siddique's The Sword of the Intellect Book 1 - The Woman

Rebuttal to Mohammed Fareeduddin Siddique's The Sword of the Intellect Book 1 - The Woman
September 2004 version

The title of Fareed's work is very interesting: "Are our women folks sub-human beings?" It is curious when someone tries to refute a charge that has not been made. Christians do NOT claim women are sub human beings, or that the Qur'an teaches that women are sub human beings. Some Muslims, such as al-Tabari vol.1 p.280,281 teach that Eve was originally intelligent, Allah made her stupid after the fall. So why is Fareed writing against Christians, and not al-Tabari and other Muslim writers. Sounds like a double standard.

Perhaps Fareed would like to explain why a chain of transmission is "controversial" if it includes a woman. Ibn-i-Majah vol.5 no.3863 p.227. Transmission of a hadith by a woman is not as good as by a man. Sunan Nasa'i vol.1 p.84. If Fareed agrees with us that women are not deficient or sub-human beings, perhaps he could explain why a woman's testimony in court is half that of a man. "This is because of the deficiency of the woman's mind." (Bukhari vol.3 no.826 p.502)

Christians are not followers of just St. Paul, because all four gospels, Revelation, and early church writers all mention Jesus' atonement, actual crucifixion, and resurrection.

Christians are not "fond" of blaming Islam for women. No, we say with regret the facts documented by Muslims themselves: Islam advocates beating women, their court testimony is worth half that of a man, and they are not even allowed to pray while menstruating. Most of the inhabitants of Hell are women according to Islam.

Woman Leaders

The reason America does not have a women president yet is not because the Bible seems to be predominantly for "mankind". In the book of judges Deborah, was a godly judge (top leader) of Israel. As a Christian, I have no theological difficulty whatsoever voting for a woman for President. Since a woman being a top leader was mentioned by you though, are you advocating that some day Saudi Arabia could be ruled by a woman? How about Iran or Kuwait?

Fareed is misrepresenting Islam here. There are very few woman leaders or teachers in Islam, about from some female Sufi's. Khadija bint Khuwaylid (Mohammed's first wife) was not a leader, except that she had her own business. Most interestingly, this was prior to Islam, so this shows that women could be business leaders in Arab society prior to Islam, not after. Aisha was only a leader of a rebellion against the caliph 'Ali, so I do not think Fareed would want to count her. Fatimah, despite being Mohammed's daughter, was not shown to be a leader. Umm Salama, Asma, Zaynab and other wives of the prophets were only leaders in the sense that they commanded slaves and told Mohammed things, but there is no other indication, in the hadiths or al-Tabari that they were leaders, despite what Fareed might wish.

According to the Muslim Sharia (Law), the witness of a woman is equal half that of a man, Mohammed said that a nation will never succeed that makes a woman their ruler (Bukhari vol.9 no.219 p.170-171).

No woman rulers. "Narrated Abu Bakr : During the battle of Al-Jamal [the camel] Allah benefited with a Word (I heard from the Prophet ): When the Prophet heard the news that the people of Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, 'Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler.'" Bukhari vol.9 no.219 p.171. Note that the context Mohammed was originally said this was when the Persians made a woman their ruler. However, also note that the application of this saying benefited Muslims after Mohammed's death at the Battle of the Camel, when A'isha tried to defeat Caliph 'Ali. So while the immediate context was Persia, the applicability was universal for after that.

Sura 4:34 says "Men are the protectors And maintainers of women, Because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means." Note that the word (strength) in Yusuf Ali's translation is not in the Arabic.

Dr. Badawi explains this by saying that women can hold government posts, but Islam forbids them to hold the top job. Fareed believes they can hold the top job. Not only that, he points to A'isha as an example of a woman leader in Islam.

Bukhari vol.9 no.220,221 p.171-172 said that when it was mentioned that 'Aisha moved [mobilized] Basra, the response was "But Allah has put you to test whether you obey Him (Allah) or her ('Aisha)"

Fareed, being a Sunni Muslim, should read his own books, especially Bukhari.

Fareed in the remaining 9 pages says he will "limit myself to the Bible and quote few verses from Qur'an where ever required". While Fareed may not realize it, the remaining nine pages attack the role of women in Islam and Qur'an as much as the Bible. It is sort of like cutting off your own nose if it would spite someone else.

To be fair to other Muslims, I need to emphasize here that I understand that Fareed's views are his own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of other Muslims, especially when the practices he criticizes are in Islam too.

Eve

In Genesis 3:16, God in the Bible punishes Eve with pains of childbirth and being subject to men. Fareed is correct here, except that he forgets that man is punished too, with having to work hard to get out of the ground what came easily before. Fareed fails to mention that normal Islamic theology believes similar to the Bible on this particular point.

Adam and Eve forbidden to eat from the tree, and Satan tempted them. Sura 7:19-20

"O Adam! Dwell though And thy wife in the Garden, And enjoy (its god things) As ye wish: but approach not This tree, lest you become of the unjust." Then began Satan to whisper Suggestions to them, In order to reveal to them Their shame That was hidden from them (Before): he said: 'Your Lord Only forbade you this tree, Lest ye should become angels Or such beings as live for even.' And he swore to them Both, that he was Their sincere adviser. So by deceit he brought about Their fall: when they Tasted of the tree, Their shameful parts became manifest TO them, and they began to sew together the leaves Of the Garden over their bodies. And their Lord called Unto them: 'Did I not Forbid you that tree, And tell you that Satan Was an avowed Enemy unto you" Sura 7:19-22

Adam and Eve could not eat from the tree, but Satan made them slip. Sura 2:35-36

As to women being lesser than men in Islam, here are some examples.

The urine of a male baby is cleaner than that of a female. Ibn-i-Majah vol.1 no.522,525,526 p.284,285,286. The reason is: "He (the Prophet) said, 'Verily, Allah the exalted created Adam and Eve (Hawwa') was created from his small rib. Thus a lad's urine became from water and clay and urine of a lass [girl] became from flesh and blood.'" Note that this is not because of anything related to the Fall, but from the very creation of Eve.

Eve was originally intelligent, Allah made her (but not Adam) stupid after the fall of Adam and Eve. al-Tabari vol.1 p.280,281

 

Women in Church (1 Cor 14:34-35)

The Christian view is that men and women are equal in God's eyes, but have different roles. Women are not to be pastors teaching and having authority over men, for example.

Christians have differing views on whether 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 means they were not to chatter or otherwise speak at the time in that culture, or today also. However, women were prophetesses (which is not a concept in orthodox Sunni Islam) and could speak and lead men outside of church.

Fareed quotes Sura 4:19 that men should live with women in kindness and equity. Yet Sura 4:24 is not equitable. It says, "Also (prohibited are) Women already married, Except those Whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you:..." The footnote 537 says "Whom your right hands possess: i.e. captives" It is a little known, yet well-documented fact in Islam that sex with captives was OK. It was even done while their husbands were still living!

"Abu Sai'd al-Khudri said : The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur'anic verse: [Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period.(1479)" Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2150 p.577

Speaking of equity, these do not sound too equitable.

Freeing from slavery one Muslim man or two Muslim women frees one from Hell fire. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2522 p.509.

Men tell their wives when to take a bath. "If anyone makes (his wife) wash and he washes himself on Friday, goes out early (for Friday prayer), attends the sermon from the beginning, walking, not riding, takes his seat near the Imam, listens attentively, and does not indulge in idle talk, he will get the reward of a year's fasting and praying at night for every step he takes." Abu Dawud vol.1 no.345 p.91. No reward for the wife is explicitly mentioned.

A woman should not give a gift from the joint property with her husband. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.3539 p.1006. This is generally because a woman lacks wisdom and intelligence. Abu Dawud vol.2 footnote 2991 p.1006.

A wife cannot give a gift without her husband's consent. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2388 p.423

Paradise has a strong smell. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2054 p.236 A woman who asks for divorce without extreme reasons is also forbidden the smell of Paradise. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2055 p.237, or strong reason in Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2218 p.600.

Men are not restricted however. Bukhari vol.3 no.859 (p.534) says a man can divorce for "something unpleasant about his wife, such as old age or the like."

A man became a Muslim and his wife knew about it. She became a Muslim, divorced her husband and married again. After the man told Mohammed, Mohammed took her away from her current husband and gave her back to her former husband. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2230-2231 p.603

 

Arguing in Sura 58:1

Fareed says that the Qur'an says Women can argue, even with Mohammed in Sura 58:1. He misinterprets the Qur'an here. Sura 58:1 tells of a woman who comes to Mohammed "arguing" (i.e. presenting her case) about her husband. It does not say she had anything against Mohammed. As far as women saying bad things about Mohammed, the hadiths and al-Tabari give the following examples.

On conquering Mecca Mohammed wanted to kill four people, two of them singing girls. One was killed and the other escaped and later became a Muslim. - presumably to save her life. Abu Dawud vol.2:2678 p.744

Two singing girls who sang reviling Mohammed. One had her hand cut off and her front tooth pulled out. Al-Mujahir did this, but Abu Bakr wrote that if he had not done this, Abu Bakr would have had her killed. Abu Bakr said that if anyone claiming to be a Muslim did this, they were actually an apostate. If any non-Muslim did this while claiming to be at peace with Muslims, they were actually at war with them and a traitor. al-Tabari vol.10 p.191-192

Pentateuch Verses

In Ex 34:23, Fareed asks why all the men had to appear and not the women and children. We can see the answer when we read both Exodus 34:23 and 24 closely. It says, "Three times a year all your men are to appear before the Sovereign LORD, the God of Israel." I will drive out nations before you and enlarge our territory, and no one will covet your land when you go up three times each year to appear before the LORD your God."

The women did not fight in the wars, only the men. No man was to "hide" by not appearing.

Exodus 22:16 was an allowance for a man who "enticed" an unmarried woman that they could get married, if the father permitted it. While we have a higher standard to follow to Jesus came, early Muslims had a lower standard: rape of captives!

Stripping female captives of their clothes is OK, according to Sahih Muslim vol.3 book 17 no.4345 p.953 and Ibn-i-Majah vol.4 no.2840 p.187.

The fact that it was OK for Muslims to have sex with captive women is in Sahih Muslim vol.2 book 8 no.3371-3374 p.732-735; Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2150 and footnote 1479 p.577-578.

"Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri that while he was sitting with Allah's Apostle he said, 'Oh Allah's Apostle We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?' [a sexual practice] The Prophet said, 'Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it, No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence." Bukhari vol.3 no.432 p.237. See also Bukhari vol.5 book 59 no.459 p.317; vol.7 no.136-137 p.102-103; vol.8 no.600 p.391; Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2166,2168 p.582

In Exodus 22:18, the prohibition against witchcraft, mediums, and the occult applied to equally to men and women.

In Leviticus 12:1-8, it says that women are unclean after childbirth, but it does not say sinful. When someone in a Levite's family died, God commanded them to bury the body, and they would be unclean until evening. Becoming unclean is different from being sinful, as proved by God commanding them to become unclean in certain situations.

Likewise when Fareed says Leviticus 15:19-30,33 asks why women are sinful during their menstruation he lies: the Bible does not say she is sinful for menstruating, or even more sinful, just unclean.

Perhaps Fareed would care to comment on this from the Sharia. Blowing your nose and menstruating are acts of Satan Ibn-i-Majah vol.2 no.969 p.87.

Why doesn't Fareed ask Muslim scholars why Muslim women are forbidden to pray during their time of month. Here are some sources from the Sharia he can use to ask them.

A black dog or a woman, or a dog and menstruating woman cut off prayer. Abu Dawud vol.1 no.702,703 p.181; Ibn-i-Majah vol.2 no.949-953 p.78-80

A menstruating woman is not allowed to recite the Qur'an. Abu Dawud vol.1 footnote 111 p.56

On prayer, the New Testament says that all believers, male and female, are to pray without ceasing (1 Thessalonians 5:17-18; Ephesians 6:18)

When a woman is menstruating in Lev 18:19 it says that her husband is not to have sex with her. Fareed has a problem, as evident by his cussing, that men cannot even look at women during the time of month, but Fareed apparently misread the Bible. It only says not to have sex with her.

In contrast, a Muslim warrior has to wait until a woman's menstrual course is finished before having sex with her. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2153-2154 p.578. There is not the slightest mention of consent. Does Fareed think this is wrong: the warrior can have sex with her, regardless of her consent, while she has her period, or does Fareed think, like Abu Dawud, that the warrior has to wait until her period is over before having sex with his captive?

Leviticus 19:20-22 says that a free man having sex with a slave woman is wrong [if she is not his wife or concubine]. It does not say the slave woman is scourged, but the man has to bring a ram (he owned or purchased) to be sacrificed.

In Islam things are different. "Can one travel with a slave-girl without knowing whether she is pregnant or not? Al-Hasan found no harm in her master's kissing or fondling with her. Ibn 'Umar said, 'If a slave-girl who is suitable to have sexual relations is given to somebody as a gift, or sold or manumitted [freed], her master should not have sexual intercourse with her before she gets one menstruation so as to be sure of absence of pregnancy, and there is no such necessity for a virgin.' 'Ata said, 'There is no harm in fondling with one's pregnant (1) slave-girl without having sexual intercourse with her. Allah said: 'Except with their wives and the (women captives) whom their right hands possess (for in this case they are not to be blamed).'" Footnote (1) says, "Pregnant from another man, not her present master." Bukhari vol.3 book 34 ch.113 after no.436 p.239-240.

In Islam the man is flogged though for having sex with his wife's slave-girl. Abu Dawud vol.3 no.4443-4445 p.1244

In Leviticus 20:18, Fareed asks rhetorically, "Who is going to peep in their beds and find out whether a husband and wife are having sex while she has her period?" That is very insulting. He asks how it is possible to enforce this law. The law is not something people are trying to break and need "peeping-toms" to enforce. The only enforcement of God's law necessary for godly people is primary telling people what was right, and they will do it. Is Fareed arguing that God should not tell us what pleased or displeased Him without enforcement. Of course, many of God's laws at that time improved hygiene and sanitation, and had practical, bad consequences when they were violated.

In Old Testament times people could divorce rather freely. Jesus said that was given at that time because men's hearts were hard, but Jesus gave a higher standard. In Leviticus 27:7 priests could not marry divorced women. Fareed asks if woman priests had equal restrictions, but in the Old Testament there were no women priests, as Fareed knows. In Islam, would Fareed advocate female "wazirs" who call people to prayer?

Leviticus 21:9 says that a priest's daughter who was a prostitute was to be burned to death. Fareed apparently did not object to the death penalty, but to the burning to death.

According to Ibn Ishaq: Kinanah b. al-Rabi' b. Abi al-Huqayq who had the treasure of the Banu al-Nadir, was brought to the Messenger of God, who questioned him, but he denied knowing where it [the treasure] was. Then the Messenger of God was brought a Jew who said to him, "I have seen Kinanah walk around this ruin every morning." The Messenger of God said to Kinanah: "What do you say? If we find it in your possession, I will kill you. "All right he answered. The Messenger of God commanded that the ruin should be dug up, and some of the treasure was extracted from it. Then he asked him for the rest of it. Kinanah refused to surrender it, so the Messenger of God gave orders concerning him to al-Zubayr b. al-'Awwam, saying, "Torture him until you root out what he has." Al-Zubayr kept twirling his firestick in his breast until Kinanah almost expired [died]; then the Messenger of God gave him to Muhammad b. Maslamah, who behead him to avenge his brother Mahmud b. Maslamah.". al-Tabari vol.8 p.122

Some Muslims were told to drink camel urine, they became apostates and killed the shepherd. Mohammed had their hands and feet cut off, and their eyes burned out. Sunan Nasa'i vol.1 no.308-309 p.255-256

Abu Bakr ordered a rogue commander burned with fire. al-Tabari vol.10 p.80

Abu Bakr told the Muslim warriors that they can kill the apostates by being burned with fire or slaughtered by any means. Accept nothing from them except converting to Islam. al-Tabari vol.10 p.57

A Muslim general under Abu Bakr burned some Muslims apostates who fought against Muslims with fire. al-Tabari vol.10 p.76

'Ali's supporters burned down a house to burn to death the Muslims inside who supported Mu'awiyah. al-Tabari vol.17 p.170

Narrated 'Ikrima: Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment ( fire ).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'" Bukhari vol.9 book 84 no.57 p.45

In general though, most Muslims, (Mohammed, Abu Bakr and 'Ali excepted) did not burn their enemies with fire.

In Leviticus 21:13-14 this simply means a priest could not marry an immoral woman, or one divorced and widowed. Contrary to what Fareed says, God does not "like" virgins; the virgin woman was the wife of the priest.

In Num 5:11-28 a husband can have his wife be tested, and God is promising them that He would show them her guilt or innocence.

In Ex 34:16; Dt 7:31; 1 Ki 11:2, it does not say Moses married an Egyptian woman.

Fareed mentions Dt 7:31, but there is no Dt 7:31. I am sure this is merely a typo, but I do not know which verse he intended. 1 Kings 11:2 mentions a prohibition of marrying from certain nations, but not Cush, and it was given after Moses married the Cushite. In Exodus 34:11,16 mentions not inter-marrying with the Canaanite peoples, again not Cushites. In Numbers 12:1-6, when Miriam and Aaron opposed Moses marrying a Cushite (not an Egyptian or Mizraimite, but a Cushite), I am mystified how Fareed thinks this shows that God's rules do not apply to God's favorites, males. Exodus 34:16 specifically mentions it is wrong to choose some of the Canaanite daughters.

Since Fareed is talking about God's rules and God's favorites, did you know that Muslims cannot have more than four wives at a time (excluding slave girls), yet the Qur'an has a special exception for Mohammed. We are not exactly sure how many wives Mohammed had, because he had so many, but here are probably most of them according to the Muslim scholar 'Ali Dashti.
1. Khadija bint Khuwailid - died first
2. Sawda/Sauda bint Zam'a
3. 'Aisha/Aesha/'A'ishah - 8 to 9 yrs old, second wife
4. Omm/'Umm Salama/Salamah
5. Hafsa/Hafsah
6. Zaynab/Zainab of Jahsh
7. Jowayriya/Juwairiyya bint Harith
8. Omm Habiba
9. Safiya/Safiyya bint Huyai/Huyayy bint Akhtab
10. Maymuna/Maimuna of Hareth
11. Fatima/Fatema/Fatimah (briefly)
12. Hend/Hind
13. Asma of Saba
14. Zaynab of Khozayma
15. Habla
16. Asma of Noman / bint al-Nu'man
¾ slaves / concubines ¾
17. Mary the Christian/Copt
18. Rayhana/Raihana/Rayhanah bint Zayd/Zaid
¾ uncertain relationship -
19. Omm Sharik
20. Maymuna/Maimuna (slave girl?)
21. Zaynab/Zainab 3rd
22. Khawla
¾
Ali Dashti missed at least ten possible other wives.

Mohammed married 15 women and consummated his marriages with 13. (al-Tabari vol.9 p.126-127)

Mohammed had a few slave girls too. See Bukhari vol.7 no.274 p.210.

Salmah for was a maid-servant of Mohammed. Abu Dawud vol.3 no.3849 p.1084

Maimuna was the freed slave girl of Mohammed. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2531 p.514; Abu Dawud vol.1 no.457 p.118

Mohammed briefly had a "very beautiful" captive before he gave her to Mahmiyah b. Jaz' al-Zubaydi. al-Tabari vol.8 p.151

One of the slave girls belonging to Mohammed house committed fornication with someone else. It is the "someone else" part that was a problem. Abu Dawud vol.3 no.4458 p.1249

Mohammed divorced a woman because she had leprosy. al-Tabari vol.39 p.187

Mohammed divorced an unnamed woman because she would peek at those leaving the mosque. al-Tabari vol.39 p.187

Mohammed married al-'Aliyyah, but then divorced her. al-Tabari vol.9 p.138

Mohammed divorced 'Amrah bint Yazid because she had leprosy. al-Tabari vol.39 p.188

Mohammed stayed with 'Aliyah bint Zabyan bin 'Amr bin 'Awf bin Ka'b a while, then divorced her. al-Tabari vol.39 p.188

Mohammed divorced 'Amra. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2054 p.233 vol.3 no.2030 p.226 (daif [weak], not Sahih)

It is said that Mohammed married Khawlah bint al-Hudayl. al-Tabari vol.9 p.139. She was a wife of Mohammed's according to al-Tabari vol.39 p.166

Daughter of Al-Jaun [Jahal] was married very briefly to Mohammed. Bukhari vol.7 book 63 no.181 p.131,132

Mention of Mohammed's brief marriage with Sana bint Sufyan. al-Tabari vol.39 p.188

Mohammed married al-Nashat bint Rifa'ah of the Banu Kilab bin Rabi'ah, allies of the Qurayzah. She was also called Sana. However, she died before the Prophet consummated his marriage with her. al-Tabari vol.9 p.135-136. al-Tabari vol.39 p.166 says the same thing about Sana bint al-Salt.

Mohammed married Qutaylah bint. Qays but she died before they consummated the marriage. al-Tabari vol.9 p.138

Mohammed married Ghaziyyah bint Jabir. "When the Prophet went to her he found her to be an old woman, so he divorced her." al-Tabari vol.9 p.139

A Father or Husband Cancelling a Woman's Vow

In Num 30:3-16, it says that woman's vow can be cancelled by her father or husband. This does show the headship of a father in the family, and a husband over the wife. Muslims in general (Fareed excepted) would have no problem with this. If Fareed really wants to bring this up, he is welcome to explain the following in Islam.

A wife cannot fast (superogatory) or allow someone to enter their home without her husband's permission. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2452, 2453 p.677-678

(superogatory means beyond what is required)

Outside of Ramadan, a wife can only fast with her husband's permission. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.1761-1762 p.62

Mohammed did not rebuke a husband who beat his wife for praying and fasting extra. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2453 p.677-678

Men tell their wives when to take a bath. "If anyone makes (his wife) wash and he washes himself on Friday, goes out early (for Friday prayer), attends the sermon from the beginning, walking, not riding, takes his seat near the Imam, listens attentively, and does not indulge in idle talk, he will get the reward of a year's fasting and praying at night for every step he takes." Abu Dawud vol.1 no.345 p.91. No reward for the wife is explicitly mentioned.

A woman should not give a gift from the joint property with her husband. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.3539 p.1006. This is generally because a woman lacks wisdom and intelligence. Abu Dawud vol.2 footnote 2991 p.1006.

A wife cannot give a gift without her husband's consent. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2388 p.423

 

Women Captives

Numbers 31:28-29; and 31:1-54 the women who had never slept with a man were spared from among the Midianites. I am not sure why Fareed has a problem with that. It says that they were captured. If Fareed thinks they should be handled in a manner consistent with Mohammed and his companions, I disagree. I do not think the soldiers should immediately have sex with the captives, even while their husbands are still present.

In Dt 5:21 in last of the ten commandments does NOT teach wives are the possessions of men. It says a man is not to covet his neighbor's wife or possessions, but that does not include a wife as a possession. On the other hand, I know of at least one Muslim who, when he came to America and had to declare his possession, but his wife on the list. After Fareed has explained "women your right hands possess" in the Qur'an, perhaps we would want to explain the following from the Sunni hadiths.

When one is given a woman, servant, or cattle, one should seize its forehead and pray to Allah. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.1918 p.157

Treat women well, for they are [like] domestic animals ('awan) with you and do not possess anything for themselves." al-Tabari vol.9 p.113.

 

In Deuteronomy 16:16-17 every man was to appear, and not be empty-handed. In other words, no man, as the head of a family, was exempted from bringing the required tithes and offerings.

Fareed appears to at first forget the Muslim custom of female captives, and then apply the Muslim custom on top of Deuteronomy 21:11-14. The Old Testament law (parts given because men's hearts were hard), a man could have sex with a female captive only after she became his wife. However, Deuteronomy 21:14 is exactly opposite of what Fareed claims. If a woman is was considered a slave, the man could sell her if she was not his wife. But if he took her as his wife, and then did not want her, Deuteronomy 21:14 says he could no longer sell her or treat her as a slave, once he took her as a wife.

We have already mentioned some of the documentation that Mohammed permitted Muslims warriors to have sex with their captives, even in one case in the presence of their husbands, who were unbelievers! If Fareed does not have a problem with that, why does he have a problem with Deuteronomy 21:14?

In Dt 21:15, Fareed writes, "Rules for those with two wives "One beloved and the other hated" DEUTERONOMY 21:15 Good one Indeed...! Nice justice from a biblical God." I am not certain Fareed has read Deuteronomy 21:15-16. It says, "If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and other bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife he does not love, when he wills his property to his sons, he must not give the rights of the firstborn to the son of the wife he loves in preference to his actual firstborn, the son of the wife he does not love." So IF a man loves one wife but not the other, the man cannot give the son who is not the firstborn the rights of the firstborn son. God is NOT saying a polygamous man should love one wife more than another. However, perhaps Fareed can explain Mohammed's behavior in this.

When Sauda was old she was afraid Mohammed would divorce her, so she gave her turn to 'A'isha. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2130 p.572

Another Muslim did the same. A man had a wife for many years, who bore him many children. He intended to "exchange her" (Majah's choice of words) but he kept here when she agreed to give up her turn with him. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.1914 p.188.

In Deuteronomy 22:13-21 mentions the bloody sheet as proof of the girl's virginity. However, it says "if no proof of her virginity can be found". One could prove this in other ways, such as testimony of parents and others.

Deuteronomy 22:22-26 is actually very practical. If she was in the country, claimed to scream when raped but nobody heard her, the elders were to believe the woman, not the man, and not do anything to the woman. This is in sharp contrast to Islamic law, where a Muslim man's word is ALWAYS equal to twice the weight of a Muslim woman's in an Islamic court of Law. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said in an annual report that one woman is raped every three hours in Pakistan. Even worse, 72% of all women in police custody in Pakistan are physically and sexually abused. The Woman's Action Forum says that 75% of all women in jail are under the charge of "zina" (fornication). It was never stated how many men, if any, were in jail for that. See Why I Am Not A Muslim p.324 for information and examples.

Fareed's words appear to support the preceding paragraph better than they do the Bible.

"I regret to say that this kind of 'Law' was just made to support the dominating males and even some times rapists? Can this possibly [be] a low [law] of God..." can we enfore it to the present day justice system if it's the law of God??" Regrettably, it is in the present day justice system, - in some Islamic countries.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 vs. Muslim Warriors' Sex Slaves

In Dt 22:28-29 the Hebrew word here, taphas, means "manipulate, i.e. seize;" so this verse refers both to seduction of an unmarried girl (as The New International Bible Commentary p.274 says) as well as rape (as the NIV says). The NKJV is more accurate than the NIV here, using the generic word "seize". If a man does this, he cannot just elope with the girl without paying the bride price. He has to pay 50 shekels of silver (more than 30 shekels to just buy a female slave as a concubine), and he had no option to divorce her, so he had to support her as long as she lived. Furthermore, since she was a legitimate wife, her children would have all the rights of other children. Tertullian in Against Marcion ch.34 p.405 also mentions this as placing a restriction on the man who did this. So by paying money and not being able to divorce her, a man had to bear responsibility for either seducing or raping her.

Since Fareed has a problem with this verse, let's contrast this to the treatment of "women your right hands possess" in Islam. Muslim men could have sex with them without them being the status of either concubines or wives. Here are some examples:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz : I saw Abu Sa'id and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Sa'id said, "We went with Allah's Apostle in the Ghazwa of Bani Al-Mustaliq and we captured some of the Arabs as captives and the long separation from our wives was pressing us hard and we wanted to practice coitus interruptus. We asked Allah's Apostle (whether it was permissible). He said, "It is better for you not to do so. No soul, (that which Allah has) destined to exist, up to the Day of Resurrection, but will definitely come into existence." Bukhari vol.3 no.718 p.432

Notice that the captives were in no way considered "wives". They were neither wives nor concubines, or they would not have seen any need to ask Mohammed about this.

"After the distribution of the spoils of war a man may have intercourse with the female slave after passing one menstrual period, if she is not pregnant. If she is pregnant one should wait till she delivers the child. This is the view held by Malik, al-Shafi'i and Abu Thawr. Abu Hanifah holds that if both the husband and wife are captivated together, their marriage tie still continues; they will not be separated. According to the majority of scholars, they will be separated. Al-Awza-I maintains that their marriage tie will continue till they remain part of the spoils of war. If a man buys them, he may separate them if he desires, and cohabit with the female slave after one menstrual period. ('Awn al-Ma'bud II.213)" Note that Mohammed married Safiyah right after the battle. Abu Dawud vol.2 footnote 1479 p.577-578.

"Can one travel with a slave-girl without knowing whether she is pregnant or not? Al-Hasan found no harm in her master's kissing or fondling with her.

Ibn 'Umar said, 'If a slave-girl who is suitable to have sexual relations is given to somebody as a gift, or sold or manumitted [freed], her master should not have sexual intercourse with her before she gets one menstruation so as to be sure of absence of pregnancy, and there is no such necessity for a virgin.'

'Ata said, 'There is no harm in fondling with one's pregnant (1) slave-girl without having sexual intercourse with her. Allah said: 'Except with their wives and the (women captives) whom their right hands possess (for in this case they are not to be blamed).'" Footnote (1) says, "Pregnant from another man, not her present master." Bukhari vol.3 ch.113 after no.436 p.239-240. (Same 'Ata as previous.)

Note that there would be no discussion if the slave girl was considered a wife or concubine.

As was typical of wealthy Arab men, Mohammed had a few slave girls too. See Bukhari vol.7 no.274 p.210.

Salmah for was a maid-servant of Mohammed. Abu Dawud vol.3 no.3849 p.1084

Maimuna was the freed slave girl of Mohammed. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2531 p.514; Abu Dawud vol.1 no.457 p.118

Mohammed briefly had a "very beautiful" captive before he gave her to Mahmiyah b. Jaz' al-Zubaydi. al-Tabari vol.8 p.151

One of the slave girls belonging to Mohammed house committed fornication with someone else. It is the "someone else" part that was a problem. Abu Dawud vol.3 no.4458 p.1249

Preferring a Mustahill to Deuteronomy 24:1-4?

Dt 24:1-4 a man finds something immoral about the wife, or else thinks he has found something immoral about the wife and then divorces her. In this case, if she is either divorced or widowed from the second man, she is not allowed to be married again to the first man. If the first man really believed she was immoral, then why would he marry again? Fareed has a problem with this, but he is welcome to explain the Muslim concept of a Mustahill / Muhallil.

In Islamic society, some men have a specialized job called a Mustahill / Muhallil. This is a man who is paid money to briefly marry a woman, consummate the marriage with her, and then soon after divorce her so that she can return to her previous husband. According to Abu Dawud vol.2 footnote 1624 "This is unanimously held by scholars ('Awn al-Ma'bua II, 263)"

Abu Dawud chapter 765 2302 (p.629) says, "She [A'ishah' said : The Prophet (may peace be upon him) replied : She is not lawful for her first (husband) until she tastes the honey of the other husband and he tastes her honey."

This rule of Sharia is also in clearly spelled out in Bukhari vol.7 book 63 no.186,187 p.136; Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2192 p.592-593; Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.1933-1936 p.165-168. Note that there is no such strange rule for a man.

 

In Dt 25:5 in the society at that time, a man's descendants were very important. If a married man died without a son, his brother had to marry (and take care of) the widow because of his duty of a brother-in-law. The first son the wife bore would carry on the name of the dead brother, not the living one. Fareed sees that God is unjust in that the woman did not get to choose a new husband. Perhaps Fareed could explain how arranged marriages work in Muslim lands. In particular, in Africa, young girls are married off against their will.

In the Ivory Coast Voices Behind the Veil tells of a 12 year old girl who would leave the house for hours before returning home. After her father tied her up, burned her back with a piece of iron, locked her up for three days with no food, he eventually married her of to a 40-year old man. He never sent her to school because he said that it would drive them from their tradition, they would start asking questions, and not want to marry until they are 19 or 20.

The Taliban encouraged families to marry off their daughters as young as eight year old. (Voices Behind the Veil p.110)

In one newspaper on 9/28/03 there was a story about the sad plight of Muslim Nigerian girls who were married very young, got pregnant and had labor before their small bodies were ready. It was actually somewhat of a gross story, basically of many girls who needed C-sections but did not get them. Many survived, but could not have any children due to their perforated uteruses.

 

In Dt 25:11-12, it was serious to grab the private parts of a man. Fareed objects to the Old Testament (not New Testament) rule of cutting of the woman's hand, but does he have any objection to cutting of the hand of a thief?

Jdg 1:12-13 records Caleb offering to give his daughter in marriage to the conqueror of the city of Debir. The Bible does not say this is the best thing to do, only that Caleb did this. While we (Christians) do not do this since Christ came, Muslims did this frequently, awarding female captives after battle. Does Fareed think Mohammed and his general were wrong to do this. Either accept that Muslims follow similar primitive practices too, or speak up and say Mohammed was wrong to award captives, but do not be a hypocrite and criticize an event in the Bible while being silent on Muslims doing worse!

By the way, Muslims saying false information about Mohammed is serious to Muslims. according to the hadiths, if anyone deliberately attributes a lie to Mohammed, their abode is Hell. Abu Dawud vol.3 ch.1372 no.3643 p.1036.

In Jdg 15:2, Fareed probably forgot that Samson was not following God in marrying a Philistine. Samson's father-in-law was a Philistine who did not follow God. Criticizing the Bible based on something a Philistine did is sort of like criticizing the morality of the Qur'an because of what Iblis (Satan) did. It is neither truthful nor fair to Islam and the Qur'an to do the latter, and it is neither truthful nor fair to the Bible to do the former.

Likewise Jdg 19:22-30 and Jdg 21:7-23 mention evil things, during the evil times when "everyone did what was right in his own eyes." I could mention the wrong things in the Qur'an the people of 'Ad and Madyan did, but does that prove the Qur'an wrong? Or course not! Likewise for Fareed's argument.

God does punish the wicked, but they do not always receive punishment while they are on earth.

In Ru 4:10, Boaz "purchased" (i.e. paid dowry) for Ruth by buying the land from Naomi. Boaz took care of Ruth and his mother-in-law the widow Naomi, and why Fareed has a problem with Boaz's loving act of compassion is unclear to me. I hope he was not just grabbing any verse from the Bible that he could.
If Fareed has a problem with dowries for wives, note that Mohammed paid 4,000 dirhams for his wife Umm Habibah. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2103 p.565. Also, 'Ali bin Abi Talib bought the daughter of Rab'iah for himself. She bore him a daughter named Umm Ruqayyah al-Tabari vol.11 p.66

In 1 Sam 1:20 in Old Testament times polygamy was permitted. However, in the New Testament, a man cannot be an elder in the church unless he is the husband of but one wife. Christians do not say that polygamy was wrong, especially in the Old Testament, but that it is not God's perfect will. If Fareed is trying to say the Bible is wrong to not condemn polygamy, then what is Fareed saying about the character of Mohammed???

By the way, even in India today, Muslim men are permitted up to four wives. Perhaps Fareed should tell the Muslims of India that they should lobby to change this law and only allow one wife.

In 1 Sam 1:5,19-20 sometimes God shuts a womb, or frustrates a purpose, in order to achieve a greater purpose. Fareed is disrespectful of God when he says, "Maybe Bible-God had nothing better to do."

This argument is not new, because it was applied by one of Mohammed's own wives to Mohammed. He had no children who survived to adulthood except Fatima. According to al-Tabari, Mohammed married al-Shanba bint 'Amr al-Ghifariyyah; her people were allies of the banu Qurayza. When Ibrahim died, she said that if he were a true prophet his son would not have died. Mohammed divorced her before consummating his marriage with her. al-Tabari vol.9 p.136. Now Christians do not give Mohammed's inability to have more children has any reason to say he was a false prophet. I am somewhat surprised Mohammed would give God shutting Hannah's womb as a sign that the Bible-God was bad or had nothing better to do.

In 2 Sam 12:11-12,21-22, God allows evil people to do evil things, and sometimes as punishment for a person's sin. God allowed Absalom to do this wicked thing. When Fareed says, "D*** this book", is this how he thinks Muslims should discuss religion with others. When Fareed says this, does this make it OK for Christians to say, "D*** the Qur'an?" As a Christian, I have never said that, and I do not think it is good to say that.

In 1 Ki 11:11-13 Fareed falsely says God did not mind Solomon having so many wives, but rather that they were strange [alien] women. While God did mind that Solomon took unbelieving wives (1 Kings 11:2), but God also commanded the kings not to take many wives in Deuteronomy 17:17.

Ezra 10:2-3; 10-12 says that at this time (when divorce was permitted because men's hearts were hard), the Israelite men were to divorce their foreign (non-Israelite) women. Now there was a precedent for a foreign woman, such as Ruth, to become an Israelite, but in Ezra there is no mention that these foreign women became Israelites and abandoned their idols.

Esther, the Persian king, and "Women Your Right Hands Possess"

Esther 1:7-22 shows that an evil Persian (not Israelite) king did. Should someone reject Islam because of what Mohammed said Zoroastrians or other idolaters did? Why does Fareed have trouble with the Bible recording that ungodly people did ungodly things?

In Esther 2:2-4 we do not know everything a king or his female palace attendants did in preparing the potential princesses. Perhaps God did not need to tell us in the Bible, but I am pretty sure we do not need Fareed's crude speculations either.

In Esther 2:9-12 the girls received beauty treatments. Fareed says he cannot understand why the women are dirty. I cannot understand either, because despite what Fareed insinuates, the Bible neither says they were dirty, nor does it say the unbelieving Persians thought the women were dirty. I think this is a case of Fareed seeing a problem, or wanting to see a problem, that is not there.

I do not think Fareed is even being fair to the ungodly Persian king here. Be that as it may, since Fareed mentions this as a "modern day sex party", perhaps he could explain why Muslim men, in addition to their four wives, can have sex with as many women as "their right hands possess" in the Qur'an in many suras.

"...abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess - for (in their case) they are free from blame," Sura 23:5-6. See also Sura 4:24

"He [Mohammed] replied, 'Conceal your private parts except from your wife and from whom your right hands possess (slave-girls).'" Abu Dawud vol.3 no.4006 p.1123

"Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess...." Sura 4:24.

 

"Those whom their right hands possess" is also mentioned in Sura 16:71.

 

"...abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess - for (in their case) they are free from blame," Sura 23:5-6

"Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess...." Sura 4:24.

"Those whom their right hands possess" is also mentioned in Sura 16:71.

"He [Mohammed] replied, 'Conceal your private parts except from your wife and from whom your right hands possess (slave-girls).'" Abu Dawud vol.3 no.4006 p.1123

"And those who guard their chastity, Except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess, - for (then) they are not to be blamed," Sura 70:29-30

It is not lawful to marry more than "these", except for those whom your right hands possess. Sura 33:52. See also Sura 33:50. So more than four "partners" is considered OK by Muslim men, as long as the other are not wives, but merely those whom your right hands possess.

Job

Job 14:4 saying "Whom can bring a clean thing out of an unclean thing" does not mention women, does not say women are dirty (sinful), or anything his slander alleges. Women are no more sinful than men. Perhaps Fareed would like to explain why the hadiths in Ibn-i-Majah vol.1 no.522,525,526 p.284,285,286 claims the urine of a male baby is cleaner than that of a female. "He (the Prophet) said, 'Verily, Allah the exalted created Adam and Eve (Hawwa') was created from his small rib. Thus a lad's urine became from water and clay and urine of a lass [girl] became from flesh and blood.'" Note that this is not because of anything related to the Fall, but from the very creation of Eve.

Proverbs

I am extremely surprised that Fareed would make the charge that the Bible teaches that the woman was hell-bound for being a woman. I do not exactly know Fareed's English fluency, but in Proverbs 5:3-5 when it talks of "strange women" it is speaking clearly of immoral women. I am surprised that Fareed would want to go here though, because Muslims do not often want to get to the topic of hell-bound women.

"It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah b. 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah observed: O womenfolk, you should give charity and ask much forgiveness for I saw you in bulk amongst the dwellers of Hell. A wise lady among them said: Why is it, Messenger of Allah, that our folk is in bulk in Hell? Upon this the Holy Prophet observed: You curse too much and are ungrateful to your spouses. I have seen none lacking in common sense and failing in religion but (At the same time) robbing the wisdom of the wise, besides you. Upon this the woman remarked: What is wrong with our common sense and with religion? He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Your lack of common sense (can be well judged from the fact) that the evidence of two women is equal to one man, that is proof of the lack of commonsense, and you spend some nights (and days) in which you do not offer prayer and in the month of Ramadan (During the days) you do not observe fast, that is a failing in religion...." Sahih Muslim vol.1 book 1 no.143 p.47-48. See also Bukhari vol.2 no.161; vol.1 no.301, vol.1 no.28; Sahih Muslim vol.2 book 4 no.1926 p.417; vol.4 no.9596-6600 p.1431 Sunan Nasa'i vol.2 no.1578 p.342.

"'O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).' They asked, 'Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle?' He replied, 'Your curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you.... The women asked, 'O Allah's Apostle? What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?' He said, 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?' They replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in your intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses? The women replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in your religion.'" Bukhari vol.1 no.301 p.181. See also Sahih Muslim vol.2 book 4 no.1982,1983 p.432.

In the false theology of Islam most hell-dwellers are women. They are ungrateful and unthankful to their husbands. Most heaven-dwellers are poor. Bukhari vol.7 book 62 no.125,126 p.96

Proverbs 6:24-26 is written from the perspective of a son, since Proverbs 6:1 starts with "My son". So the command to watch out for immoral women by extension would apply to women watching out for immoral men too.

When Proverbs 7:5-27 teaches about a known house of a prostitute, it also talks about the foolish young men who went to her house. No Fareed, it does not give followers of Paul permission to be immoral. I wish I could say the same about the captive women in the Qur'an. But since you brought up the topic, in the early days of Islam temporary marriage (Mu'tah) was permitted. A man and women could be married for a short, set duration of time, IF THE MAN GAVE THE WOMAN SOMETHING. So what exactly were you saying about men having permission to visit prostitutes Fareed?

"Narrated 'Ali bin Abi Talib: On the day of Khaibar, Allah's Apostle forbade the Mut'a (i.e. temporary marriage) and the eating of donkey meat." Khaibar was fairly late in Mohammed's career, not too long before he died. Bukhari vol.5 book 59 no.527 p.372 as well as Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.1961,1963 p.180,182. Bukhari vol.7 no.50,52 p.36,37 also discuss temporary marriage.

Proverbs 11:22; 22:14; 23:27-28 talk about immoral women. I am not sure what problem Fareed has here.

Proverbs 30:20 describes an immoral woman that we should recognize and avoid, not a godly one.

Proverbs 31:21-23 describes people with very strong emotions: a servant who becomes king, a [formerly hungry] fool who is full of food, an unloved [not odious, but unloved] woman who is married, and a maidservant who displaces her mistress. Other than finding a verse that mentions a woman, I am not sure what problem Fareed has with this.

Proverbs, Contentious Women and Beating Wives

Proverbs 27:15 speaks of contentious women (actually a quarrelsome wife). Fareed thinks it unfair that it singles out the women, but actually Proverbs also talks about the hot-tempered man (Proverbs 22:24-25), wicked men (Proverbs 21:29; 24:1), and an unfriendly man (Proverbs 18:1). I hope no one reads this and says Proverbs is unfair for singly out men though.

I do not know why Fareed says, "contentious men are like sunny spring days.", that is no where in the Bible Christianity, or Judaism, and I thought he was discussing those.

But while the Bible simply warns women not to be contentious, Fareed should know that Islam has a definitive answer to contentious women: BEAT THEM!

In a January 2004 Associated Press article by Mar Roman, a Muslim imam in Fuengirola, Spain, Mohammed Kamal Mustafa, was fined $2,735 and given a 15-month suspended prison sentence for writing and distributing the book Women in Islam, which urged husbands to hit their wives ``on the hands and feet using a rod that is thin and light so that it does not leave scars or bruises on the body.'' The imam argued that he was interpreting passages of the Qur'an and said he opposed violence against women. If Fareed wants to be consistent, he can write a refutation of the Muslim book Women In Islam.

Likewise Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.1983 p.194 says that in a sermon Mohammed criticized Muslim men who beat their wives like they beat their slave girls. It could be a bummer to be a slave girl.

Mohammed did not rebuke a husband who beat his wife for praying and fasting extra. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2453 p.677-678

In Sura 4:34 the Arabic word idreb is a conjugate of daraba which means "to beat, strike, or hit" according to Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic p.538.

Mohammed himself once deliberately struck 'Aisha "on the chest which caused me pain", according to Sahih Muslim vol.2 book 4 no.2127 p.462.

If a husband is remiss, the Qur'an never says the wife is to have her husband beaten. Even if the husband is a known beater, nothing is done to him.

In Egypt they do not think much of Dr. Badawi's novel interpretation. The Guardian Weekly reported that in 1987 and Egyptian court ruled that a husband had the duty to educate his wife, and therefore he could punish her as he wished. (from Voices Behind the Veil p.152).

Umm Kulthum did not want to marry the caliph 'Umar because "he leads a rough life and is severe with his womenfolk." al-Tabari vol.14 p.101.

'Aisha explained to the Caliph 'Umar, "You are rough and ready. ... How will it be with (Umm Kulthum) if she disobeys you on any matter and you punish her physically? al-Tabari vol.14 p.102

Likewise al-Tabari vol.15 p141 footnote 251 said that all four caliphs had family ties to Mohammed except 'Umar, "since Muhammad thought him too harsh for any of his daughters." So Muhammad thought him too harsh for his daughters, but did not stop him from being harsh towards others.

Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.1850 p.116 in discussing the responsibilities of a husband says that a husband cannot beat the face of his wife, or denounce her as ugly, or fail to materially support her. See also Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2137 p.574; vol.2 no.2138-2139 p.574-575. In all these references, only the face is exempt from beating.

Mu'awiya and Abu Jahm both asked to marry Fatimah bint Qais. Abu Jahm doesn't put his stick down from his shoulder. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2277 p.619-620. Mohammed knew this, but never did it say he rebuked Abu Jahm.

According to the Muslim historian al-Tabari, Job was allegedly ordered to beat his wife. al-Tabari vol.2 p.140

Today the penal code of Egypt and Libya Article 212 says that if a woman disobeys her husband, the man can file a complaint with the local judge. The judgments can be implemented in a coercive manner if the situation demands it. The house can be besieged by the forces of order if the need arises following the instructions of the judge." (See Why I Am Not A Muslim p.314 for more info.)

"'A'ishah said: Habibah daughter of Sahl was the wife of Thabit b. Qais b. Shimmas. He beat her and broke some of her part. So she came to the Prophet (may peace be upon him) after morning, and complained to him against her husband. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) called on Thabit b. Qais and said (to him): Take a part of her property and separate yourself from her. He asked: Is that right, Apostle of Allah? He said: Yes. He said: I have given her two gardens of mint as a dower, and they are already in her possession. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: Take them and separate yourself from her."

Note that the man still got the gardens back after beating his wife and breaking part of her. Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2220 p.600

"This shows that wives should obey their husbands. In case they do not obey or become emboldened towards their husbands, they should try to amend them by preaching and education. Beating is the last resort. But it is better to avoid beating as far as possible." Abu Dawud vol.2 footnote 1467 p.575.

"'Umar b. al-Khattab reported the Prophet (may peace be upon him) as saying: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.(1468)" Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2142 p.575

"This means that a man tries his best to correct his wife, but he fails to do so, he is allowed to beat her as a last resort. This tradition never means that a husband should beat her [his] wife without any valid reason. If he beats her without any fault on her part, he will be responsible and called to answer." Abu Dawud vol.2 footnote 1468 p.375

Isaiah

Isa 3:1 does NOT say a woman is "polluted" when she remarries. On one hand, Fareed just has a typo here. On the other hand, no verse in the Bible says a woman is polluted if she remarries, as the godly woman Ruth did.

To answer Fareed's question, "I do not know who polluted Eve", since the Bible does not say anyone polluted Eve. However, I do know that al-Tabari says that Allah made Eve (but not Adam) stupid in Islam. al-Tabari vol.1 p.280,281

In Isa 3:20 Fareed has a typo on this reference here, and I am not sure what verse he means. Fareed says that Isaiah teaches a woman is "treacherous" if she leaves her husband, but a man is blameless when he "puts her away" for no reason. I find this no where in Isaiah, but I find this exact thing in Islam.

A woman who asks for divorce without extreme reasons is also forbidden the smell of Paradise. Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2055 p.237, or strong reason in Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2218 p.600.

Men are not restricted however. Bukhari vol.3 no.859 (p.534) says a man can divorce for "something unpleasant about his wife, such as old age or the like."

Fareed writes, "God threatens to punish the men by taking away all of their property, including their wives, and giving them to others. ISAIAH 6:12 To punish men, God will 'give their wives unto others. ISAIAH 8:10" These verses do not say this,

Isaiah 6:12 says, "until the LORD has sent everyone far away and the land is utterly forsaken."

Isaiah 8:10 says, "Devise your strategy, but it will be thwarted; propose your plan, but it will not stand, for God is with us."

The verses in chapters 5 through 9 do not say what Fareed has here either. I have no idea from where he gets this.

In Isa 19:16 and Isa 50:37, when it compares the Egyptian army to women, in the Mideast they were not used as soldiers.

In Fareed's discussion of Isa 4:10 and Isa 4:21, Isaiah chapter 4 does not have 10 verses, much less 21. I looked around, and I think he means Lamentations 4:10 and 4:21. In Lamentations 4:10 the writer recounted the awful circumstances of women eating their children. It does not say God made or told them do that, though. Edom, who worshipped other gods, was compared to a daughter who would be drunk and stripped naked. Again, Fareed was wrong to say that it mentions a whore, and Fareed was wrong to say "When Bible-God gets angry at you he calls you a drunken whore." When discussing different religions with other people, it is better to just stick with the facts.

Ezekiel and Magic Charms

In Ezek 13:18-21 I do not know where Fareed gets the idea that God is against women that sew pillows. It really says God is against women who sew magic charms on their wrists and make veils of various lengths. God is not against sewing or making clothes, but against the magic charms. By the way, magic charms are prominent in Islam.

"The evil eye is a fact." Bukhari vol.7 book 71 no.636 p.427, vol.7 book 71 no.827 p.538. See also Bukhari vol.4 book 55 no.590 p.386

The evil eye is a truth. Ibn-i-Majah vol.5 no.3506,3507 p.39

"...The influence of the evil eye is a fact." Sahih Muslim vol.3 book 24 no.5426 p.1192. See also Sahih Muslim vol.3 book 24 no.5424-5427 p.1192.

Amir bin Rabia was said to have given the evil eye to someone. Ibn-i-Majah vol.5 no.3508 p.40

However, Mohammed's hair was a cure for the evil eye. Bukhari vol.7 book 72 no.784 p.518

When Mohammed got his hair cut, his companions wanted to catch every lock to preserve it. Mohammed generously had it distributed among the people. Sahih Muslim vol.2 book 7 no.2991-2994 p.656-657

Incantation cures the evil eye. Ibn-i-Majah vol.5 no.3510,3511 p.41; vol.5 no.3512 p.42

Incantation is permissible against the evil eye and a scorpion. Ibn-i-Majah vol.5 no.3513-3518 p.42-44

Mohammed used incantation against the evil eye and poisonous reptiles. Ibn-i-Majah vol.5 no.3525 p.48

Mohammed gave 'Aisha an incantation to cure the evil eye Sahih Muslim vol.3 book 24 no.5445,5447-5450 p.1196

Mohammed believed in the evil eye, and their were charms against it. al-Tabari vol.39 p.134

Last two suras (113 and 114) of the Qur'an were given against the evil eye according to Ibn-i-Majah vol.5 no.3517 p.41

"He who ate seven dates (of the land situated) between these two lava plains in the morning, no poison will harm him until it is evening." Sahih Muslim vol.3 book 21 no.5080 p.1129. vol.3 book 21 no.5081 also adds magic.

Some magic is OK, because Sa'id bin Jubair practiced charm when he was stung by a scorpion. He learned this from Mohammed. Sahih Muslim vol.1 book 1 no.625 p.141

Mohammed gave the Ansar people an incantation for remove the poison of scorpion stings. Sahih Muslim vol.3 book 24 no.5442-5444,5448 p.1192,1196

Mohammed at one point was bewitched: "Narrated 'Aisha: Magic was worked on the Prophet so that he began to fancy that he was doing a thing which he was not actually doing. One day he invoked (Allah) for a long period and then said, 'I feel that Allah has inspired me as how to cure myself.'..." Bukhari vol.4 book 54 no.490 p.317. See also vol.4 no.400 p.267, vol.8 no.89 p.56-57, vol.8 no.400 p.266-267. vol.7 no.658-660 p.441-443.

Ezekiel

Ezek 18:5-6, contrary to what Fareed thought, does not say a good man never gets near a menstruating woman. Rather it shows that a good man does not lie [have sex with] a menstruating woman.

In Ezek 22:1-6; 23:1-49, God mentions the immorality (both spiritual and physical) of Israel and Judah.

Ezek 24:3-14 the parable of the cooking pot is introduced as a parable in verse 3.

Yes, in Ezek 24:15-18 God did take Ezekiel's wife, and told him not to mourn. This was a sign to the people of the seriousness what was about to happen to them.

But Ezekiel's wife just died, she was not murdered. Perhaps Fareed would like to explain about al-Khidr in Sura 18:63-82. Al-Khidr was a murderer for Allah who was wiser than Moses Bukhari vol.1 book 3 no.124 p.92. The boy whom al-Khidr broke his neck was born an infidel, who would have led his parents astray, so that was the justification of why al-Khidr was allowed to murder him in cold blood. Abu Dawud vol.3 no.4688-4690 p.1319

In Ezek 26:6-8 this prophesies the daughters of Tyre (a pagan city) would be killed. This happened, and this prophecy showed that the Lord's word comes to pass.

In Ezek 36:16-17, their sin in God's eyes was compared to a woman's uncleanness during her menstrual period. Old blood is a fertile environment for germs, so I am not sure if Fareed has a problem here, or he is just mentioning the verse.

Hosea

In Hos 1:2-3, Fareed is telling a lie; God never told Hosea to commit adultery, and Hosea did not commit adultery. Rather, Hosea married someone who had been a prostitute, and later returned to prostitution.

Hos 2:2-5 is an allegory, and it is directed at unfaithful Israel.

Likewise Hos 2:10 is an allegory of the punishment of unfaithful Israel.

In Hos 2:13 God is jealous when his people are idolatrous. Hosea 2:13 says, "I will punish her for the days she burned incense to the Baals [idol gods]; she decked herself with rings and jewelry, and went after her lovers, but me she forgot, declares the LORD."

In Hos 3:1 Fareed is apparently quoting from the King James Version. However, even in the King James version it is clear that God tells Hosea to love his wife again, even though she is loved by another [outside of marriage].

Hos 9:14 warns of God's judgment of miscarrying wombs and dry breast to the tribe of Ephraim since that was better than Ephraim bringing out their children to the slayer in Hos 9:13. The Canaanite religion had infant (up to 2 year old) sacrifice.

In Hos 9:16; 13:!6y, God slaying their children would be more merciful than the children growing up being taught wickedness.

Hosea, and Fareed condemning Muslims

In Hosea 4:13 Fareed is either a hypocrite or actually d***ing Muslims! Here is what he wrote verbatim.

"If you misbehave, Bible-God will make your daughters 'commit whoredom' and your wife commit adultery, HOSEA 4:13 D*** this kind of justice."

Here is what the Hosea 4:13 really says: "They [unfaithful Israelites] sacrifice on the mountaintops and burn offerings on the hills, under oak, poplar and terebinth, where the shade is pleasant. Therefore your daughters turn to prostitution and your daughters-in-law [or brides] to adultery."

This is easy to understand. If the family practices the Canaanite religion, which sacrifice on mountain tops and practiced religious prostitution, their women will be immoral.

In other words, if you set an example with these bad sins, your women will follow your example. Is Fareed against God warning people of bad consequences?

What do you call people who have sex outside of being married or concubines? Muslim warriors and companions of Mohammed!

Stripping female captives of their clothes is OK, according to Sahih Muslim vol.3 book 17 no.4345 p.953 and Ibn-i-Majah vol.4 no.2840 p.187.

Sex with captives among the Bani Al-Mustaliq. Bukhari vol.9 no.506 p.372; Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2167 p.582

The fact that it was OK for Muslims to have sex with captive women is in Sahih Muslim vol.2 book 8 no.3371-3374 p.732-735; Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2150 and footnote 1479 p.577-578.

"Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri that while he was sitting with Allah's Apostle he said, 'Oh Allah's Apostle We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?' [a sexual practice] The Prophet said, 'Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it, No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence." Bukhari vol.3 no.432 p.237. See also Bukhari vol.5 book 59 no.459 p.317; vol.7 no.136-137 p.102-103; vol.8 no.600 p.391; Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2166,2168 p.582

"Abu Sai'd al-Khudri said : The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur'anic verse: [Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period.(1479)" Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2150 p.577

"After the distribution of the spoils of war a man may have intercourse with the female slave after passing one menstrual period, if she is not pregnant. If she is pregnant one should wait till she delivers the child. This is the view held by Malik, al-Shafi'i and Abu Thawr. Abu Hanifah holds that if both the husband and wife are captivated together, their marriage tie still continues; they will not be separated. According to the majority of scholars, they will be separated. Al-Awza-I maintains that their marriage tie will continue till they remain part of the spoils of war. If a man buys them, he may separate them if he desires, and cohabit with the female slave after one menstrual period. ('Awn al-Ma'bud II.213)" Note that Mohammed married Safiyah right after the battle. Abu Dawud vol.2 footnote 1479 p.577-578.

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz : I saw Abu Sa'id and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Sa'id said, "We went with Allah's Apostle in the Ghazwa of Bani Al-Mustaliq and we captured some of the Arabs as captives and the long separation from our wives was pressing us hard and we wanted to practice coitus interruptus. We asked Allah's Apostle (whether it was permissible). He said, "It is better for you not to do so. No soul, (that which Allah has) destined to exist, up to the Day of Resurrection, but will definitely come into existence." Bukhari vol.3 no.718 p.432

Notice that the captives were in no way considered "wives". They were neither wives nor concubines, or they would not have seen any need to ask Mohammed about this.

"...We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captives some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have [sex] with them but by observing .... But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born." Sahih Muslim vol.2 book 8 no.3571 p.732-733.

Note that in this quote these women were in no way considered "wives".

Bukhari vol.7 no.22; vol.3 no.after 436, vol.3 no.432; vol.5 no.459; vol.8 no.600 also teach it is morally acceptable to force female slaves to have sex.

"Can one travel with a slave-girl without knowing whether she is pregnant or not? Al-Hasan found no harm in her master's kissing or fondling with her.

Ibn 'Umar said, 'If a slave-girl who is suitable to have sexual relations is given to somebody as a gift, or sold or manumitted [freed], her master should not have sexual intercourse with her before she gets one menstruation so as to be sure of absence of pregnancy, and there is no such necessity for a virgin.'

'Ata said, 'There is no harm in fondling with one's pregnant (1) slave-girl without having sexual intercourse with her. Allah said: 'Except with their wives and the (women captives) whom their right hands possess (for in this case they are not to be blamed).'" Footnote (1) says, "Pregnant from another man, not her present master." Bukhari vol.3 ch.113 after no.436 p.239-240. (Same 'Ata as previous.)

"And 'Ata disliked to look at those slave girls who used to be sold in Mecca unless he wanted to buy." Bukhari vol.8 no.246 p.162.

Mohammed was asked about sex with slave girls. - It is fine. Sahih Muslim vol.2 book 8 no.3377,3383-3388 p.734-735. In contrast to this, in the Old Testament a man who had sex with a slave, and not his wife, was killed.

Sex with captives is OK. Sahih Muslim vol.2 book 8 no.3371-3376 p.733; Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.2517 p.506

Sex with slave girls is OK. Ibn-i-Majah vol.1 no.89 p.52; vol.3 no.1920 p.158; vol.3 no.1927-1928 p.162. See also Ibn-i-Majah vol.3 no.1851 p.117.

However, A Muslim slave owner is not allowed to look at the nakedness of a slave girl if she is married to someone else. Otherwise it is OK; she does not have to be married to him, only owned by him at the time of sex. Abu Dawud vol.1 no.496 and footnote 198 p.126.

"Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess...." Sura 4:24.

 

"Those whom their right hands possess" is also mentioned in Sura 16:71.

 

"...abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess - for (in their case) they are free from blame," Sura 23:5-6

"And those who guard their chastity, Except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess, - for (then) they are not to be blamed," Sura 70:29-30

It is not lawful to marry more than "these", except for those whom your right hands possess. Sura 33:52. See also Sura 33:50. So more than four "partners" is OK, as long as they other are merely those whom your right hands possess.

So Fareed condemns the "justice" of forcing women of families who are ungodly into prostitution and adultery. Fareed is thus condemning Muslim warriors and companions of Mohammed who force women captives to have sex, in one case even while their husbands were present!

 

So for Fareed to have any consistency, he needs to repudiate Sunni Islam, which holds to these beliefs, as well as the Qur'an, which says that sex with women your right hands possess (captives) is OK.

Amos and Nahum

In Amos 2:7, Fareed comments that God predicts the wickedness that a man and his father have sex with the same women. He should not have a problem with the Bible telling the wicked actions of ungodly people, as well as bad consequences in Nahum 3:4-6. The Qur'an mentions ungodly acts of unbelievers too.

The Gospels

Christians universally understand Mt 5:32 by extension to refer to adultery by the man or wife.

In Mt 24:19; 13:17, God is not making it tough on people here, but rather warning about how terrible the times will be for pregnant and nursing women. When you warn about something, that does not mean you hate them.

In Mt 2:22 Mary being "purified" means the sacrifice after childbirth. Neither Muslims nor Christians say having Jesus was sinful in any way.

Lk 20:17 is understood as Jesus would not any anyone to touch him, either Mary Magdalene or anyone else, until he ascended to heaven. So when Mary was not to touch him then, I do not see how Fareed gets that a woman's touch was bad and a man's touch was OK.

If someone wanted, they could say the same about Mohammed. He would not even touch the hands of the women who took the pledge of allegiance to him.

On the other hand, Bukhari 9:324 p.247 says it was OK for Mohammed to touch the hand of his captives or his lady slaves.

Furthermore, Mohammed was more prone to touch women than westerners would think is proper. "Narrated Um Khalid bint Khalid: When I came from Ethiopia (to Medina), I was a young girl. Allah's Apostle made me wear a sheet having marks on it. Allah's Apostle was rubbing those marks with his hands saying, "Sanah! Sanah!" (i.e. good, good)." Bukhari 5:214 p.137. It does not specify exactly where the marks were on this sheet. I have not found this to be a standardized ritual among Muslims, so why was Mohammed doing this?

 

The Rest of the New Testament

Rom 1:27 says nothing about women being "sexual objects". Are you reading the Bible here, or some Muslim-made paraphrase? Rather Romans 1:27 says, "In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." By the way, were you aware that in the Islamic world, the Sultan of Oman has a harem of 1,000 boys?

1 Tim 5:5-6 is speaking to widows who live for pleasure, but nobody should live just for pleasure. Anyone who does is not satisfied, but is "dead while they are alive."

1 Tim 5:9-15 does not say let widows starve if they do not meet these criteria. Rather, in distributing the church's limited financial resources at that time, special care was given to godly widows over 60 who had been faithful to their husbands.

2 Tim 3:6-7 speaks of evil men (not women) who will worm their way into women's homes seducing them. The Bible is warning against this; I do not know if Fareed has a problem with warning against this.

In 1 Peter 3:2-6, as well as Eph 5:22-24, wives are supposed to obey their husbands. However, the Bible never says Abraham, Job, or anyone else beat their wife, or was supposed to beat their wife. According to the Muslim historian al-Tabari, Job was allegedly ordered to beat his wife. al-Tabari vol.2 p.140. See also the preceding part about Muslims, both in Mohammed's time and now, being allowed to beat their wives.

In 2 Pet 2:8 Lot was called righteous man. Lot was righteous, until the time he got drunk and was very unrighteous in Gen 19:8, 30-38. A righteous person, who then does something unrighteous can be forgiven though. Likewise David was a righteous man, who was very unrighteous, and then asked forgiveness.

By the way, Mohammed asked forgiveness too. Allah even told Mohammed to ask forgiveness for his sin (or frailty) in Sura 40:55; 48:1-2. People do not need forgiveness for physical frailties, but for moral ones. Sahih Muslim vol.1 1695 says Mohammed prayed, "I wronged myself and make a confession of my sin. Forgive all my sins,..." Bukhari, vol.1:7,19,711, 781; vol.6:3; vol.8:319, and vol.8:407 prior also mention Mohammed's sins. Specific things mentioned in the Bukhari vol.1:234 vol.8:794, 795 include cutting off people's limbs, burning out their eyes, and making them die of thirst. See Bukhari vol.8:796,797; vol.6:198 prior, as well as Fiqh us-Sunnah vol.1 p.133.

Mohammed asked forgiveness for sins in al-Tabari vol.39 p.195-196

"Narrated Abu Huraira: ... What do you say in the pause between Takbir and recitation? The Prophet said, ... O Allah! Set me apart from my sins (faults) as the East and West are set apart from each other and clean me from sins as a white garment is cleaned of dirt (after thorough washing). O Allah! Wash off my sins with water, snow and hail." Bukhari vol.1 no.711 p.398. See also Sura 40:55; 48:1-2, and Bukhari vol.1:7,19,781; vol.6:3; vol.8:319, vol.8:407 prior.

Revelation is a metaphorical book, and in Rev 2:20,22 the use of the word "Jezebel" does not mean Jezebel was alive all these years from 2 Ki 9:33-37. Rather it is a metaphor for a vile, immoral woman.

Rev 14:3-4 is a special class of Jewish men (from the tribes of Israel). Fareed is telling a lie to say it teaches "only 144,000 celibate men will be saved". You can read more about them in Rev 7:1-8, directly followed by "the great multitude from every tribe and nation in Revelation 7:9-10. Fareed, I am beginning to wonder whether or not it was intentional, that you deliberately left out Revelation 7:1-10 when you said that only 144,000 celibate men will be saved.

Fared, having reached this point, I am amazed that you have not only told so many untruths, but so many blatant untruths. Furthermore, your arguments condemn Islam along with Christianity. Do you yourself really believe you represent Islam???

It means nothing for either of us to call something false if we do not have any documentation for it, or we lie about it. But since you have lied, and you ask if I will accept Islam, then no, I will not accept what you present when you present proven lies. How can anybody accept Islam, when you yourself condemn Muslim practices too.

I hope you will change and follow the truth. As for me, I will follow the truth.

Bible verses are from the NIV

Qur'an quotes are from Yusuf 'Ali's translation.

Christian Debater™ P.O. Box 144441 Austin, TX 78714