IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum: Contracts & technical loopholes

Author

Message

nospam001
Male Agnostic
Senior Member

Joined: 02 October 2012
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 149

Posted: 24 October 2012 at 3:20pm

Originally posted by nothing

I have read once long time ago a small book about the Prophet's wives, it did not mention concubine or sort, unless if I missed it. To add more to it I am not fond with hadiths so that create a problem in the way I try to catch up with your point. It does seem though that this concubine is the engine of this thread. Who was she? The story I heard from one perspective, it was about honey smell, that is where the Prophet promised would not touch it again. So can you tell about who was that beautiful concubine, thanks.

The 'concubine' referred to in most commentaries was Maria al-Qibtiyya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya).

However, let me repeat: 'concubine' or 'honey pot' makes no difference. The 'engine' of this thread, to me anyway, is that Sura 66 deals severely with gossiping and eavesdropping, but tacitly approves of the husband's duplicity, secrecy and attempted cover-up i.e. it condones the fact that he acted in secret, contrary to an earlier understanding or promise and then, when found out, tried to stop the truth from spreading. These points are not disputed anywhere, as far as I can tell.

It may surprise you to discover that I'm not raising objections to polygamy and I'm not saying that the husband by 'managing' information was therefore guilty of any offence - legal or moral. I assume he had good reasons to act in that way, possibly something to do with local cultural norms of that era. I also assume that the Qur'an has good reasons for condoning those actions for all believers, for all time. My problem is that those reasons are not self-evident, at least not to me, not yet.

In this discussion, I am not looking for 'proof' - just a clarification that makes sense. Is that too much to hope for?

God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.

IP Logged

Abu Loren
Male Islam
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 June 2012
Location: United Arab Emirates
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 568

Posted: 29 October 2012 at 11:47am

Originally posted by nospam001

The 'concubine' referred to in most commentaries was Maria al-Qibtiyya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya).

In this discussion, I am not looking for 'proof' - just a clarification that makes sense. Is that too much to hope for?

If you had read and understood the opening verse of Surah 66 then you would have known that the Prophet was given privileges.

Sahih International

O Prophet, why do you prohibit [yourself from] what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
66:1

O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful. 33:50

IP Logged

nospam001
Male Agnostic
Senior Member

Joined: 02 October 2012
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 149

Posted: 30 October 2012 at 12:55am

Originally posted by Abu Loren

If you had read and understood the opening verse of Surah 66 then you would have known that the Prophet was given privileges.

Yes, but did those privileges also include the special freedoms to act in secret, contrary to an earlier understanding or promise and (when found out) to stop the truth from spreading? If so then please say where. I can't find it in 33:50.

God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.

IP Logged

nothing

Senior Member

Joined: 09 November 2008
Location: Andorra
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 360

Posted: 30 October 2012 at 11:50pm

Originally posted by nospam001

The 'concubine' referred to in most commentaries was Maria al-Qibtiyya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya).

Ok I will only to add my input concerning the above Mary the Copt position from the way I understand. The governor of Egypt sent the gift to the Prophet, and the gift were two slave girls, they were sisters, Mary and Serene. Since the Islamic injunction states a man can not marry sisters at the same time therefore the Prophet passed on Sirin to one of his companion.
Mary gave him a son by the name Ibrohim. That was the reason he stopped by her house more than agreed, not for sex but to visit his son. But the other wives still did not like it regardless.

Anyway that is my input concerning the irregular visit. So what do you think, sound reasonable?

IP Logged

Abu Loren
Male Islam
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 June 2012
Location: United Arab Emirates
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 568

Posted: 31 October 2012 at 12:47am

Originally posted by nothing

Originally posted by nospam001

The 'concubine' referred to in most commentaries was Maria al-Qibtiyya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya).

This nospam001 is here looking for trouble. There is no proof whatsoever that Maria was a concubine of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) but rather his wife. If wikipedia is his source of reference then the same people lists his wives as thus :-

Prophet Muhammad (saw) had 12 wives, 9 were alive at the time of his death.

1.Hazrat Khadija Bint Khuwaylid, the only wife during his youth.

He married the rest in the following order after Khadija's death. They were all for social reasons (eg. widow, divorcee). The reason he had more than 4 wives, which is the maximum allowed, is that the verse limiting the number of wives was revealed after his marriages. After the revelation of the verse, he did not marry any more.

2. Hazrat Sawada Bint Zam'a

3. Hazrat A'isha Bint Abu Bakr

4.Hazrat Hafsa Bint 'Umar

5.Hazrat Zaynab Bint Khuzayma

6.Hazrat Ummay Salama Hind Bint Abi Umayya

7.Hazrat Zaynab Bint Jahsh

8.Hazrat Juwayria Bint Al-Haritha

9. Hazrat Umm Habiba Ramla Bint Bint Abi Sufyan

10.Hazrat Safya Bint Huyayya

11.Hazrat Maymuna Bint Al-Haritha

12.Hazrat Maria al-Qibtiyya

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Names_of_the_wives_of_Prophet_Muhammad_in_order_please

IP Logged

nospam001
Male Agnostic
Senior Member

Joined: 02 October 2012
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 149

Posted: 31 October 2012 at 7:15pm

Originally posted by nothing

...he stopped by her house more than agreed, not for sex but to visit his son. But the other wives still did not like it regardless.

Originally posted by Abu Loren

There is no proof whatsoever that Maria was a concubine of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) but rather his wife.

We seem to be getting off the topic here. What does this have to do with my original questions about duplicity, secrecy & cover-up?

God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.

IP Logged

Abu Loren
Male Islam
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 June 2012
Location: United Arab Emirates
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 568

Posted: 01 November 2012 at 12:41am

Originally posted by nospam001

We seem to be getting off the topic here. What does this have to do with my original questions about duplicity, secrecy & cover-up?

Well you brought up the subject of concubine falsely when Maria was one of the wives of the Prophet (pbuh).

Btw I've seen your kind before. When they first join the a site, they are ever so polite and ask "oh is it ok of I ask this question?" then they say things like "my wife and kids are Muslims" to gain trust, then the 'real' reason comes out why they are here. It is to sow doubt and to defame and to slander.

IP Logged

nospam001
Male Agnostic
Senior Member

Joined: 02 October 2012
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 149

Posted: 01 November 2012 at 7:04pm

Originally posted by Abu Loren

Well you brought up the subject of concubine falsely when Maria was one of the wives of the Prophet (pbuh).

The scholars didn’t seem to be beating around the bush on this point so I assumed that it was not a contentious matter. However, there are people who clearly disagree so I sincerely regret my ill-advised use of the c-word. It had zero relevance to my original question, as I was careful enough to say in the very next sentence - and in several posts since then.

If all I wanted was to 'sow doubt and to defame and to slander' then there would be more effective ways than posting bland questions on this site. Yes, my later questions are more direct, but if you perceive any hostility on my part then I guess we’ll just have to agree to differ on that. What can I do to convince you that I’m not lying? (Without revealing my daughters' identities. Please.)

God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.

IP Logged

	Active Topics Memberlist Calendar Search Help
	Register Login Old Forum

Interfaith Dialogue
IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue

Topic: Contracts & technical loopholes - what is
	<< Prev Page of 7 Next >>

Author	Message
nospam001 Male Agnostic Senior Member Joined: 02 October 2012 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 149	Posted: 24 October 2012 at 3:20pm
	*Originally posted by nothing* I have read once long time ago a small book about the Prophet's wives, it did not mention concubine or sort, unless if I missed it. To add more to it I am not fond with hadiths so that create a problem in the way I try to catch up with your point. It does seem though that this concubine is the engine of this thread. Who was she? The story I heard from one perspective, it was about honey smell, that is where the Prophet promised would not touch it again. So can you tell about who was that beautiful concubine, thanks. The 'concubine' referred to in most commentaries was Maria al-Qibtiyya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya). However, let me repeat: 'concubine' or 'honey pot' makes no difference. The 'engine' of this thread, to me anyway, is that Sura 66 deals severely with gossiping and eavesdropping, but tacitly approves of the husband's duplicity, secrecy and attempted cover-up i.e. it condones the fact that he acted in secret, contrary to an earlier understanding or promise and then, when found out, tried to stop the truth from spreading. These points are not disputed anywhere, as far as I can tell. It may surprise you to discover that I'm not raising objections to polygamy and I'm not saying that the husband by 'managing' information was therefore guilty of any offence - legal or moral. I assume he had good reasons to act in that way, possibly something to do with local cultural norms of that era. I also assume that the Qur'an has good reasons for condoning those actions for all believers, for all time. My problem is that those reasons are not self-evident, at least not to me, not yet. In this discussion, I am not looking for 'proof' - just a clarification that makes sense. Is that too much to hope for?
	God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.
	IP Logged

Abu Loren Male Islam Senior Member Joined: 29 June 2012 Location: United Arab Emirates Online Status: Offline Posts: 568	Posted: 29 October 2012 at 11:47am
	*Originally posted by nospam001* The 'concubine' referred to in most commentaries was Maria al-Qibtiyya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya). However, let me repeat: 'concubine' or 'honey pot' makes no difference. The 'engine' of this thread, to me anyway, is that Sura 66 deals severely with gossiping and eavesdropping, but tacitly approves of the husband's duplicity, secrecy and attempted cover-up i.e. it condones the fact that he acted in secret, contrary to an earlier understanding or promise and then, when found out, tried to stop the truth from spreading. These points are not disputed anywhere, as far as I can tell. It may surprise you to discover that I'm not raising objections to polygamy and I'm not saying that the husband by 'managing' information was therefore guilty of any offence - legal or moral. I assume he had good reasons to act in that way, possibly something to do with local cultural norms of that era. I also assume that the Qur'an has good reasons for condoning those actions for all believers, for all time. My problem is that those reasons are not self-evident, at least not to me, not yet. In this discussion, I am not looking for 'proof' - just a clarification that makes sense. Is that too much to hope for? If you had read and understood the opening verse of Surah 66 then you would have known that the Prophet was given privileges. Sahih International O Prophet, why do you prohibit [yourself from] what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. 66:1 O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful. 33:50
	IP Logged

nospam001 Male Agnostic Senior Member Joined: 02 October 2012 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 149	Posted: 30 October 2012 at 12:55am
	*Originally posted by Abu Loren* If you had read and understood the opening verse of Surah 66 then you would have known that the Prophet was given privileges. Yes, but did those privileges also include the special freedoms to act in secret, contrary to an earlier understanding or promise and (when found out) to stop the truth from spreading? If so then please say where. I can't find it in 33:50.
	God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.
	IP Logged

nothing Senior Member Joined: 09 November 2008 Location: Andorra Online Status: Offline Posts: 360	Posted: 30 October 2012 at 11:50pm
	*Originally posted by nospam001* The 'concubine' referred to in most commentaries was Maria al-Qibtiyya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya). Ok I will only to add my input concerning the above Mary the Copt position from the way I understand. The governor of Egypt sent the gift to the Prophet, and the gift were two slave girls, they were sisters, Mary and Serene. Since the Islamic injunction states a man can not marry sisters at the same time therefore the Prophet passed on Sirin to one of his companion. Mary gave him a son by the name Ibrohim. That was the reason he stopped by her house more than agreed, not for sex but to visit his son. But the other wives still did not like it regardless. Anyway that is my input concerning the irregular visit. So what do you think, sound reasonable?
	IP Logged

Abu Loren Male Islam Senior Member Joined: 29 June 2012 Location: United Arab Emirates Online Status: Offline Posts: 568	Posted: 31 October 2012 at 12:47am
	*Originally posted by nothing* *Originally posted by nospam001* The 'concubine' referred to in most commentaries was Maria al-Qibtiyya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya). Ok I will only to add my input concerning the above Mary the Copt position from the way I understand. The governor of Egypt sent the gift to the Prophet, and the gift were two slave girls, they were sisters, Mary and Serene. Since the Islamic injunction states a man can not marry sisters at the same time therefore the Prophet passed on Sirin to one of his companion. Mary gave him a son by the name Ibrohim. That was the reason he stopped by her house more than agreed, not for sex but to visit his son. But the other wives still did not like it regardless. Anyway that is my input concerning the irregular visit. So what do you think, sound reasonable? This nospam001 is here looking for trouble. There is no proof whatsoever that Maria was a concubine of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) but rather his wife. If wikipedia is his source of reference then the same people lists his wives as thus :- Prophet Muhammad (saw) had 12 wives, 9 were alive at the time of his death. 1.Hazrat Khadija Bint Khuwaylid, the only wife during his youth. He married the rest in the following order after Khadija's death. They were all for social reasons (eg. widow, divorcee). The reason he had more than 4 wives, which is the maximum allowed, is that the verse limiting the number of wives was revealed after his marriages. After the revelation of the verse, he did not marry any more. 2. Hazrat Sawada Bint Zam'a 3. Hazrat A'isha Bint Abu Bakr 4.Hazrat Hafsa Bint 'Umar 5.Hazrat Zaynab Bint Khuzayma 6.Hazrat Ummay Salama Hind Bint Abi Umayya 7.Hazrat Zaynab Bint Jahsh 8.Hazrat Juwayria Bint Al-Haritha 9. Hazrat Umm Habiba Ramla Bint Bint Abi Sufyan 10.Hazrat Safya Bint Huyayya 11.Hazrat Maymuna Bint Al-Haritha 12.Hazrat Maria al-Qibtiyya http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Names_of_the_wives_of_Prophet_Muhammad_in_order_please
	IP Logged

nospam001 Male Agnostic Senior Member Joined: 02 October 2012 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 149	Posted: 31 October 2012 at 7:15pm
	*Originally posted by nothing* ...he stopped by her house more than agreed, not for sex but to visit his son. But the other wives still did not like it regardless. *Originally posted by Abu Loren* There is no proof whatsoever that Maria was a concubine of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) but rather his wife. We seem to be getting off the topic here. What does this have to do with my original questions about duplicity, secrecy & cover-up?
	God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.
	IP Logged

Abu Loren Male Islam Senior Member Joined: 29 June 2012 Location: United Arab Emirates Online Status: Offline Posts: 568	Posted: 01 November 2012 at 12:41am
	*Originally posted by nospam001* We seem to be getting off the topic here. What does this have to do with my original questions about duplicity, secrecy & cover-up? Well you brought up the subject of concubine falsely when Maria was one of the wives of the Prophet (pbuh). Btw I've seen your kind before. When they first join the a site, they are ever so polite and ask "oh is it ok of I ask this question?" then they say things like "my wife and kids are Muslims" to gain trust, then the 'real' reason comes out why they are here. It is to sow doubt and to defame and to slander.
	IP Logged

nospam001 Male Agnostic Senior Member Joined: 02 October 2012 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 149	Posted: 01 November 2012 at 7:04pm
	*Originally posted by Abu Loren* Well you brought up the subject of concubine falsely when Maria was one of the wives of the Prophet (pbuh). The scholars didn’t seem to be beating around the bush on this point so I assumed that it was not a contentious matter. However, there are people who clearly disagree so I sincerely regret my ill-advised use of the c-word. It had zero relevance to my original question, as I was careful enough to say in the very next sentence - and in several posts since then. Btw I've seen your kind before. When they first join the a site, they are ever so polite and ask "oh is it ok of I ask this question?" then they say things like "my wife and kids are Muslims" to gain trust, then the 'real' reason comes out why they are here. It is to sow doubt and to defame and to slander. If all I wanted was to 'sow doubt and to defame and to slander' then there would be more effective ways than posting bland questions on this site. Yes, my later questions are more direct, but if you perceive any hostility on my part then I guess we’ll just have to agree to differ on that. What can I do to convince you that I’m not lying? (Without revealing my daughters' identities. Please.)
	God has the right to remain silent. For His advocates, however, each resigned shrug is a missed opportunity to win new converts.
	IP Logged