Mansoor: Dissecting your posts sentence by sentence is not dodging

Submitted by Plato (India), Mar 27, 2008 at 13:20

Mansoor you wrote:

>>It is clear from your posts that you are always dodging out when a clear cut reply is made to your and others' questions<<

I take your posts almost sentence by sentence and answer/analyse them. Show me a question I have dodged or lacked clarity. I will try and reply or reframe my answer to make it easier to understand. I have shown in a previous post how you have dodged the question of the Bamiyan statues, the Babri Masjid/Kaaba idlos and the Gujarat riots/Qadianis by maintaining a deafening silence.

>>You are unable to understand the undeniable logics and replies which are best to satisfy somebody who is there to accept the truth.<<

An example of your undeniable logic is to state that Allah has allowed Muhammad to commit atrocities like marrying the widowed Safiya after having her husband killed. Or that.Allah is the ruler of the universe so He can do whatever He likes. Or Muhammad claimed he spoke to Allah and the proof is that it is in the Koran. You are right I am unable to understand this kind of Islamic logic. And don't expect non-Muslims on this forum will understand it.

>>Our beloved Prophet (PBUH) followed Islamic Sharia, most of his marriages were to nullify the ignorant practices prevailed during that period.<<

This is an interesting observation you make. Marrying Aisha at age 6/9 when the Prophet was 53 was to nullify an ignorant practice. This would mean that the pagan custom was to marry off their daughters much later than 6 and to far younger men than doddering old men. You call better matched marriages an ignorant practice?

Was forcibly marrying a teenaged girl after torturing and murdering her husband something that nullified an ignorant practice of the period? We can see the result of the nullification of such ignorant practices in the Muslim world. They are the most backward with the women among them the most downtrodden.

>>His marriages were having solid reasons behind and perfect logics well governed by Allah's law.<<

This means Allah's law allows you marry a six year old girl or a woman after torturing and killing her husband. Allah's laws are so sublime!!

Below I have cut pasted from the extract you have given:

>> For the sake of uniting some prominent Arab tribes who often were at logger heads with each other and to safeguard the internal political status of Islam. The Prophet married A'ishah daughter of Abu Bakr Siddiq (first caliph) from the tribe of Bani….<<

What you are saying is that Allah in order to unite some Arab tribes and to interfere in the politics of the time ordered a 53 year old man to marry a 6 year old girl. Was there no older woman in the tribe of Abu Bakr? Is this the glorious, all-powerful Allah telling lecherous old men that they can marry little girls as their prophet did to unite tribes and play politics? Could Allah with all his powers not have foreseen this situation and given Abu Bakr a much older girl or widowed/divorced daughter for Muhammad to marry and saved hundreds of thousands of innocent little girls the misery of living with old men?

>>…, Safiyah daughter of Huaiy bin Akhtab of the Jewish tribe of Bani an-Nadir… Safiyah was widowed daughter of Huaiy bin Akhtab, one of the chiefs of Jewish tribe of Bani an-Nadir. When the prisoners of this tribe were released by the Muslims, the Prophet married her in order to safeguard her status; and, thus, also linking himself with one of the great Jewish tribes of that time, and paving the way for them to come nearer to Islam]<<

This does not tell us how Safiya was acquired. This little piece also tells us she was a widow without telling us how she came to be widowed. Whoever wrote this piece is patently dishonest. It does not tell us that the prophet had her husband Kinana bin Rabi tortured and killed to extract the location of his tribe's treasure. The brave man refused. Her whole tribe was expelled from Madina. Their land was taken over by the Muslims.

The author of this little piece of propaganda tells us shamelessly that the prophet married her to safeguard her status when prisoners of this tribe were released. Nowhere does he say whether she was given the choice to go back to her tribe and live with its surviving members.

The author does not mention she was a captive and he married her when he saw her beauty and not to preserve her status. Safiya simply had no choice in the matter. If he was so concerned about her status he would not have had her husband tortured and murdered. Mansoor, weep for the tragedy in the life of this Mother of Believers.

The author has the temerity to suggest that by marrying Safiya he was creating a political linkage with the Banu Nadir. He does not inform us that instead of any linkage the Banu Nadir were exiled and their property confiscated. There seems to be no limit to the dishonesty of this Islamic story teller.

>>Umm-Habibah (i.e. Ramla) was daughter of Abu Sufyan of Bani Umayyah who was the bitterest enemy of the …..great distress since she was divorced from her original husband (who had become a Christian in Abyssinia) and her father was a great enemy of Islam. …..

Seeing her deprived of every help from parent and divorced from husband, the Prophet married her in sympathy. This marriage also gave a chance to the people of Bani Umayyah to soften their hearts for Islam. <<

Does it say anywhere in the sira that Abu Sufyan had deprived his daughter of anything for turning Muslim? In fact we read Ibn Ishaq that Abu Sufyan went to his daughter to plead with her husband on behalf of the Quereish and she even refused to let him sit on a carpet which the prophet used. This is a case of a daughter not honouring her own father after becoming a Muslim.

Mansoor, also remember that so-called softening of the hearts of the Bani Umayyah happened when the sword of the prophet was pressed to their necks when he conquered Mecca.

>> Plato, I am there to defend every false allegation and to clear clouds from every maligned heart over here. I am not ready to turn my back on you...Thats my promise<<

Keep your promise and rebut what I have written. Coming back here and saying Allah allowed Muhammad to marry a child or marry a woman after widowing her or that whatever the prophet did can only be holy may be acceptable to Muslims but unbelievers have higher standards than unproven claims to having god's special dispensation. Use the original sira and the four authentic hadith, logic and ethics to convince us that:

1. A 53-year-old man marrying a six-year-old is an enlightened practice.

2. Marrying a girl after torturing and killing her husband almost immediately after the murder was to nullify some ignorant and silly feelings of the people of the jahilia which who would consider such an act abhorrent.

Regards

Plato

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".