Sorry, it's not a fiction

Submitted by Shaji (United Arab Emirates), May 28, 2009 at 06:15

"I am sure you haven't made any attempt to approach Islam with a clear and unprejudiced mind."
In reply, you wrote - Well then another one of your certainties is truly is misplaced. I have studied Islam - along with many other religions.
It must be difficult for you to accept that a person can study Islam and not find it a panacea for all mankind's ills. But there you have it - people do just that and reach the same conclusion - not because of any perversity of mind but they use their God-given intelligence to discern the truth. They separate the wheat from the chaff so to speak.

I understand why you might doggedly adhere to your worldview as you most probably have been brought up in an Islamic monoculture where the Muslim way of life and beliefs hold sway. You're part of the status quo.

Nice to know you made attempt to study about Islam and other religions. I find difficult to accept your comprehension but certainly no problem to pursue. It depends how the person conceive principle of faith. I can only remind you a verse from Qur'an 30:8 – "Do they not reflect in their own minds? Not but for just ends and for a term appointed, did Allah create the heavens and the earth, and all between them: yet are there truly many among men who deny the meeting with their Lord (at the Resurrection)!"

I am not entirely brought up in Islamic monoculture. I had my schooling in a Christian convent. I too a student of comparative religion especially the three major religions of world. As far as I understood I do discussion here and Islam is my choice and not just a chance. I would like to know what you found not acceptable in Islam and other religions better than it. Once again, it's only due to curiosity about your understanding and if you don't wish to write, you may ignore.

"Actually I don't have to rationalize my belief to remain Muslim and to convey the message of Islam. "
In reply, you wrote - Of course you do. But you're so steeped in your cultural millieu that you no longer have to rationalize the absurd. Your superstitions have become real for you - it's now 'reality'. You have your won perfectly good reasons for stepping into the toilet with your left foot and exiting with your right , shaving your pubic hair etc etc

Not certainly all. For example, Allah asks to believe in Unseen God (Qur'an 2:3). I believe it readily because I don't have to know each and every whereabouts except what God mentioned in Qur'an (Chapter 112). The culture I belong is not a problem for me, what I am concerned is how that culture is shaped to follow Qur'an and Hadith. It's not a superstition. It gives a perfect moral code of Conduct which itself claims that it is from God. By the way, some is beyond our imagination and knowledge, like hereafter life - heaven and hell, which we have to believe as it is, once we find rest of the Qur'an is truth.

Stepping in to toilet with left foot and coming out with right foot, also shaving pubic hair every 40 days is part of following Sunnah of Prophet (peace be upon him). These entire one has to do only when he himself realize Islam is the true religion believing in One and Only God, pray only to Him and follow the path of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). But the question is, whether one is convinced with religion of Islam and ready to follow God's Commandments or not….??. Most people whether they are believer or not, use right hand to eat food and use left hand for cleaning purpose in toilet. If people not concerned about the logic behind that, Muslims follow such simple deeds from Prophet as he is the messenger of God.

"................It is already clarified by Qur'an and Sunnah through Prophet (peace be upon him). I am only trying to remove the misconceptions about this religion. It is the most misunderstood religion today. ."

In reply, you wrote - As Christ said - 'ye shall know them by their fruits'. i.e. what actually matters is not what people believe but what they do and how they are in their own being. Islam is not misunderstood by non-Muslims - although the idealised version of it you believe in may not be appreciated. Having said that It is good that you live your life by ideals - as long as those ideals don't infringe on other people. However - those ideals are universal and certainly not unique to Islam.

It matters what people believe. Islam says making partners for God is biggest sin (Qur'an 4:48). Though other religions have certain remarks of it, there are comments contrary to that also and its followers are not keen to be strictly monotheistic. So belief is a matter.

No Sir, there are deliberate attempts of maligning Islam on corporate levels. Media and vested interests of globalization are playing major role in attacking Islam. Media is their weapon in this century to attack Islam. The reason, Islam is against all exploitations of today's world of business and marketing. Islam is against alcohol, prostitution, lottery, exposing nudity, marketing with no ethics and all other exploitations widely chosen by the media. They took up the "great freedom struggle" in order to save Muslims from "Islamic oppression". This is a great deception tactic and they do all efforts to misunderstand the public about Islam.

Certainly ideals put forward by Islam are unique. Take for example, according to the Gospel of John, the first miracle of Christ had been that he had produced wine at a marriage function in Cana (John 2:1-11) and people had drunk too much from it. The same Bible in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 says – "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders, nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.". Also see Proverbs 20:1 - "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging; and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." Again see Ephesians 5;18 - "And be not drunk with wine."

So how prohibition of drinking is unique here….??. The same bible is giving the permission and prohibition.

It is mentioned in Yajurveda 40:9 - "Andhatma pravishanti ye assambhuti mupaste" - "They enter darkness, those who worship natural things." - E.g. worship of natural elements air, water, fire, etc.

Again, Yajurveda 32:3 says - "Na tasya pratima asti" - "There is no image of Him".

But, hardly you find Hindus (as believers) now without worshipping natural elements and making image for God.

Whereas Islam strictly resist such innovations and instruct followers to abide with its principles.

"...It has been maliciously presented in order to keep public away from true principles and in fact, it is the religion taught by all the Prophets (peace be upon them all), that is towards ONE GOD and worship HIM ALONE"
In reply, you wrote - There you go, stating opinions for facts. Bad move. I know it is certainly not the religion taught by all the prophets. All the prophets and spiritual masters mission was to awaken human beings to their true inner potential - the Kingdom of Heaven within, higher spiritual consciousness or whatever you want to call it. Masters and prophets through the ages were connected with this universal consciousness. call it Original Nature, Buddha nature, the real Self or any of the many and varied terms from so many traditions - it all points to the same thing. If you don't recognise or experience the divine within - your belief and worship of an external deity, following rites and rituals is a waste of time. The truth is within each person. It is not 'Islam' - it is beyond words and myth and rites and rituals and beliefs and limitations - and verbal descriptions don't really do it justice. It is the true nature of consciousness itself.

No, it's not my opinion. Read following verses in Qur'an.

Qur'an 2:213 – "Mankind was one single nation, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed…"

Qur'an 21:25 – "Not an apostle did We send before thee without this inspiration sent by Us to him: that there is no god but I; therefore worship and serve Me".

Qur'an 10:47 - To every people (was sent) an apostle: when their apostle comes (before them), the matter will be judged between them with justice, and they will not be wronged.

I hope it is clear from above verses that all the prophets taught the same message (as per Qur'an).

Then you said, all prophets and spiritual masters mission was to awaken human beings to their true inner potential. What is that inner potential….??. Then you said, "Masters and prophets through the ages were connected with this universal consciousness". Once again, what is that universal consciousness…??. Is that God…??. Finally you end with, "It is the true nature of consciousness itself." So, do you say God is within one's self……??. Also, do you say, the Creator and creation are same….??. I will reply you as per your response.

If my understanding is correct, you speak about Advaita philosophy, isn't it?.

"The problem you face, and all other critics of Islam do, is to interpret Qur'an and authentic Sunnah according to their own wish."
In reply, you wrote - I do not face a problem at all for having looked at the past and continuing effect of Islam on societies - why are you suggesting it is a problem? I do not have a 'wish' to interpret it one way or another. I interpret it as I do. But then again, I am not myopically focussing on it , hoping for it bring some great revelation to me. I have better things to do.

I suggest it's a problem, because people misinterpret Qur'an for both personal and corporate benefits especially Christian apologists and some influential western political and business interests. Now the world order is deciding by them, others simply follow their suit. There are rules regarding Qur'an interpretation. There is a science of Interpretation of the Holy Qur'an, known as Usul-e-Tafseer.

The knowledge of Tafseer was given to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and it was described through him in Qur'an 16:44 - "And We have also sent down unto you (Muhammad, peace be upon him) the reminder and the advice (the Qur'an), that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought."

This verse tells us - The correct interpretation of the Qur'an is actually what described by the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself.

This means that the meaning of a particular verse cannot be circumscribed by one's own thoughts; it should be in the light of the Prophet's (peace be upon him) sayings.

So, to understand a verse, we should first take into account all the verses related to that matter from Qur'an itself. Then, we must search the Prophet's (peace be upon him) traditions/sayings/actions (Hadith). Then, the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all) were the experts and their sayings must be taken into account. Rest few points are also to be considered as it is not relevant to mention here. Those who do not follow these essentials, actually misleading the public in conveying the truth of Islam.

It's a revelation from God and Qur'an says in 17:9 – "Verily this Qur'an doth guide to that which is most right (or stable), and giveth the Glad Tidings to the Believers who work deeds of righteousness, that they shall have a magnificent reward";

No problem, for you to do better things. When it comes to criticize other faiths especially Islam, it is recommended to follow the rules when interpreting Qur'an.

"...As usual like those critics, this is evident from you also."
In reply, you wrote - If I had agreed with Islam and its followers - you would say I was wise but I would say I was a sheep. What you're basically saying is I have arrived at my own conclusions about Islam through my own reasoning and observations - rather than blindly accepting positive (or negative) opinions of other people. I agree.

You are free to reach your own conclusions but I advise you to go through Qur'an again. You may discuss unacceptable points you find in it, if you are a critic. It is up to you to believe or discard. I only invite your attention once again towards it. Qur'an 18:29 says - "Then whosoever wills, let him believe, and whosoever wills, let him disbelieve……."

Qur'an has the answer about the final result. It says in 17:81 - And say: "Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish."

I am being a Muslim, intend only to remind you. Rest nothing is with me.

"One must understand Islam from Qur'an and Sunnah. "

In reply, you wrote - One mustn't do anything. The Quran and Sunnah have made Islam what it is today - a confused religion practised in a large part by large numbers backward peasants intent on recreating their 7th centruy Arabian myth by whatever means it takes. including blowing up buildings, trains, planes and automobiles to force the hand of 'infidels'. These people have no real insight or appreciation of the worth of their own lives and indeed some will even die in order to kill other human beings in , so hypnotised have they become in their belief in their myth.

If one mustn't do anything, why critics are working against Islam….??. Your criticisms are result of their activity. Yes, Qur'an and Sunnah have made Islam what is today and Islam is still perfect. Islam is very well able to answer to those who want to attack it.

It's a religion of peace and practiced not only by peasants but also the richest among people and the royals. According to west, when Islam started blowing up buildings and started using "terrorism" in Islam….??. It is after the cold war. The profiling of Muslims as congenital 'terrorists' has been such a cleverly done psychological operation that although proven several times as plain lie, the Muslim terrorist image has been made the basis of American and western foreign policy. Before cold war, Islam did not have terrorist image though America wanted to protect the interest of Israel. Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussain once dears of America, suddenly branded as terrorists. When IRA violence was at its height in Northern Ireland and Britain in the 1970s and 1980s, no one spoke of Christian terrorists. The ETA bombing campaign in northern Spain is not labeled Catholic. When Prabhakaran killed people for more than 25 years, no one called him as Hindu terrorist. If some Muslim does any mischief somewhere, he is branded as terrorist and that too, a proof for Islam promoting violence…..!!!!. Those who crave for political heights without sense of ethics also forget the death toll of World wars and they also criticize Islam being terror…..!!!!. How long these deceptions continue…..??.

Let us see how the labeling is done and who assign the label. Before India achieved independence from British rule, some freedom fighters of India who did not subscribe to non-violence were labeled as terrorists by the British government. The same individuals have been lauded by Indians for the same activities and hailed as patriots'. Thus two different labels have been given to the same people for the same set of actions. One is calling him a terrorist while the other is calling him a patriot. Those who believed that Britain had a right to rule over India called these people terrorists, while those who were of the view that Britain had no right to rule India called them patriots and freedom fighters. Don't you feel important that before a person is judged, he is given a fair hearing…..??. Both sides of the argument should be heard, the situation should be analyzed, and the reason and the intention of the person should be taken into account, and then the person can be judged accordingly.

Islam did not hypnotize anyone and it's not a mistake of Qur'an if anybody understood it wrongly. Campaign against Islam is widespread because it stand firm against all exploitation.

"The best teacher and interpreter of both was Prophet (peace be upon him) himself. "
In reply, you wrote - You are adept at making value judgements not based on fact and which can never be proved empirically.

You haven't mentioned the fact still and with what proof you intend to prove…..??. My adaptation is nothing but Qur'an and Sunnah and judgments also based on that. I don't have to make it empirical, it's already defined and the query remains whether the critic ready to ponder over truth of Islam or not…..??.

"His followers learnt Islam from him and spread to the whole world."

In reply, you wrote - Islam was not spread to the whole world. For a long time it remained in a very localised region - the Middle east. It was spread through North Africa by what we would call today terrorism and the reason it took off in the East Indies was because the natives there at that time were a collection of primitive tribes (some headhunters) met arab traders and saw that they were fair in their dealings - they used weights and measures and the abacus. So it was a form of assimilation by interaction with a superior culture.

You take any religion, it remain localized to the nation it originated. Then it starts spreading by its followers. You did not explain its spread through North Africa by terrorism. Which war or attack happened there to have Muslim population of over 40% in Africa…??. Islam is spread there mainly through trade and migration. You are right; Islam took off in the East Indies "was a form of assimilation by interaction with a superior culture". But what culture, I don't think it is due to superior culture of Arabs but because of Islam, which made them culture from cultureless.

" We living in many centuries later, must understand Islam how those righteous predecessors (called Salaf, pious followers till 3rd generation, as certified by Prophet) understood and followed it."
In reply, you wrote - Again - we 'must' do nothing. You 'must' do nothing as well - though you will follow the dictates of your beliefs.

Nobody is sitting idle here. Propagation of faith in what they believe is everybody's right. Only thing it should be done through lawful means.

" Without knowing the background of instructions of Prophet (peace be upon him) and how it is practiced by these predecessors, present-day critics do grave mistake with their own "misinterpretations" to attain their wicked benefits. "

In reply, you wrote - What 'wicked benefits' do people who make objective calls on 'the background of instructions of Prophet' ? There is no mistake at all. The real mistake is to blindly accept it.

Wicked benefits are many. It has political, social and religious objectives. In brief, politically for "oil" and wealth of Arabs, socially it is to prove dominance of west over others (as per "Clash of Civilizations") and religiously to suppress Islam as it is against all exploitations.

Islam is not asking people to blindly accept it. If it is to accept blind, why Qur'an asks to preach and argue with people in most beautiful manner (16:125)……??. If Islam has nothing to defend and only blind belief, how it becomes the fastest growing religion in the world, even today….??.

You wrote mistake in blind belief. Which belief you have, that is acceptable without being blind….??.

"Their intention and purpose is to malign and nothing else."
In reply, you wrote - I probably believed in Santa Claus until I was 4 or so. Most adults don't believe in Santa Claus now and most don't malign Santa Claus and are quite happy for kids down the street to believe - and maybe even their own children. But if the kids down the street started taking over my house and threatened its occupants with harm because they don't believe in Santa Claus - then of course there's going to be a reaction.
From the childrens point of view - it would be seen as malicious wouldn't it?

No child will cause harm for occupants of your house if you don't believe in Santa Claus. You yourself know that is not going to happen, so as Islam. Qur'an says in 2:256, "Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things".

Further in Qur'an 18:29 says - "Then whosoever wills, let him believe, and whosoever wills, let him disbelieve……."

But Allah also says in Qur'an 3:19 – "The Religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His Will):……"

If you have made a serious study about Islam with a clear and open mind and find not acceptable, it is up to you….

I can only reply you quoting another verse from Qur'an 88:21-22 – "Therefore do remind, for you are only a reminder. You are not a watcher over them;"

" Regarding "camel's urine", I already clarified, it was proposed by prophet to certain people that time for some illness and those people got cured through that......."

In reply, you wrote - Well, you can continue drinking it . There may be commercial possibilities there for you - perhaps carbonate it and sell it in soda cans.

How you suddenly jumped to convey Muslims still drinking camel's urine (and you referred to me)……??. While you answer, you completely ignored my words, "to certain people that time for some illness and those people got cured through that". Now I will tell you people as their belief still drinking cow's urine. In Ayurveda it is said - gavyam pavitram ca rasayanam ca pathyam ca hrdyam balam buddhi syata (Cow urine panchgavya is great elixir, proper diet, pleasing to heart, giver of mental and physical strength, enhances longevity). Cow's urine is one excertment of the Pancha Gau Amrit (Five Cow Nectar). It plays major part in Hinduism practice used in Yajur Veda for Ark as medicine.

Vyasa said: Cows are sacred. They are embodiments of merit. They are high and most efficacious cleansers of all. One should for three days drink the hot urine of the cow. For the next three days one should drink the hot milk of the cow. Having thus drunk for three days hot milk, one should next drink hot ghee for three days. Having in this way drunk hot ghee for three days, one should subsist for the next three days on air only.

Vasishtha said: By bathing in water mixed with cow-dung, people shall become sanctified. The deities and men, shall use cow-dung for the purpose of purifying all creatures mobile and immobile. One can sit on dried cow dung. One should never eat the flesh of cows.

Yes, commercial possibilities there for Cows urine – read http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/food_and_drink/article5707554.ece

Yes, the promoters suggest it can be used as soft drink also (read the above link).

I haven't heard any such attempt somebody has done with Camel urine.

Prophet (peace be upon him) never said one has to take drink camel's urine during thirst. Those who deliberately want to misinterpret they continue their usual scheme of tarnishing the Prophet (peace be upon him).

"....Also remember, science and understandings of today may change tomorrow and who knows new discoveries will not be made on what you find "unacceptable" today."
In reply, you wrote - Science is just a record of observations and making hypothesis on those opbservations. The underlying principles in the narural world remain constant. Water will continue to quench people's thirst in 5,000 years time.

I agree…..

"Regarding Prophet's (peace be upon him) marriage with Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her), "
In reply, you wrote - Mohammed must have been pleased with her - so that's the same thing.

Of course, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) definitely pleased with her, so as she to him.

"I tried to clarify with culture in Semitic traditions, wisdom behind that marriage and with age factor in small detail"
In reply, you wrote - semitic traditions have reduced its adherents to the squalor most of them currently live in - there is nothing wise about it.

Abrahamic religion comprises more than half of the total world population. They continue to grow. Not just those, in view of early marriage, see what Hindu beliefs have to say.

In Manu-smriti, we read: Gautama (18-21).— A girl should be given in marriage before puberty.

Vashistha (17.70).— Out of fear of the appearance of the menses, let the father marry his daughter while she still runs about naked. For if she stays in the home after the age of puberty, sin falls on the father.

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics says: [It was considered] sinful on the part of the [Hindu] father to allow his daughter to attain puberty without being married and the girl herself fell to the condition of a Sudra [i.e. low caste], marriage with whom involved degradation on the part of the husband…the Smrti of Manu fixes the age of husband and wife at 30 and 12 or 24 and 8 respectively; the later work of Brhaspati and the didactic portion of the Mahabharata give the wife's age in these cases as 10 and 7 respectively, while yet later texts give 4 to 6 as the lower and 8 as the upper limit. There is abundant evidence that these dates were not merely theoretical.

(Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, p.450, http://books.google.com/books?id=INJI4FGeLpYC&pg=PA523&lpg=PA523&dq =manu+ix+a+girl+should+be+given+in+marriage+before+puberty&source=web &ots=7WP3uyXj9V&sig=HN-O7gG0ya_0QTuwCvEUjGPQG_Y#PPA522,M1)

Let us see what science has to say. LiveScience.com says:

There is a range, and this has been part of the problem of establishing the "normal" age of puberty. Girls might enter full-blown puberty anytime between ages 9 and 15.

(LiveScience.com, http://www.livescience.com/health/070904_bad_puberty.html)

So, girls will go through "full-blown puberty" at various ages, anywhere from between nine and fifteen years of age. HealthTouch.com says:

Puberty usually starts between ages 8 to 13 in girls (HealthTouch.com, http://www.healthtouch.com/bin/EContent_HT/cnoteShowLfts.asp?fname=07103

&title=PUBERTY+IN+GIRLS+&cid=HTHLTH)

Even if we look simply at menarche, we can see that the age varies greatly. A medical journal on Cambridge.org says:

The variable age at menarche was normally distributed with an age range of 7–24

years.

(Cambridge.org, journals.cambridge.org/production/action/cjoGetFulltext?fulltextid=10260

HerWord.com says:

Don't be surprised if your nine-year-old daughter will have her menarche that early.

(HerWord.com, http://www.herword.com/healthdesk/others/changes10.28.03.html)

"....It seems you are not convinced and you don't want to ponder over the traditions. "

In reply, you wrote - Yes, I certainly am not convinced and despite your best efforts will never be convinced that a nine year old girl should be having sexual relations with a 53 year old man.

If the facts cannot convince you, let you live with your thoughts…..

"You are more inclined with Freudian thoughts."
In reply, you wrote - Another assumption but if Freud said child sex wasn't a good thing then you are right. I am inclined to the view that sex with a child is based not on the needs of the child. I suppose pedophiles think their victims 'need' it - but it is purely their own lust , lack of self control and the thoughts of their evil minds that let this occur. There is no justification for it and certainly no tolerance for it in the minds of reasonable people - no matter how much you'd like it to be otherwise. It is sick behaviour.

You decide a thing, good or bad based on what you feel and not on facts. Then I have nothing to say.

If you allege Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) was the victim, she narrated about 2210 Hadiths and out of which 316 Hadiths are mentioned in both Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. Can you point out a single Hadith from her, alleging she was a of pedophile?. Not just that, all what was said in scriptures (both Semitic and non-Semitic) and the people followed it and those who made scientific observations (which I quoted) all happens to be, in your words, either pedophile or supporting pedophiles. Once again in your words, all those have "sick behavior".

"See an article entitled Puberty in Girls (http://www.public.health.wa.gov.au/hp2107.htm) by your own country (Australian government Public Health organization), says:
The first sign of puberty is usually a surge of growth: you become taller; your breasts develop; hair begins to grow in the pubic area and under the arms. This may start from 10 years to 14 years - even earlier for some and later for others.This completely refutes your argument that there is no maturity difference among different people."

In reply, you wrote - Not at all. The point I was making was not that different individuals do not physically mature at different rates - it is ridiculous to think that that was the assertion I was making. The point I made was that racial groups do not mature at an earlier rate than others. Precocious puberty occurs in all racial groups for individuals but Arabs as a group do not mature earlier than Chinese for example - or South Americans. Yet child sex is considered completely wrong in those cultures by right thinking people and this is reflected in their laws. And my assertion that a 9 year old girl is not ready physically or emotionally or mentally for sexual relations with a middle aged man for still stands, let alone having a child at that age.

Before coming to maturity difference in Arabia, China or South America, do you agree Australian Government public health organization's comment that puberty starts from 10-14 years…??.

Now I take your comment, "Precocious puberty occurs in all racial groups for individuals but Arabs as a group do not mature earlier than Chinese for example - or South Americans."

Read first what The book Women and Health Psychology says:

Many factors have been reported to affect age at menarche and/or the regularity of menstruation—[such as] climate, altitude, race, height, weight, hereditary, stress/psychological factors, light, and nutrition.

(Women and Health Psychology, http://books.google.com/books?id=pK9RGVrvQAEC&pg=PA74&lpg=PA74&dq =menarche+climate&source=web&ots=ILfZwgFzEO&sig=8ZZxn7Dvhzm2HH3

cQTBh9_K-mss#PPP1,M1)

This phenomenon is not limited to menarche, but also applies to the whole of puberty. In the book Women: An Historical, Gynecological, and Anthropological Compendium, we read: The average temperature of the country or province is considered the chief factor here, not only with regard to menstruation but as regards the whole of sexual development at puberty.

(Herman H. Ploss, Max Bartels and Paul Bartels; Woman: An Historical, Gynecological, and Anthropological Compendium, Volume I, Lord & Bransby, 1988, p.563; http://www.biblioz.com/lp25762280577_207.html)

Therefore, it is not at all implausible that the average age was much younger in Arabia one thousand years ago. There is absolutely no way that anyone can disprove the idea that puberty began much earlier back then, since it is known that the average age fluctuates from one time to the other. In fact, the historical evidence supports our claim that the average age of puberty was much younger during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

The historical literature does indeed suggest that the average age of puberty was much younger in Eastern countries. The Cambridge World History of Food says:

Albrecht von Haller (1775), for example, claimed that girls in the southerly regions of Asia, where the climate was warm, were marriageable in their eighth year and gave birth in their ninth or tenth year; conversely, women in Arctic regions did not menstruate until age 23 or 24. This view was shared by other eighteenth-century writers, most notably J.F. Freind (1738), Herman Boerhaave (1744), and Montesquieu (1751).

(The Cambridge World History of Food, p.1455, http://books.google.com/books?id=tAnsCn0A3rcC&pg=PA1455&lpg=PA1455&

dq=average+age+of+puberty+climate&source=web&ots=MQwdFaB1iY&sig=G64

wJ-pPjE3b0hrx8KYYNRKTuVxE#PPA1454,M1)

It is generally accepted that historically girls in Eastern civilizations reached puberty before their European counterparts, which was one of the reasons that marriage oftentimes took place a few years earlier in the Orient. The Southern Medical and Surgical Journal says:

It is allowable to infer that early marriage in oriental countries (which has generally, but without any proof, been ascribed to precocious puberty) ....

(The Southern Medical and Surgical Journal, p.41, http://books.google.com/books?id=QpwCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA41&lpg=PA41&

dq=russia+puberty+marriage&source=web&ots=8yfAFiQxuK&sig=6Z4em89heF tlZG_Zyjf_ar5GE8s)

Age of Sexual Maturity in Ancient Arabia: Imam al-Shafi'i said in Siyar A'lam al-Nubala' (Vol.10, p.91):

During my stay in Yemen, I have come across girls at the age of nine whom menstruated…

Imam al-Bayhaqi also narrated the words of Imam Shafi'i in Sunan al-Bayhaqi al-Kubra (Vol.1, p.319):

I have seen in the city of Sana'a a grandmother while she was twenty-one. She menstruated at the age of nine and gave birth at the age of ten.

Ibn al-Jawzi narrated similar stories from Ibn U'qail and U'bad al-Mahlby in his Tahqeeq fi Ahadith al-Khilaf (Vol.2, p.267). So the fact is that girls were sexually active at the age of nine, and they were turning into grandmothers before most people alive today would have their own children! Therefore, because this was the cultural norm back then, no blame can be put on Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). It is unacceptable to judge an ancient figure based on today's standards; we must judge him based on what was the norm back then.

Now see, Age of Marriage Under Islamic Law:

Islamic Law (Shari'ah) allows for a marriage contract (nikah) to be drafted years before the marriage itself is actually enacted. In other words, the marriage contract is drawn up, but the contract is not executed until a later date. So even though the marriage contract can be drafted, the girl will not be "handed over" to the husband until many years afterwards. In other words, a father can marry his immature daughter off to a man before she comes of age, but the husband may not consummate the marriage until after she attains maturity.

Under Islamic Law, there are certain shuroot an-nifaadh (conditions required for the execution of the contract): for consummation of marriage, one of these conditions is that both parties are mature enough for marriage. If this condition is not met, then the marriage contract remains mauqoof (suspended) and has no actual practical effect, i.e. the consummation of marriage is delayed until the girl becomes mature enough for that. In the example of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her), the marriage contract was signed when she was immature, but only took effect until after she attained maturity. This is why Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) remained in her father's house for three years after the marriage contract was drafted.

The fact that it is permissible to marry a young girl does not mean that it is permissible to have intercourse with her; rather that should not be done until she is able for it. For this reason, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah) delayed the consummation of his marriage to 'Aa'ishah…Al-Dawoodi said: 'Aa'ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) had reached physical maturity (at the time when her marriage was consummated). [Sharh Muslim, 9/206] (source: http://www.islamqa.com/index.php?ref=22442&ln=eng)

"And as you acknowledge the relevancy of the source of the quote (Australian government Public Health organization) you can bet your last dinar that the Australian Government proscribes child sex in all cases.
An article Physical Changes in Girls During Puberty (http://www.chmc.org/aboutchi/infoline/girls.htm) has this to say:
"During puberty, a girl's body changes, inside and out, into the body of a woman. The changes don't come all at once, and they don't happen at the same time for everybody. Most girls start showing physical changes around age 11, but everyone has her own internal schedule for development. It's normal for changes to start as early as 8 or 9 years of age, or not until 13 or 14. Even if nothing looks or feels different yet, the changes may have already begun inside your body."

In reply, you wrote - You seem to be a little obsessed with this. We learn this in sex education in late primary school. It really doesn't need to be repeated.

This is the problem. You completely rely on what you studied recently and never look back the facts of yesterday. If your primary school curriculum ignores the above facts in educating you, the problem is not with Prophet (peace be upon him) or the texts which do not support your claim.

I told you, my obsession is to protect and convey Qur'an and authentic Sunnah, which I believe is the truth. My intention is to convey you the message. When I say this, when you single out certain issues, I have to be obsessed to clarify that. Again it is your choice, whether to accept or not. Even after conveying, defending and convincing the truth, some people "obsessed" in maligning the Prophet (peace be upon him) ignoring the evidences around them.

"Many will readily agree with the information above, but still might harbour reservations about whether a marriage to an older man could be happy for such a young girl. "

In reply, you wrote - Yes, I think they just might. Strange , isn't t?

Let them be…..but strange with some others hesitancy…..

"The marriage of Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) and the Prophet (peace be upon him) was a mutually happy and loving one as in expressed in numerous Hadith and biography books. That happy marriages occur between people with a fairly large difference in ages is known among psychologists (from Theodor H. Vandevelde, Ideal Marriage: Its Physiology and Technique, Greenwood Publishing Group, 1980, p. 243.):
When the differences (in ages) is great, e.g. exceeds fifteen to twenty years, the results may be happier. "

In reply, you wrote - People with deviant sexualty have a plethora of excuses to justify their behaviour.

Deviant is who…..one who hides or not ready to accept the facts….??.

"The marriage of an elderly (senescent) not, of course, an old (senile) man to a quite young girl, is often very successful and harmonious. The bride is immediately introduced and accustomed to moderate sexual intercourse."
In reply, you wrote - I'm sure Mr. Theodor H. Vandevelde's opinions are taken on board by rock spiders everywhere and even used by defence lawyers at their trials.

Used wherever it is necessary…..

"This topic can be explained in further detail. I will do it as per your response."
In reply, you wrote - I won't ask.

To me, or to here in this forum or elsewhere…??. I am glad if you said it with clear mind.

"Regarding Comforter, followers of many religions have their own way of proving their belief. But let us analyze the scriptures to get the truth. If others are able to explain with the base of scriptures, we must evaluate how true is their arguments. I explained in detail about Muslim argument about the "comforter" in my reply to Mr. Lactantius Jr., http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/152892. Hope you will read it.

In reply, you wrote - Actually, rather than concentrating on trying to propogate yet another myth - that Mohammed was the 'Comforter' - I think it would be better if you read the interpretation of the many Biblical references to the 'False Prophet'.

It is not myth; debate is still there on this topic. Let me take your advice, to look upon bible references of False prophet.

This is what Bible says, Matthew 24:10-11 – "And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many". Then, in 23-26 – "Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not".

Above is the quoting from Bible about false prophet. Now see the verse 5 from the same book which is the starting of this prophecy "For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many" –

Did Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon Him) ever say he is Christ…..??. The beginning part of that prophecy itself is not matching, then how one can allege Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is false prophet….??. Also, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) brought the Arabs united and not hate one another. Many Christians that time believed in him, even Jews. Were they betrayed or hated one another….??. Definitely, No…..

"Mr. GIK, keep in mind, social practices and its acceptability is different among people even in the same country itself. Then how you compare such differences between nations…??. Right and wrong among such practices depends on religion, traditions and many other factors. That's why Islam speaks about God in providing guidance to mankind, wherever you are, irrespective of your cast, color, race, tribe or nation, you must follow God's divine guidance. This is what Qur'an says in 49:13 – "O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things)".

In reply, you wrote - So, seeing that all cultures are different and that ' Right and wrong among such practices depends on religion, traditions and many other factors' - to make it clear to humanity the 'divine guidance' from the external 'Allah' is that child sex is OK?

If marriage at puberty is not OK, all the references I had given, including the beliefs from major world religion must be not OK and only you and circle around you are only….OK…..??.

"Whether Islam is supreme or not, Qur'an has the answer. It says in 9:33 – "It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it)."

In reply, you wrote - That's like saying to see if 'National Socialism' is supreme - read Mein Kampf. It's hardly objective or an unbiased opinion is it? In fact it is completely subjective for those who believe it. And those who don't because of what they objectively see with their own eyes and appreciate with their minds - are categorised as 'foolish unbelievers' by the deluded.

I don't think Mein Kempf is involved as debatable topic as strong as world religions. Qur'an is not instructing you to believe in it, by force. In fact, it says in 2:256 – "No compulsion in religion". It is Quran's method to challenge because it proclaims it's the revelation from Creator. That's why Muslims, as part of their Daawa sit with others to convince them. Prophet Muhammad was a warner too. Qur'an 18:29 says - Say, "The truth is from your Lord": Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it): for the wrong-doers We have prepared a Fire whose (smoke and flames), like the walls and roof of a tent, will hem them in: if they implore relief they will be granted water like melted brass, that will scald their faces, how dreadful the drink! How uncomfortable a couch to recline on!

Whether you agree or not, this is a warning from Qur'an. If the Mein Kempf has the similar challenges and you find that acceptable, you may go with it.

"...My friend, I would request you to go through Qur'an. You will find hereafter life is a reality. "
In reply, you wrote - All religions say the soul goes on after physical death - so what's new? Not all religions mention 72 virgins, everlasting wine, green cushions etc etc

New is, about the life in hereafter. That is, the permanent residence in heaven or hell. Qur'an speaks about success in hereafter life require strictly to be monotheistic. Qur'an 40:60 says – "And your Lord says: "Call on Me; I will answer your (Prayer): but those who are too arrogant to serve Me will surely find themselves in Hell - in humiliation!".

Do you consider one has to worship One and Only God to achieve heaven in hereafter….??. Before that, do you believe in heaven or hell…..??.

I will quote you verse from Atharva Veda and see whether this Veda speaks about hereafter life.

"Bereft of physical bodies, pure, cleansed with the wind, brilliant, they go to a brilliant world. The fire does not cause burning in their male organ. In the world of happiness they get plenty of women.

(Atharva Veda 4:34:2)

"Having pools of clarified butter, stocks of sweet honey, and having exhilarating drinks for water, full of milk and curds, may all these streams flow to us in the world of happiness swelling sweetly. May our lakes full of lotuses be situated near us."

(Atharva Veda 4:34:6)

Now see what Jewish Talmud have to say - "Garden on Eden has two gates of ruby, by which stand SIXTY varieties of pure servants. The luster of the face of each of them glistens like the splendor of the firmament. When a righteous man arrives, they remove his clothes in which he had been buried.." (Yalkut Shimoni, Bereshit 20)

Christians believe that we will be like "spirits" or "Angels" in Heaven without physical bodies. They believe that once a "Christian" dies, then he/she will go and live with GOD Almighty as a spirit in Heaven:

Matthew 22:29-30 - Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.

Obviously this contradicts the very teachings of their very own Bible about Adam and Eve having physical bodies in Heaven and that they had sex (they were a husband and wife).

"It is duty of every Muslim to convey the truth. "
Qur'aan says in 16:125 – "Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance."

In reply, you wrote - You automatically make the mistake of assuming that anyone who does not follow Islam is not on the 'true path'. That is an extremely conceited attitude to have. Are you more enlightened than all Buddhist monks or all yogis or all Christian or Jewish mystics for example? If you are not - then they know something that you do not - and you have something to learn or more to the point - unlearn.

Obviously, I am a Muslim because I realize that Islam is 100% right. I don't insult other beliefs but I do discussion with them to convey the truth of Islam and they can either believe or disbelieve, it is up to them. Islam does not force anybody to believe in it and it's not insulting anyone. It has always responded to criticisms against it and others have the freedom to choose or discard according to how they convinced. Islam definitely says other faiths are wrong, not to insult them but to save them in the life hereafter and due course it has to explain the deviation in other faiths. Others misinterpret it as "compulsion".

My enlightenment is Islam and Qur'an is the only scripture (I know) which claims revealed from God. The Holy Qur'an repeatedly makes clear that it is Divine.

Qur'an 32:2 - "(This is) the revelation of the Book in which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the Worlds."

Qur'an 26:192 - "Verily this is a Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds"

Qur'an 36:5 - "(It is a Revelation) sent down by (Him), the Exalted in Might, Most Merciful"

If you say, one has to learn from Buddhist monks and yogis, Christian or Jewish mystics which I do not know and then only to reach truth, Qur'an answers for this comment in 3:136 - "Say : We believe in Allah and what is revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and what was entrusted to Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord."

So, God has sent Prophets to every nation and we do not know their names and activities except a few. Essentially they all invited their people to worship One and Only God. Afterwards, people among them followed their vain desires and made alterations in belief. Read what Qur'an has to say about this in 5:48 – "To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah. it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute;"

"If Allah wishes, you will reach the truth."
In reply, you wrote - The 'truth' is an inner experience - and one you are unaware of.

Yes, truth is inner experience and that is nothing but God consciousness. But how to achieve that consciousness…??. Major religions existing today have different views about this consciousness. All religions basically exhort mankind to be righteous and eschew evil. But Islam goes beyond that. It guides us towards practical ways of achieving righteousness and eliminating evil from our individual and collective lives unless people don't misinterpret according to their personal benefits. So Islam just not theoretically speaks and lie in the texts but shows practical ways to achieve righteousness.

"...May Allah helps to understand and follow the truth (Amen)."
In reply, you wrote - Allah' has - and that's why I am not and never will be a Muslim.

Thanks to agree Allah has. Rest is your willingness and I don't know whether Allah enlightens you with "Hidaya" (guidance) or not.

Therefore I repeat, may Allah helps us to understand and follow the truth (Ameen).

Shaji

---

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".