One of my longtime blog friends and an expert on the nefarious side of Islam (it is my humble opinion any good side is based on ignorance), posted a comment on my NCCR blog responding to “CAIR-Hitler Angry Kelly File Reports on ‘Honor Diaries’”. In case you didn’t read it I culminated that post with a tongue-in-cheek video of the German high command hosted by Hitler speaking in German and dubbed with English subtitles as if the meeting was a Council on American-Islamic Relations meeting. So enjoy Dajjal’s comment that I am cross posting.
I am giving the comment an arbitrary title.
JRH 4/12/14
*******************************
Let’s Anger CAIR and Offend Muslims by Exposing Them
By Dajjal
Edited by John R. Houk
Let’s piss off CAIR and offend Muslims by exposing them for what they are. They emulate Moe as per QV 33.21. Moe told them something important for them to obey as regards their wives. This text comes from “The Life of Muhammad”, page 651. May the blessing of God be upon all who read it! (OCR does not work well with that book and I cannot see worth a damn, so there may be some typos in this quote. [Blog Editor: I am giving my best guess to the OCR errors])
You have rights over your wives and they have rights over you. You have the right that they should not defile your bed and that they should not behave with open unseemliness. If they do, God allows you to put them in separate rooms and to beat them but not with severity. If they refrain from these things thy have the right to their food and clothing with kindness. Lay injunctions on women kindly, for they are prisoners with you having no control of their persons. You have taken them only as a trust from God, and you have the enjoyment of their persons by the words of God, so understand (this and listen to) my words 0 men, for I have told you.
Wives are prisoners of Muslims, having no control over their persons. Moe said that, not me.
Wikiislam quotes Tabari volume 9, pages 112-113, the last sermon, thusly:
Now then, O people, you have a right over your wives and they have a right over you. You have [the right] that they should not cause anyone of whom you dislike to tread on your beds; and that they should not commit any open indecency. If they do, then Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain from [evil], they have the right to their food and clothing in accordance with the custom. Treat women well, for they are [like] domestic animals with you and do not possess anything for themselves. You have taken them only as a trust from Allah, and you have made the enjoyment of their persons lawful by the word of Allah, so understand and listen Wives are like domestic animals, owning nothing.
Notice that, in both texts, Muslims are allowed to beat their wives, but not severely. Wife beating is explicitly permitted in Surah An-Nisa’ 4:34.
Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allâh has made one of them to excel the other, and because they spend (to support them) from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient (to Allâh and to their husbands), and guard in the husband’s absence what Allâh orders them to guard (e.g. their chastity, their husband’s property, etc.). As to those women on whose part you see ill conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly, if it is useful), but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance). Surely, Allâh is Ever Most High, Most Great.
Note: the “lightly” qualifier is in a parenthetical expression, not in the translation. Get a clue: it ain’t in the Arabic text!
(4:34:29) wa-iḍ’ribūhunna and [finally] strike them.
Of course that says nothing about honoricide, which must surely be a figment of Arabic culture, unrelated to Islam. Yeah, right ;)
I will extract the interesting parts from a long hadith: Sahih Bukhari 6.60.249
[...]Then they both got out of the boat, and while they were walking on the sea shore, Al-Khadir saw a boy playing with other boys. Al-Khadir got hold of the head of that boy and pulled it out with his hands and killed him. Moses said, ‘Have you killed an innocent soul who has killed nobody! Truly, you have done an illegal thing.’ (18.74) He said, “Didn’t I tell you that you can have no patience with me?’ (18.75) [...]
Sahih Bukhari 6.60.250
[...] ‘His parents were believers, and he (the boy) was a non-believer and we (Khadir) feared lest he would oppress them by obstinate rebellion and disbelief.’ (18.80) (i.e. that their love for him would urge them to follow him in his religion, ‘so we (Khadir) desired that their Lord should change him for them for one better in righteousness and near to mercy’ (18:81). This was in reply to Moses’ saying: Have you killed an innocent soul.’? (18.74). ‘Near to mercy” means they will be more merciful to him than they were to the former whom Khadir had killed. Other than Sa’id, said that they were compensated with a girl. Dawud bin Abi ‘Asim said on the authority of more than one that this next child was a girl.
[....]
It is ok to kill a child in hopes Allah will give you one better. And it is not just in the hadith, its in the Koran, too!
18:74. Then they both proceeded, till they met a boy, he (Khidr) killed him. Mûsa (Moses) said: “Have you killed an innocent person who had killed none? Verily, you have committed a thing “Nukra” (a great Munkar – prohibited, evil, dreadful thing)!”
18:80. “And as for the boy, his parents were believers, and we feared lest he should oppress them by rebellion and disbelief.
18:81. “So we intended that their Lord should change him for them for one better in righteousness and near to mercy.
Yeah, right; honoricide is in the Koran & hadith; must be a mistake or misinterpretation. Of ‘cuss. ;) It is confirmed in Shari’ah!! Islamic law says there is no retaliation for offing yer brats. Read it and curse Islam.
Reliance of the Traveller lists, in o1.0, classes of acts not subject to retaliation.
(4) a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring;
(4) a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring;
It is on page 602, look it up.
That leaves FGM; surely that is strictly Arabic culture, having no basis in Islam. Yeah, right. ;)
Sunan Abu Dawud Book 41, Number 5251:
Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah:
Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah:
A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.
Open Reliance of the Traveller to page 77 and get a clue.
e4.3 Circumcision is obligatory (0: for both men and women. For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Ar. bazr) of the clitoris (n: not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert). (A: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)
That is Islamic law; obligatory according to the Shafi’i school of Islamic law.
_____________________________________
© Dajjal
No comments:
Post a Comment