Is Muhammad a true Prophet? - On the topic of "Sexual Immorality":

In this article, I will insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing) respond to Sam Shamoun's points regarding sexual morality and clarify his misunderstanding regarding Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, being sexually immoral.

Note:  This is the beginning of a series of rebuttals to Sam Shamoun's final false strong holds against Islam.  Insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing), after I soundly refute all of his bias and misunderstandings against Islam in his article above, I will invite him for a second round of debate regarding morality in both the Bible and Islam, because the first round was not fair to me and he knows that very well, if he is truly honest and sincere regarding Truth seeking, and not just bashing.

At any rate, I sincerely pray that Allah Almighty would open the heart of Mr. Sam Shamoun and the non-Muslim reader to Islam, because truly Islam is the Divine Truth of GOD Almighty.

Some additional articles:

Do the Ten Commandments, especially the "do not covet" part, exist in the Noble Quran?

Prophet Muhammad lived among pagans who literally worshiped in nakedness!

Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene according to early Christians' authentic Manuscripts!

Here is what Sam Shamoun wrote....

He wrote:

3. The Holy Bible On Sexual Immorality:

“You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.” Exodus 20:17- see also Deuteronomy 5:21

"You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Matthew 5:27-28

"But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people.” Ephesians 5:3

The Quran:

Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath God ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, - desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and God is All-knowing, All-wise. S. 4:24 Y. Ali

And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favor and to whom you had shown a favor: Keep your wife to yourself and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them; and Allah's command shall be performed. There is no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has ordained for him; such has been the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before; and the command of Allah is a decree that is made absolute: S. 33:37-38 Shakir

O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war, and the daughters of thine uncle on the father's side and the daughters of thine aunts on the father's side, and the daughters of thine uncle on the mother's side and the daughters of thine aunts on the mother's side who emigrated with thee, and a believing woman if she give herself unto the Prophet and the Prophet desire to ask her in marriage - a privilege for thee only, not for the (rest of) believers - We are Aware of that which We enjoined upon them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess - that thou mayst be free from blame, for Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful. S. 33:50 Pickthall

Muslim commentator Al-Qurtubi enumerates Muhammad’s privileges:

And any believing woman who dedicates herself to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed (Nikah) her; this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large).

As for what was granted and made lawful (by Allah) to the prophet –pbuh- they are 16 issues:-

·         First: To be fair with the spoils.

·         Second: To (forcefully) take a fifth of a fifth or just a fifth (of the spoils of war).

·         Third: “Al Wisal” (Dimitrius- the fast or fasting. This usually refers to fasting or abstaining from food.)

·         Fourth: To take more than four women.

·         Fifth: To marry, “Yas-tan-kih” (or have intercourse), with a woman who verbally pronounces her dedication (to the prophet).

·         Sixth: To marry, “Yas-tan-kih,” without the presence (or permission) of a legal guardian.

·         Seventh: To marry, “Yas-tan-kih,” without a dowry.

·         Eighth: To marry (and have intercourse) during a state of ritual consecration and purification.

·         Ninth: The annulment of an oath he may make to his wives.

·         Tenth: If Muhammad looks at a woman (and desires her) THEN IT IS NECESSARY FOR HER HUSBAND TO DIVORCE HER AND FOR MUHAMMAD TO MARRY HER. Ibn Al A’raby said, “This is what the servant of the two holy mosques has also said, as was clear to the scholars FROM THE STORY OF ZAID which also had this meaning.”

·         Eleventh: That the prophet released Safiyyah (from her captured status) and he considered her release as her dowry.

·         Twelfth: To enter Mecca without being in a state of ritual purification.

·         Thirteenth: To fight in Mecca.

·         Fourteenth: That he is not inherited by anyone at all. This was mentioned in the oath of absolution for when a man approaches death due to illness, most of his possessions are taken away, so that he does not have more than a third left for him. But the possessions of the prophet remained for him, as is evidenced in the verse of inheritance and in Surat Mariam.

·         Fifteenth: His marriage is still considered effective after his death.

·         Sixteenth: If he divorces a woman she remains prohibited to everyone and may not be married, “Nikah,” to someone else.

“Yas-tan-kih” comes from the word “Yan’kah.” For it is said in different forms “Nakaha” and “Istan-kaha” just as it is said “Ajab” and “Ista-jab”… It is permissible to use the word, “Istan-kaha,” to mean one whom requests marriage or one who requests sexual intercourse. (Source- http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?l=arb&taf=KORTOBY&nType=1&nSora=33&nAya=50)

My response:

Sam Shamoun had raise two main points above:

1-   Slave women as war booties.

2-   Coveting the neighbor's wife and another man's wife.

Point #1:

(Slave women as war booties)

The refutation to his points above is quite simple.  Have he read his Bible, he would've seen that in Deuteronomy 20:13-20 below, women were taken as war booties in the Bible long before Islam.

What's different between Islam and the Bible is that in Islam, slaves can request and get their freedom from their Muslim masters, and one of Islam's Ultimate Goals was to eliminate slavery.  On the other hand, the Bible forces slaves and all the generations that come after them to be inherited by their masters forever and ever.

The reason for slavery and why it took place:

It is important to know that thousands of years ago life was different than today.   Today, people wouldn't accept slavery for any reason.  The reason for this is because people are a lot more independent both financially, education wise, mentally, etc...  But people back then were different.  When a tribe or a group of people lose a major battle and their money is mostly, if not all, is taken as war booty by the other side, then people could and would accept being slaves for the following reasons:

1-  Both financial and social security. When their country or tribe lost the war, they also lost most or all of their money as war booty.  Being out of money and food, it becomes necessary for an individual to find the means for basic survival in life.  Living as a slave would provide this.

2-  Protection from hostile individuals.   Even under the Islamic rule, you can still find hostile individuals who violate the Law and take matters into their own hands.  An enemy family can be sometime in danger if they don't have a "protector".

3-  Widows, Orphans, and the extremely poor of the enemy side need the financial and social protection from a Master.  Back then, there were no governments with good social system that protects everyone.  Slavery back then was that social system in special cases.

There are probably more points I can add, but I think these are sufficient enough.

Simple proofs:

I do not wish to crowd this article with too many topics and verses.   The following links have the direct proofs for all of my claims and points above:

The gradual ending of slavery in Islam.  Proving that the Ultimate Goal of the Noble Quran was to end slavery!

The liberation of slaves in Islam.   The ending of the Judeo-Christian and pagan slavery.

Slavery and racism in the Bible.  (Some of my rebuttals are included).

Women as war booties in the Bible:

Note:  Pay attention to my analysis point #2 below.

Deuteronomy 20:13-20
13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword (even the unarmed ones):
14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.
15 Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations.
16 But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:
17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:
18 That they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods; so should ye sin against the LORD your God.
19 When thou shalt besiege a city a long time, in making war against it to take it, thou shalt not destroy the trees thereof by forcing an axe against them: for thou mayest eat of them, and thou shalt not cut them down (for the tree of the field is man's life) to employ them in the siege:
20 Only the trees which thou knowest that they be not trees for meat, thou shalt destroy and cut them down; and thou shalt build bulwarks against the city that maketh war with thee, until it be subdued.

In the following verses we see the following:

1-   All men, including the unarmed ones, were to be executed (Deuteronomy 20:13).

2-   All women and children were to be taken as spoils of war (Deuteronomy 20:14).

3-   For the others, kill and destroy every creature that is breathing - that is all men, women, children and animals (Deuteronomy 20:16-17).

By the way, wasn't there COVET also against the slave women, by Moses and his men?

Notice that in point #1 above, all men, women and children had to be killed.  Keep in mind that one of the ten commandments says "Thou shalt not murder. (Exodus 20:13)".  In other verses in the Bible we see more terrorism to even "suckling children":

1 Samuel 15:2-4
2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.
3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
4 And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.

A praise for dashing little children against rocks as a form of revenge:

Psalm 137:8-9
8 O daughter of Babylon, O destroyed one, O the happiness of him who repayeth to thee thy deed, That thou hast done to us.
9 O the happiness of him who doth seize, And hath dashed thy sucklings on the rock!

I find it to be absolutely ridiculous that the bible feeds us all kinds of lies and contradictions about "love your enemy", and yet, we see mass slaughter of suckling infants and innocent boys, girls, unarmed men, women (old and young), and innocent domestic farm animals by the tens of thousands!  It is clear that the inconsistent man-altered, man-corrupted and morally corrupt bible is nothing but a false book, and can not be a Divine and Perfect Holy Book!

Clearly, the Moral Code for not murdering had been SOUNDLY violated in Sam Shamoun's Bible!

Will Mr. Shamoun now reject his own Bible?

My open challenge to Sam Shamoun:

Jews and Christians today often talk about the lie of "Islamic Terrorism".  I openly challenge any Jew or Christian to produce ONE, JUST ONE Noble Verse from the Muslims' Noble Quran that condones killing of innocent children, women or even hostile enemy men who drop their weapons before Muslims (surrender). 

See the Rights of Prisoners of War in Islam. 

Allah Almighty Said in the Noble Quran:

"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.  (The Noble Quran, 5:32)"

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors.  (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"

Allah Almighty also Commanded UNCOMPROMISED Justice:
"O ye who believe! Stand out firmly For justice, as witnesses To Allah, even as against Yourselves, or your parents, Or your kin, and whether It be (against) rich or poor: For Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (Of your hearts), lest ye Swerve, and if ye Distort (justice) or decline To do justice, verily Allah is well-acquainted With all that ye do.  (The Noble Quran, 4:135)"

(Coveting the neighbor's wife and another man's wife)

We already saw above how Moses and his men were allowed to covet women who were "spoils of war"!

Before I answer this important point, let us all just assume for one second that Muhammad was indeed a True Prophet from GOD Almighty.  If this is correct, then this would make Prophet Muhammad:

1-   The Greatest Prophet of all Prophets, since he is their seal and the final Messenger of GOD Almighty to the billions upon billions of humans to come after him.

2-   Well worthy of special privileges that would only be given to him and not to any of his followers, as this also was the case in the Bible as I will demonstrate shortly!

So having established these two points, the Muslim reader, since all of us are assumed to be Muslims for this section, can clearly see that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Noble Verses that Sam Shamoun mentioned above.  Now let me demonstrate and prove my points regarding the Bible's Prophets so that I can hopefully shed some Light upon everyone.

First I want to comment on the following points:

·         Fourth: To take more than four women.

·         Fifth: To marry, “Yas-tan-kih” (or have intercourse), with a woman who verbally pronounces her dedication (to the prophet).

·         Sixth: To marry, “Yas-tan-kih,” without the presence (or permission) of a legal guardian.

·         Seventh: To marry, “Yas-tan-kih,” without a dowry.

·         Eighth: To marry (and have intercourse) during a state of ritual consecration and purification.

·         Ninth: The annulment of an oath he may make to his wives.

These are clear man-made interpretations that are not backed up by the Noble Quran!  For instance point #7 is clearly refuted in the above Noble Verse that Sam Shamoun himself presented:

O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war, and the daughters of thine uncle on the father's side and the daughters of thine aunts on the father's side, and the daughters of thine uncle on the mother's side and the daughters of thine aunts on the mother's side who emigrated with thee, and a believing woman if she give herself unto the Prophet and the Prophet desire to ask her in marriage - a privilege for thee only, not for the (rest of) believers - We are Aware of that which We enjoined upon them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess - that thou mayst be free from blame, for Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful. S. 33:50 Pickthall

So for some absurd "Muslim scholar" to say that the Prophet did not have to pay dowry is not only something very absurd and contradicting to the Noble Quran, but it definitely requires some concrete evidence and proofs to prove it.   Brining some doubtful and absurd narrations that were written around 300 years after the death of the Prophet and his close companions and people in general all died, would not cut it!  The Noble Quran is clearly and obviously in contradiction with this absurd point.  I therefore have the right to reject it!

Now to the covet and sexual immorality issue, we have already seen how the Bible's murder code in one of its ten commandments had been horribly violated by the Prophets of the Bible themselves!  This answer by itself can be sufficient enough to refute Sam Shamoun's points above!

I can simply stop here!

The fact that the Bible itself can not hold ground on the moral issue of murdering innocent lives, such as slaughtering in the tens of thousands "suckling infants", it becomes quite absurd to use it as a measuring stick, and a hammer and a club, to refute and to beat on any other scripture such as the Noble Quran!

I think Sam Shamoun would clearly agree with me on this one!

But I want to demonstrate to him, that even the covet law had been horribly violated and refuted, like the murder one, in the Bible by its own Prophets as well.  Let us look at the following examples:

Genesis 38:23-30
23 Then Judah said, "Let her keep what she has, or we will become a laughingstock. After all, I did send her this young goat, but you didn't find her."
24 About three months later Judah was told, "Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant." Judah said, "Bring her out and have her burned to death!"
25 As she was being brought out, she sent a message to her father-in-law. "I am pregnant by the man who owns these," she said. And she added, "See if you recognize whose seal and cord and staff these are."
26 Judah recognized them and said, "She is more righteous than I, since I wouldn't give her to my son Shelah." And he did not sleep with her again.
27 When the time came for her to give birth, there were twin boys in her womb.
28 As she was giving birth, one of them put out his hand; so the midwife took a scarlet thread and tied it on his wrist and said, "This one came out first."
29 But when he drew back his hand, his brother came out, and she said, "So this is how you have broken out!" And he was named Perez.
30 Then his brother, who had the scarlet thread on his wrist, came out and he was given the name Zerah.

In these verses, we see clearly see the following points:

1-   The woman committed the adultery, and she was supposed to be burnt with fire.   The decision was already made against her.

2-   After discovering that Judah was the one who slept with her, the decision was terminated.  Neither she got burnt nor Judah!

3-   Have she slept with an ordinary man, by GOD!!!, she would've got burnt to death!!

Can Mr. Shamoun here honestly tell me, WHY did GOD Almighty allow this??

Leviticus 19:29
29 " 'Do not degrade your daughter by making her a prostitute, or the land will turn to prostitution and be filled with wickedness.

Leviticus 21:9
9 " 'If a priest's daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she disgraces her father; she must be burned in the fire.

Now to Lot's offering:

Genesis 19
1 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground.
2 "My lords," he said, "please turn aside to your servant's house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning."
"No," they answered, "we will spend the night in the square."
3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate.
4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house.
5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him
7 and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing.
8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."

In these verses, we see clearly see the following points:

1-   The Bible prohibits any man from making his daughter(s) as prostitute(s).

2-   Lot did offer his daughters as prostitutes.

Wasn't Lot in clear violation to the Bible's moral code regarding daughters and prostitution?

I am not saying that Prophet Lot, peace be upon him, was a bad person.  But he certainly was in contradiction and violation to Sam Shamoun's Bible's commands, wasn't he?

The two Angels simply had the power to defend themselves!   They didn't need his sacrifice.

When one reads Genesis 19, especially Genesis 19:31-38, he sees that the daughter's of Lot, whom GOD Almighty saved from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorah, shortly after the great event decided to commit fornication with their father, and both of them ended up getting pregnant and bearing a child each from him!

My Question is:

Since Lot's daughters were initially innocent and virgins before the Great Event, since Lot said that they knew no man when he offered them to his people as a redemption and sacrifice to the two Angels, then how come GOD Almighty did not save the other innocents from the people of Sodom and Gomorrah?

It is hard to imagine that out of the thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands, that GOD Almighty doomed, not a single CHILD existed among them!   Objecting to this point would obviously be preposterous!

So my question to Mr. Shamoun is, how come GOD Almighty didn't doom Lot's daughters since He, the Almighty, Knew that they would do the greatest sin with their father after they made him drunk?

Wasn't this clear favoritism to Lot, hence, breaking the very Law and Reason of why GOD Almighty doomed Sodom and Gomorah?

If you're answer is because they were innocent girls back then, then my question is, what about the children in that town then?  Weren't they too innocents?

King David is probably the biggest one of all!  He broke three main commands from the ten commandments!  Each one of them is sufficient enough for his execution.  Yet, he was not executed!  GOD Almighty Forgave him!  This is also in the Noble Quran.

The story is too long to post here.  The reader can read chapters   2 Samuel 11 & 12  from the Bible to see the details for themselves.

In chapter 2 Samuel 4 , David SO UNJUSTLY killed an innocent man for only telling him that Saul died!  Saul died because of the old animosity between him and David.  Read 1 Samuel 24 to learn about their animosity and reconciliation for more details.  David's men, not knowing that the two reconciled, killed Saul in the battle, who was fighting against them, and thought they were pleasing David.  A messenger from them rushed to tell David about what they thought was "the good news," and David decided to unjustly kill the messenger who anyway had nothing to do with the killing of Saul.  AND EVEN IF HE DID, THAT STILL WOULDN'T JUSTIFY HIS KILLING!   See the rebuttal below for more details.

For the details, the reader can visit:  David's selective murder.

GOD Almighty NEVER condemned this in the Bible!

Two Questions regarding David's murder:

1-   Was the killing of the unknowing messenger, who had nothing but loyalty to David, and who anyway had nothing to do with the killing Saul, a justified act?

2-   If Prophets were not favored by GOD Almighty in the Bible, and favoritism and compromise did not exist in the Bible, then how come GOD Almighty never condemn David's unjust killing?

Perhaps this point would not occur to anyone, because no one would use something positive as a negative point against something, except for rare occasions, such as the following:

In the Mosaic Law and the Old Testament, we clearly saw above the no-mercy and absolute annihilation and hatred toward the enemy by GOD Almighty and his Believers.

Even "suckling infants" were not saved from the mass killings and terrorism of the Bible! (click here)

For Jesus to actually come and say "Love for your enemy what you love for yourself" (Luke 6:27), is actually and ironically, a CLEAR CONTRADICTION to the Mosaic Law toward enemies!

Enemy in the Mosaic Law was to be inherited forever and ever, and their women and children were to be taken as spoils of war, and their men were to be all executed.

Jesus' new law is an actual contradiction and a breaking for the Mosaic Law!  And Jesus' new law, by the way, doesn't answer away the evil, terrorism and pedophilia that exist in the Bible!

Since the article is too large to post here, I'd like to ask the reader to visit my article at: Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene according to early Christians' authentic Manuscripts!  This is in the Gospel of Philip, a widely accepted Gospel among many Christians, especially the early ones.

So what ever happened to:

Matthew 5:28 
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Ironically, Jesus broke his very own commandment!

So what's your say to all of the above Sam Shamoun?

Will you now reject your Bible too?

Aisha on Muhammad’s privileges:

Narrated Aisha:
I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Apostle and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily)." (33.51) I said (to the Prophet), "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 311)

Muhammad and Aisha:

Narrated 'Aisha:

I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, NOT YET REACHED THE AGE OF PUBERTY.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)  (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151- http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/073.sbt.html#008.073.151)

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house AS A BRIDE when she was nine, AND HER DOLLS WERE WITH HER; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3311- http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/008.smt.html#008.3311)

'A'isha reported that she used to play with dolls in the presence of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and when her playmates came to her they left (the house) because they felt shy of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), whereas Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent them to her. (Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 5981- http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/031.smt.html#031.5981)

And here is a religious fatwah which mentions Muhammad and Aisha:

Praise Allah and peace be upon the prophet:  

After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwahs (religious decrees) reviewed the question presented by Abu Abdullah Muhammad Al-Bashry, whose question was forwarded by the grand scholar of the committee with reference number 1809 issued on 7/5/1421 (Islamic calendar). The inquirer asked the following:

It has become wide spread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufa’khathat of the children (mufa’khathat literally translated means “placing between the thighs” which means placing the male member between the thighs of a child). What is the opinion of scholars knowing full well that the prophet, the peace of Allah be upon him, also practiced the “thighing” of Aisha - the mother of believers- may Allah be pleased with her.

The following link provides independent evidence that the above fatwah does indeed exist: http://www.islamic-fatwa.net/viewtopic.php?TopicID=8330.   In the above link Islamic scholar Dr Ahmad Al-Hajj Al-Kurdi comments on the fatwah in question. He is responding to a person who is asking whether or not the fatwah actually exists, and whether or not Muhammad committed this action. In response he says that Muhammad most probably did this after he consummated the marriage at 9 rather than when she was 6. His point of contention therefore is concerning when Muhammad did this to the little girl, and not whether or not he did it.  We also read:

Fatwah 23672:
The inquirer asks: "My parents married me to a young girl who hasn't yet reached puberty. How can I enjoy her sexually?"

The imam answers her by saying: "Do not harm her if she cannot take intercourse but you may hug her, kiss her, and ejaculate between her legs" i.e. “thigh” her, as the fatwah in question indicates.  (http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/Istisharat/ShowFatwa.php?lang=A&Id=23672&Option=FatwaId&x=40&y=13)

The disgusting action which the fatwah describes is allowed to all other Sunni Muslims as can be seen by the following 3 fatwahs found:

http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/Istisharat/ShowFatwa.php?lang=A&Id=23672&Option=FatwaId&x=48&y=16

http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/Istisharat/ShowFatwa.php?lang=A&Id=13190&Option=FatwaId&x=54&y=11

http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/Istisharat/ShowFatwa.php?lang=A&Id=3907&Option=FatwaId&x=46&y=11

There is also a Shi'ite reference condoning the practice.  In Ayatu Allah Al Khumaini's book, "Tahrir Al wasila," p. 241, issue number 12, we read: “It is not illegal for an adult male to 'thigh' or enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his male member between her thighs, and to kiss her.”

My response:

This section is divided into the following sub-sections:

1-  Quick notes about girls back then.

2-  The detailed response.

1-  Quick notes about girls back then:

From http://www.answering-christianity.com/aisha.htm:

First of all, it is important to know:

Aisha's parents were the ones who married her to our Prophet, and that no Muslim or even pagan objected to the marriage because it was widely practiced.  And even until today in 3rd world countries (Muslims and non-Muslims), little girls as young as 9 or 10 do get married.  Anyway, the reason no one objected was to the Prophet's marriage was:

1. People used to have very short life-spans in Arabia.   They used to live between 40 to 60 years maximum.  So it was only normal and natural for girls to be married off at ages 9 or 10 or similar.
   
   
2. Marriage for young girls was widely practiced among Arabs back then, and even today in many third-world non-Muslim and Muslim countries.  See the following examples: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7], etc...

It is important to know that girls during the Biblical and Islamic days used to be married off at young ages when they either had their first periods, or their breasts start showing off.  In other words, when they turn into "women", then they get married off.  It was quite different for men on the other hand, because physical power and the ability of living an independent life had always been and will always be a mandatory requirement for men to have in life.  So men waited much longer than women in terms of getting married.  The guy had to develop both his body and mind before he was ready for marriage. 

That is why you see girls as young as 9 or 10 were married to men as old as 30 or even older.  The culture back then and in many third world countries today (NON-MUSLIM ONES TOO) is quite different than what you live in today.

Prophet Muhammad's marriage with Aisha was 100% legal and acceptable by all laws and Divine Religions!

So to call Prophet Muhammad a pedophile for marrying a girl that was OFFERED TO HIM by her parents and was accepted by all of the people back then including the enemies of Islam, the pagans, is quite absurd.

The pedophilia in the bible was quite different, because girls were raped at 3-years of age by Moses and his men.

Also, in Exodus 21:7-11 as further elaborated on below, girls were sold off as slave girls by their own fathers to other men.  So most certainly, no one is qualified to call the Prophet of Islam a pedophile!

*** X-Rated Pornography in the Bible.

*** Fathers sticking their fingers into their daughters' vaginas before marriage in the Bible.

2-  The detailed response:

Like I mentioned above, I'd like to ask the reader to assume for one second that Muhammad was indeed a True Prophet from GOD Almighty.  If this is correct, then this would make Prophet Muhammad:

1-   The Greatest Prophet of all Prophets, since he is their seal and the final Messenger of GOD Almighty to the billions upon billions of humans to come after him.

2-   Well worthy of special privileges that would only be given to him and not to any of his followers, as this also was the case in the Bible as I already demonstrate above, and will further even prove below!

So having established these two points, the Muslim reader, since all of us are assumed to be Muslims for this section, can clearly see that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Hadiths that Sam Shamoun mentioned above.

My response will be divided into the following points:

1-   Young girls were married off to much older men in the Bible.

2-   Moses and his men even raped 3-year old slave girls!  THREE YEARS OLD!

3-   The Bible allows for "digital defloration" of girls, where a finger is inserted into the girl's vagina!  Even minority Christians TODAY in Europe still practice it!

(Young girls were married off to much older men in the Bible)

Aside from the point that the Hadiths (Sayings of Prophet Muhammad) were literally written 100s of years after the death of Prophet Muhammad, his companions and all of the people during his days, which clearly by itself proves that the narrations that Sam Shamoun provided above are all doubtful and may very well be out of context or straight lies, but I will go ahead and assume that they are Truthful.

Prophet Muhammad committed no adultery or fornication with Aisha.  She was his wife even before they consummated!  The culture back then and still today in many parts of the world as we'll see shortly did allow for such marriage to take place.

The Bible too allowed for little girls being married off as well:

Exodus 21:7-11
7. "If a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do.
8. "If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master who designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He does not have authority to sell her to a foreign people because of his unfairness to her.
9. "If he designates her for his son [Note: "his son" means that the master is either her father's age or even much older!], he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters.
10. "If he takes to himself another woman, he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights.
11. "If he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.

First of all, did the daughter have any choice to be sold off by her father, married off by her master to either himself or his son?  No!

Also, the fact that the master can either marry her or marry her off to his son, means that MOST LIKELY, SHE IS HIS DAUGHTER'S AGE and younger than his son!!  So he's probably at least 30+ years older than her.  Yet, he himself (her father's age or even MUCH older) can marry her.

Also visit: Fathers sticking their fingers into their daughters' vaginas before marriage in the Bible.

Also, the fact that there is no AGE LIMIT to how girls in the Bible were sold off and married off to other men, WITHOUT ANY CHOICE, who were much much older than them as also the case with the Biblical Prophets who married 100s of wives clearly proves the hypocrisy of some Christians who attack Islam through Aisha's very young age, while they clearly ignore the same fact in their own Bible.  Here is a sample of the 100s of wives of the Biblical Prophets:

In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.

In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.

In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.

Even today, girls in many third-world countries are married off at the same or similar age.  Also, it is believed by many Jews and Roman Catholics that Mary was 12 - 14 when she had Jesus.   Also as I said, the Biblical Prophets who had 100s of wives each most probably married young girls as well.

Also, what about Aisha's PARENTS (MOM AND DAD)?   Didn't they see it right and fit to marry their daughter at that age and at that time?   Who are we to judge?

Also, see why Muta (temporary) Marriage was allowed and why it was discontinued.

A picture and news paper article about a 9-year old girl from Thailand gave birth

A 12-year old Christian girl getting married in Romania

Moses and his men raped 3-year old slave girls:

Numbers 31:17-18
"Now kill all the boys [innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."

It is only natural for girls who have never slept with any man to be young in age!   In the case of the time that these verses occurred, the girls were as young as three.  Here is the Jewish Talmud's historical elaboration on what exactly took place by Moses and his men when they took the virgin girls as spoils of war.  Pay attention to the bolded and underlined quotes below.

From www.answering-christianity.com/age3.htm:

Children

Sometimes one has to read a passage twice to believe what has been written in the Sacred Books of Judaism: what has been decreed the way to a holy life by the "sages of blessed memory... whose words are the natural sounds of Judaism" [131]:

Said Rabbi Joseph, "Come and take note: A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse. And if a Levir has had intercourse with her, he has acquired her. And one can be liable on her account because of the law prohibiting intercourse with a married woman. And she imparts uncleanness to him who has intercourse with her when she is menstruating, to convey uncleanness to the lower as to the upper layer [of what lies beneath]. If she was married to a priest, she may eat food in the status of priestly rations. If one of those who are unfit for marriage with her had intercourse with her, he has rendered her unfit to marry into the priesthood. If any of those who are forbidden in the Torah to have intercourse with her had intercourse with her, he is put to death on her account, but she is free of responsibility [M.Nid. 5:4].
Sanhedrin 7/55B [132]

R. Nahman bar Isaac said. "They made the decree that a gentile child should be deemed unclean with the flux uncleanness [described at Lev.15], so that an Israelite child should not hang around with him and commit pederasty [as he does]."
For said R. Zira, "I had much anguish with R. Assi, and R. Assi with R. Yohanan, and R. Yohanan with R. Yannai, and R. Yannai with R. Nathan b. Amram, and R. Nathan b. Amram with Rabbi [on this matter]: 'From what age is a gentile child deemed unclean with the flux uncleanness [described at Lev.15]'? And he said to me, 'On the day on which he is born.' But when I came to R. Hiyya, he said to me, 'From the age of nine years and one day.' And when I came and laid the matter before Rabbi, he said to me, 'Discard my reply and adopt that of R. Hiyya, who declared, "From what age is a gentile child deemed unclean with the flux uncleanness [described at Lev.15]? From the age of nine years and one day."'
[37A] Since he is then suitable for having sexual relations, he also is deemed unclean with the flux uncleanness [of Lev.15]."
Said Rabina, "Therefore a gentile girl who is three years and one day old, since she is then suitable to have sexual relations, also imparts uncleanness of the flux variety."
That is self-evident!
Abodah Zarah 36B-37A [133]

The basis for these rulings is the following Mishnaic passage of Tractate Niddah (filth):

A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse. "A girl three years old may be betrothed through an act of sexual intercourse," the words of R. Meir. And sages say, "Three years and one day old."
And if a Levir has had intercourse with her, he has acquired her. And they are liable on her account because of the law prohibiting intercourse with a married woman. And she imparts uncleanness to him who has intercourse with her when she is menstruating to convey uncleanness to the lower as to the upper layer. If she was married to a priest, she eats heave offering. If one of those who are unfit for marriage has intercourse with her, he has rendered her unfit to marry into the priesthood. If one of all those who are forbidden in the Torah to have intercourse with her did so, they are put to death on her account. But she is free of responsibility.
If she is younger than that age, intercourse with her is like putting a finger in the eye.
(Mishnah Niddah 5:4) [134]

Thus, one "of the many important issues worked out in the Mishnah concerns proper conduct with women," [135] and the "entire society of Judaism – that is, the community formed by the Torah – found in the Talmud those modes of thought and inquiry, those media of order and value, that guided the formation of public affairs and private life as well." [136]

While it is reassuring to see there was at least some limit as to what the sages would declare holy and moral, this ruling had severe implications on the interpretation of other topics as well. The Tannaïtic Midrash Sifre to Numbers in §157 comments on the above quoted commandment of Moses to kill the Midianite women as well as the male children:

"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that has known a man by sleeping with him.(Num 31:17).
[This] refers to her who has slept with a man as well as her who is suitable for intercourse, even when she has not slept with a man...
But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves. From here R. Shimon b. Yohai used to say: a Proselyte girl who became a proselyte in the age of less than three years and one day, is rendered fit to marry into the priesthood." [137]

According to the Tannaïte Rabbis, Moses therefore had ordered the Israelites to kill all women older than three years and a day, because they were "suitable for having sexual relations." [138]

Bibliography:

[131] Ibid., vol.XXI.A-D, Tractate Bava Mesia, Atlanta: Scholars Press 1990, p.ix-x.

[132] Ibid., vol.XXIII.B, Tractate Sanhedrin 1984, 150. See also vol.XIX.A, Tractate Qiddushin 10a-b, 1992, 33. "Menstruating" here of course refers to the ritual "flux uncleanness" described in Lev.15.

[133] Ibid., vol.XXV.A, Tractate Abodah Zarah, 1991, 168. Emphasis original.

[134] J. Neusner, The Talmud of Babylonia. A complete outline, Part IV. The Division of Holy Things. B. Number 37. 1995, 704.

[135] Neusner 1993, 41.

[136] Neusner 1995, 7.

[137] Kuhn 1959, §157, 652f. My translation. In general, proselytes are not allowed to marry into the priesthood.

[138] Ibid., §157, footnote 86, 653.

And by the way:

Wasn't that COVET & Pedophilia against the virgin girls anyway?

(The Bible allows for "digital defloration" of girls, where a finger is inserted into the girl's vagina!)

(Minority Christians in Europe still do it today!  See the CLEAR-CUT proofs below!)

Fingers are allowed to be inserted into virgin girls' vaginas before marriage in Sam Shamoun's Bible:

"If a man takes a wife and, after laying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, 'I married this woman but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,' then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof [how do you think they would do that?] that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate.   The girl's father will say to the elders, 'I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her.  Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.'  But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity.'  Then her parents shall display the cloth [the father would literally stick his two fingers covered with a piece of cloth into his daughter's vagina before she gets married and keep that bloody cloth for as long as his daughter is married] with  before the elders of the town, and the elders shall take the man and punish him.  (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 22:13-18)"  

Here is a more clear translation from Hebrew Resources:  "The girl's father and mother shall produce the evidence of the girl's virginity before the elders of the town at the gate.  And the girl's father shall say to the elders, "I gave this man my daughter to wife, but he had taken an aversion to her; so he has made up charges, saying, 'I did not find your daughter a virgin.' But here is the evidence of my daughter's virginity!"  And they shall spread out the cloth before the elders of the town.  (From the New JPS translation, Deuteronomy 22:15-17)"

The New JPS translation of Deuteronomy 22:15-17 makes it even more clear about having the parents of the girl displaying the bloody piece of cloth before the elders of the town.

According to the Talmud, the cloth should be "A cloth of less than 3 square finger-breadths.  (From the Talmud, Eruvin 29b-30a and Succah 16a)", and before it is being used, it should be "soft, woolen and clean.   (From the Talmud, Niddah 17a)"

From www.answering-christianity.com/fathers_rape.htm:

2-  Males in the Bible did it to females:

Before we get into the fathers and daughters issue, it is important first to know that some males in the Bible did it to females.  Let us look at the following information:

"There were, of course, others who might examine accused brides. Dwyer, 63, notes the role of doctors in modern Morocco. In pre-modern times this role was performed by midwives (see Westermarck, Marriage Ceremonies in Morocco, 229f.; Marcus, p. 324. M. Friedman, Ribbui Nashim Beyisra'el [Tel Aviv: Mosad Bialik etc., 1986], 169-170, 263). According to the Midrash Hagadol, Isaac himself examined Rebekah digitally before their marriage (Midrash Hagadol to Genesis 24:67 [ed. M. Margulies; Jerusalem: Mosad Harav Kook, 1967, 411]; according to Pirke Rabbi Eliezer, chap. 16, p. 38a, the examination consisted of digital defloration [ref. courtesy of my colleague, Prof. Judah Goldin]). According to the  aprocryphal Book of James, sec. 19-20, Mary was likewise examined digitally for virginity by Salome (New Testament Apocrypha, ed. E. Hennecke & W. Schneemelcher, 385; ref. courtesy of Prof. Tikva Frymer-Kensky and my colleague Prof. Robert A. Kraft)."

(http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jwst/4q159.htm)   [Note #13, read toward the end of the note]

(the article is also located on my site)

.............................

8-  Some minority Christians in Europe still do it today:

The following two posts were sent to me by Anna C., may Allah Almighty further Lead her to Islam.  Ameen.  They contain a link that has a story about old-fashion Christians in Europe practicing this Biblical law.  For the sake of readability, the structure of every post that is stored on my site is as follows:

Name
Email
Subject
Date (automatically populated)
Content

--------------------------------------------------------------

Anna C.

<I decided not to reveal her email address>

http://www.answering-christianity.com/fathers_rape.htm

3/14/2005

I think, on the issue of fathers digitally raping their daughters, that it would also be interesting to note that this custom was also practiced by the Gypsies that lived in the Iberian Peninsula.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Anna C.

<I decided not to reveal her email address>

http://www.answering-christianity.com/fathers_rape.htm

3/14/2005

http://www.andalucia.com/accounts/myfriendsgypsies.htm  

I meant nothing ill by the comment, I just found it interesting to note that this was also practiced elsewhere.

Thank you for your time!

--------------------------------------------------------------

Note:  Because I realize that this contribution by Anna C. will offend many of the Islam-hating Jews and Christians, I decided to keep her email address anonymous.

The link above contains the following quotes:

"But the gypsy wedding I attended was all rejoicing and beauty - albeit of a rather uncivilised kind, which made it all the more exciting. The lovely 17 year old bride, our neighbour Paqui, walked down from El Coro (our gypsy neigbourhood) in a cloud of white chiffon on the arm of her father, Conejo (Rabbit, as he is known), between two rows of admiring neighbours - even the payos came out to gape. In the great round church, the mothers of bride and groom stood by the altar until the priest had finished his standard sermon and then, with great feeling, sang lamenco marriage chants into the microphone, one of which, I remember, spoke of the union of "gitano con gitana". As they left the church, a white dove was released into the air, a symbol of the bride's purity, soon to fly away."

.........

"Paqui was then taken away by the two mothers and an old gypsy woman with a great mane of white hair, who, it was explained to me, was a virginity examiner (the actual expression for what she does is sacar la honra, or "display the honour"), who had been brought especially all the way from Cadiz, at great expense: 100,000 pesetas for the night's work, which is more than the minimum monthly wage. The reason why the sacaora, as she is known, has to come from so far away is, they said, to ensure her impartiality...

An hour later the three women and Paqui (who looked sheepishly proud, as if she had just been awarded her high school diploma) were back: the "judge" entered the church screaming and holding up a large white handkerchief embroidered in each corner with three red roses (this is because, generations ago, three corners of the handkerchief were twisted together to form a lancet which actually deflowered the girl, and came out stained in blood). I drew closer and could observe that there was a yellowish stain in the middle of the handkerchief, which showed signs of having been creased. The current, more "civilised" procedure is for the judge to wrap the handkerchief around her finger and introduce it in the vagina to feel, rather than break the hymen."

(http://www.andalucia.com/accounts/myfriendsgypsies.htm......the color, underline and bold emphasis added above are mine)

As we clearly see above, those Gypsy minority in Europe are Christians, and among those Christians, the digital defloration of virgin women before marriage is still practiced even until today!

What's your say about this Biblical practice Sam Shamoun?

Are you up for a debate?

Back to My Rebuttals, and exposing the lies of the Answering Islam team section.

Rebuttals to Sam Shamoun's Articles section.

X-Rated Pornography in the Bible.

Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and his marriage from Aisha.

Answering Trinity.

Do the Ten Commandments, especially the "do not covet" part, exist in the Noble Quran?

Prophet Muhammad lived among pagans who literally worshiped in nakedness!

Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene according to early Christians' authentic Manuscripts!

Contradictions and History of Corruption in the Bible.

Questions about Jesus that trinitarian Christians don't have logical answers for.

What parts of the Bible do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth? and Why?

"Allah" was GOD Almighty's original Name in the Bible according to the Hebrew and Aramaic sources.

Scientific Miracles in Islam and the Noble Quran.

Most of the Bible's books and gospels were written by mysterious people!

Jesus mentioned Muhammad by the name in the Bible.

Did Isaiah 53 really prophesies about the crucifixion of Jesus? It supports Islam's claims about Jesus peace be upon him never died on the cross.  I also addressed John 19:36-37 from the Bible and proved that Jesus never got crucified, since GOD Almighty promised that he will protect Jesus' body and not let even a single bone be broken.  My question to all Christians is: How in the world is it possible for the feet to get nailed on the cross without any penetration to the bones by the nails, hence breaking part of the feet's bones?! I also added refutations to Exodus 12:46, Numbers 9:12, Zechariah 12:10 and Psalm 34:20, which supposedly prove the Christians' belief about Jesus crucifixion.  I proved that this dogma has no truth what so ever and exposed the wrong Trinitarian English translation of Zechariah 12:10.

Send your comments.

Back to Main Page.