What's new

Islamic militants warn they will sell captive Nigerian schoolgirls into sex slavery after internatio

Status
Not open for further replies.
jE skinadari,,, Are you plain ignorant or idiot? I boldly put out those ahadiths which allowed and negate it after wards. It's not a game of choose and pick. If you are quoting our books, than qoute it with full honesty and put Ahadiths where Muta'h was banned by Prophet (PBUH)[/quote]


Where Mutah is allowed in this Ayaah?



And you have totally ignored the tHE AYAH 6 OF Surah AL Momeenuun.... Like I say, this is not a game of pick and chose!
4:24

to top

4_24.png
Sahih International
And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess. [This is] the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are [all others] beyond these, [provided] that you seek them [in marriage] with [gifts from] your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse. So for whatever you enjoy [of marriage] from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation. And there is no blame upon you for what you mutually agree to beyond the obligation. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.
 
This is the other rational for Mutah supporter to give up their practice:

Islam condemn divorce, and it is only allowed if the two married couple cannot be united anymore based on justified reason. I believe in Shariah there should be a judge that will determine whether the divorce can be allowed or not, just like our positive rule in Indonesia on this matter that has used Shariah Law.

And in Mutah our intention is clear that we are not going to make it last anyway.
 
The people who claimed to Umar that it was allowed were men like Amr Bin Harrith who made a young slave girl pregnant and then denied it. Only when the slave girl proved it did the man accept it but then resorted to justify it. It was men like him that Umar spoke against!
 
BOKO HARAM AND THE HISTORY OF CHILD RAPE IN JIHAD

boko-haram-Reuters.jpg

by DR. PHYLLIS CHESLER 9 May 2014

On April 14, 2014, Boko Haram, (whose name either means “Western education is forbidden” or “a colonialist fraud being perpetrated against us”), captured three hundred Christian and Muslim Nigerian schoolgirls to become their sex and domestic slaves. The Muslim fundamentalists swooped down upon them as they were learning in a “forbidden” government secular school. Some girls managed to escape. Two hundred and seventy six girls are still missing.
The world media calls this a “kidnapping” in Nigeria. It is not a “kidnapping.” It is the face of Jihad, the way of Jihad. Boko Haram are not holding these girls for ransom, they are not willing to return them for money. They already view the girls as their God-given booty, and as sale-able property.

The girls are between the ages of twelve and fifteen. The Christian girls will be raped, converted to Islam, and then, like the Muslims girls, “married” to one of their captors. Some will be trafficked into the sex trade, which is pandemic throughout Africa and the Muslim Middle East. Sharia law allows men to purchase the sexual favors of a female child or a young woman for one hour, a week, or a month. Private and public brothels exist as well.

Please understand: Boko Haram are the Nigerian Taliban. Like their Pakistani and Afghan counterparts, they oppose education for girls and would rather marry and impregnate them instead--for Allah’s sake.

This behavior is absolutely par for the course in Islamic history. Anyone who is surprised or shocked by this latest outrage in Nigeria simply does not know the facts.

Boko Haram’s behavior is typical of any armed Muslim force beginning in Mohammed’s time. The Prophet’s warriors went on raids and systematically massacred the Jewish tribes in Arabia. The men who refused to convert were beheaded--and then the Prophet divided the women, children, houses, and chattels among the Muslims. The women were forcibly converted and kept as “wives” or slaves.

Thereafter, Muslim warriors in search of power, land, and gold, did much the same thing.

Contrary to the politically correct intelligentsia, who focus only on Western sins, Islam also has a long and ongoing history of imperialism, colonialism, conversion by the sword, sex slavery, (of both boys and girls), polygamy, sex trafficking, and the brutal subordination and cyclical massacres of religious minorities.

Westerners either do not know this, do not want to know this, don’t care all that much, or misunderstand this.

Some, including journalists, still believe that Boko Haram and other such groups are crying out against injustice and poverty, against government corruption and ineptitude--all of which exist.

But that is not Boko Haram’s major concern. They want to assert an Islamic state in Nigeria, similar to that which exists in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, and now, Brunei. These Muslim extremists, both Sunni and Shiia, want Sharia law to dominate public and private life. This means that the state will have the power to stone people to death for adultery and apostasy, to amputate for theft, to lash and jail for “blasphemy,” to tax and hold hostage, jail, murder, or exile infidels.

Oh, yes--male polygamy will be legal, marriage will be forced, women will be veiled, normatively beaten and raped without recourse, honor killed for the slightest perceived disobedience. Women are breeders and housekeepers--an education would ruin them.

Nevertheless, for the first time, the world is mobilized, we have a “teachable moment.” Petitions have been signed, tweets tweeted, articles written, offers of military support tendered. I have remained silent because I have not liked how many in the media have jumped on this latest example of barbarism to plead their own special cause.

The capture of girls is horrifying but, they say, let’s remember that Boko Haram and other groups like them have also persecuted religious minorities in the Muslim and Arab world; let’s not forget that there are so many moderate Muslims who believe in women’s rights and the Western enterprise; let’s remember that this is just one more face of Jihad against the West, etc. All true--but this all takes the focus away from the way in which historical Islam views and treats women.

In 1971, hundreds of thousands of women were raped during the Bangladesh Liberation War. Pakistani Muslim soldiers publicly and repeatedly gang-raped and tortured Muslim (future Bangladeshi) women. These women became known as “Birangona,” or “brave women.” At the time, many killed themselves or, if pregnant, their families killed them in honor killings. Forty years later, those who survived are still traumatized and shamed by what was done to them. Many were humiliated by their relatives, rejected by their husbands.

At the time, the West paid no attention.

From 1992 on, Islamic paramilitary troops enslaved young Muslim girls in Algeria both sexually and domestically; they just grabbed them off the streets. If they tried to escape, they would be shot dead; the same was true when they became pregnant. Their names are lost in history.

At the time, the West paid no attention.

And then there was 2004, in Sudan, a long and ugly war, in which ethnic Arab Muslims engaged in what I call “gender cleansing” when they publicly and repeatedly gang-raped mainly Black African Muslim, Christian, and animist women. I was approached for advice and suggested setting up Women’s Talking Tents where the raped girls and women could come and speak their pain, see they were not alone, learn that it was not their fault.

And Western governments did nothing.

I wonder what will happen to those poor Nigerian girls who survive this ordeal? Will they be rescued and embraced? Will they be able to one day see themselves as war heroes, not victims? Will they all ever be found?

Mainly, will the world finally take a strong stand against such militant and barbaric Islamic groups who not only rape and imprison Muslim girls and women but who also slaughter both Muslim civilians and "infidels" indiscriminately?

@Indos .. Why the negative rating mate? I just copied and pasted that article..
 
DETAILS OF UMAR’S STATEMENT



The whole controversy of Mutah started with a man called Amr bin Harith. He made a
young slave girl pregnant and then denied it. The incident happened during the
time of Umar bin Khattab.



The story is in both Sunni and Shia books and, therefore, has a rijali credibility.
If true it means that Amr bin Harith had been lying that he had made her
pregnant until the girl’s story reached Umar. Umar was having none of it! The
story says that Umar soon caught up with the old man who was trying to abscond
from Medina.



When ibn Harith saw Umar, he decided to accept what he had done. But when Umar went
to flog him he quickly shifted the blame. He shifted the blame on the Prophet
and claimed that the Prophet had allowed him to do mutah with as many girls and
women as he wanted. When Umar asked him what he intends to do with the baby he
said:”The Nabi even allowed the man the last word to accept or reject the
child!”



Umar then said: “If you were so sure that the Nabi allowed you to do mutah then why
did you lie of what you had done with the young girl?”




Ibn Harith had no answer. Being a Companion he should have displayed both high moral
excellence with a young vulnerable slave girl and should not have lied after
making her pregnant. And as he was able to lie against a pregnant girl it threw
doubt on his character and on what he claimed the Nabi had allowed.




Umar then dragged Ibn Harith to the mosque to see if anybody could verify the claims
he made. Many well known Companions refused to believe it and argued that if
mutah was allowed by the Nabi and Abu Bakr then there would already been a large
number of children born in Medina whose paternity would have been doubted.
The Companions further argued that no fornicators would have been flogged in
their time because they would all have claimed to have done mutah. Then Umar got
ready to flog the old man saying: “I had been with the Nabi longer than you
(since Mecca) but I have not known of any such
cases.”



The story continues and says that since Ibn Harith was to be flogged his relatives
came to stop Umar. Then after a long hesitation his old friend Abdullah ibn
Abbas spoke in favour of mutah. But in some narrations it is written that even
Abduallah ibn Abbas changed his stance. When challenged by
his own young slave he said that mutah was only allowed in desperation ‘like
eating pig during starvation!’
 
jE skinadari,,, Are you plain ignorant or idiot? I boldly put out those ahadiths which allowed and negate it after wards. It's not a game of choose and pick. If you are quoting our books, than qoute it with full honesty and put Ahadiths where Muta'h was banned by Prophet (PBUH)


Where Mutah is allowed in this Ayaah?



And you have totally ignored the tHE AYAH 6 OF Surah AL Momeenuun.... Like I say, this is not a game of pick and chose!
4:24
to top
4_24.png
Sahih International
And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess. [This is] the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are [all others] beyond these, [provided] that you seek them [in marriage] with [gifts from] your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse. So for whatever you enjoy [of marriage] from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation. And there is no blame upon you for what you mutually agree to beyond the obligation. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.


first if you want to continue the discussion learn to do it without insulting like a cultured person , second hope you are aware that the parts in bracket is not in the text of Quran and is added by the translator to explain it . and if you look at the text of the Verse it is more applicable to the temporary marriage
 
first if you want to continue the discussion learn to do it without insulting like a cultured person , second hope you are aware that the parts in bracket is not in the text of Quran and is added by the translator to explain it . and if you look at the text of the Verse it is more applicable to the temporary marriage

. If Allah wanted Mutah to be lawful , He would clearly allowed Mutah. Now let us talk on facts. You are clearly ignoring my question again and again. If Allah had made Mutah permissible, why he said Only marriages or the girls that right hand possess are lawful???? Don't dodge this time

23_6.png




23_7.png



Surah Nisaaa


4_24.png


JE Sikandari, Allah has explained it's marriage rules in clear terms. If Surah Al Nissah Ayaah was causing ambiguity, you should have had read quran more carefully.
 
Last edited:
@Indos .. Why the negative rating mate? I just copied and pasted that article..

No garbage media should be put in PDF, if so, so many lies can be spread in here. Why don't you ask @WebMaster to revise it for you.

And by the way, the previous link that you put in a video about Mutah practice in Indonesia said that Mutah is allowed in Indonesia, which is actually wrong and lie. You seek Anti-Islam media and put it here. If some one comment some thing bad here, people in here can understand that it maybe not true as it comes from a person, but biased and lies made by a garbage media can make some one believe that it is true. So you will make more damage by putting non credible media in here than just if you comment. Even a bad comment can have negative rating as well.

Another one, Why don't you put any link on the media that you use ?
 
Last edited:
Surat 'Āli `Imrān (Family of Imran) - سورة آل عمران

3_7.png





Sahih International
It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.



With this Ayah, I end my Debate.on mut'ah. Whatever I said is suffice. I won't say further.


Hakim was asked whether the verse on Mut'ah has been abrogated, he said "No. Ali
ra.gif

 We read in Tafseer Durre Manthur.
Hadhrath Hakim was asked if the verse on Mut'ah had been abrogated . He replied "No, because Ali said if Umar had not banned Mut'ah, then the only person to fornicate would be a wretched person."
Sunni Reference: Tafseer Durre Manthur Volume2 p. 40

 Indeed, the Sahaba deemed Umar to be a liar when it came to this issue. We read in Tafseer Kabeer p. 41:
"Imam Ali(as) said "Had Umar not banned Mut'ah then the only person to fornicate would be a wretched person."
Tafseer al-Kabeer, Page 41

All these mentions are ambiguous and I would consider them fabrications until you can provide it's arabic source I won't accept them !
 
Last edited:
. If Allsh wanted Mutah to be lawful , He would clearly allowed Mutah. Now let us talk on facts. You are clearly ignoring my question again and again. If Allah had made Mutah permissible, why he said Only marriages or the girls that right hand possess are lawful???? Don't dodge this time

23_6.png




23_7.png



Surah Nisaaa


4_24.png
Does it say what sort of marriage ?

its another translation of the verse
[Forbidden to you] are married woman, except what your right hand possesses. This Allah has written for you, and all other women besides these are permitted to you, so that you may seek them out with your wealth, seeking chastity and not fornication. So when you have contracted temporary marriage [istimt'atum] with them, then give them their words. There is no sin on you for whatever you agree to after this. Indeed, Allah is Knowing, Wise.
Al-Qur’an, Surah An-Nisa, Ayah 24

as I'm not neither an Islamic scholar nor an Arabic language expert let see what another person say about it or exactly the word istimta’tum

First evidence- The fact that authentic Sunni books are replete with traditions informing us of episodes wherein the Sahabah performed temporary marriage (Mutah) and many of these traditions contain the same Arabic word istimta. Let us cite two such examples, first from Sahih Muslim, the second most authentic Sunni Hadith book.

حدثني الربيع بن سبرة الجهني، أن أباه، حدثه أنه، كان مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال ‏”‏ يا أيها الناس إني قد كنت أذنت لكم في الاستمتاع من النساء
“Sabra al-Juhanni reported on the authority of his father that while he was with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon hm) he said: 0 people, I had permitted you to contract temporary marriage with women…”
Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3255

We read the following episode in Muwatta by Imam Malik:

۔۔۔ عمر بن الخطاب فقالت ان ربيعة بن امية استمتع بامراة فحملت منه ۔۔۔
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Urwa ibn az-Zubayr that Khawla ibn Hakim came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, ”Rabia ibn Umayya made a temporary marriage with a woman and she…”
Muwatta Imam Malik, Book 28, Number 28.18.42

Second evidence – The fact that all Sunni commentators have recorded arguments regarding the permissibility or impermissibility of Mutah and have recorded the practices and views of the Sahaba, Tabaeen and Ulema regarding Mutah under the commentary of no other verse but 4:24. For those who advance the notion that this verse does not deal with Mutah, we would like to ask them:

“Did the Sunni commentators of the Quran including the favourites such as Ibn Kathir, along with Imam Tabari, Qurtubi etc have no understanding as to what they were doing when they were advancing their arguments about Mutah under the commentary of 4:24?”
Third evidence - The fact that many of the prominent Sahaba and Tabayeen that present day Nawasib adhere to would read the cited verse with some extra words, making it crystal clear that the verse referred to temporary marriage. They would recite the verse in this manner:

“And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them) for a specified period…”

The recitation of the words ‘for a specified period’ by the Sahaba and Taba’een proves this to be the verse dealing with Mutah in which the period of marriage is specified.

Fourth evidence – The fact that the leading Sahaba, Tabayeen and scholars clearly stated that verse 4:24 refers to ‘temporary marriage’ leaves no ground for our opponents to bring absurd excuses. We read the testimony of the great jurist, Mujahid who stated:

“This (verse) revealed for Mut’ah marriage”

Famed Sunni commentator of Holy Quran namely Maqatil bin Sulaiman himself would read the verse in this manner: ‘Then as to those whom you profit by for a specified period” making it clear that according to him this verse refers to temporary marriage.

the rest is here some guys may like the source as it tend to insult the opposite view just like some of our friends here like to do.
Quranic evidences for the legitimacy of Mut’ah
 
JE Sikandari, I'm seriously Doubting your intentions. That Hadith you qouted about Sabrah Al Juhaani..... For the upteenth time I'm asking stop cherry picking. Be truthful about it, and read the Hadith of Negation by same SAbrah Al Juhaani I put it in last page and how many times It has to be told that Mutaah was temporarily allowed and it was banned later ?


Sabra al-Juhanni reported on the authority of his father that while he was with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon hm) he said:

0 people, I had permitted you to contract temporary marriage with women, but Allah has forbidden it (now) until the Day of Resurrection. So he who has any (woman with this type of marriage contract) he should let her off, and do not take back anything you have given to then (as dower).

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ نُمَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْعَزِيزِ بْنُ عُمَرَ، حَدَّثَنِي الرَّبِيعُ بْنُ سَبْرَةَ الْجُهَنِيُّ، أَنَّ أَبَاهُ، حَدَّثَهُ أَنَّهُ، كَانَ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ ‏ "‏ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنِّي قَدْ كُنْتُ أَذِنْتُ لَكُمْ فِي الاِسْتِمْتَاعِ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ قَدْ حَرَّمَ ذَلِكَ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ فَمَنْ كَانَ عِنْدَهُ مِنْهُنَّ شَىْءٌ فَلْيُخَلِّ سَبِيلَهُ وَلاَ تَأْخُذُوا مِمَّا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ شَيْئًا‏

Reference : Sahih Muslim 1406 d
In-book reference : Book 16, Hadith 25
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 8, Hadith 3255


What sort of marriage Allah has allowed?
 
The reality is that Mutah was permissible in the early days of Islam, but was eventually banned categorically by the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم).

Why did the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) first allow wine and then later forbid it? This was only because Islam was revealed in stages, and the faith was going through a transitional period, with the Shariah being expounded during the life-span of the Prophet.
Isn't stating this same as saying that Quran was altered during the lifetime of Mohammed? isn't it considered blasphemy?
 
Isn't stating this same as saying that Quran was altered during the lifetime of Mohammed? isn't it considered blasphemy?

ALLAH who altered it. No problem. ALLAH wants to teach us the importance of using context to find suitable decision in dealing with our current problem in this world. The core principle is not changed which is Tauhid. Only One God deserves to be worshiped, and that God is ALLAH. He doesnt need any son, since we all belong to ALLAH. We are more close to Him rather than we to our parents. So why does He need a son ? Not logic.
 
ALLAH who altered it. No problem. ALLAH wants to teach us the importance of using context to find suitable decision in dealing with our current problem in this world. The core principle is not changed which is Tauhid. Only One God deserves to be worshiped, and that God is ALLAH. He doesnt need any son, since we all belong to ALLAH. We are more close to Him rather than we to our parents. So why does He need a son ? Not logic.
ALLAH wrote the Quran even before creating the world and the original is still in Heaven. Various prophets were given copies of that book and they are supposed to be exactly identical to the original master copy, and Mohammed was given (recited) the same unadulterated copy. This is the core belief of Islam. Anyone saying otherwise is committing blasphemy.
If ALLAH altered the Quran over a short period (relative to history of this universe) of Mohammed's life, then it implies that the copy of Quran revealed to Mohammed was not the exact copy of the master copy of Quran. This is a big contradiction to Islams core belief.
 
ALLAH wrote the Quran even before creating the world and the original is still in Heaven. Various prophets were given copies of that book and they are supposed to be exactly identical to the original master copy, and Mohammed was given (recited) the same unadulterated copy. This is the core belief of Islam. Anyone saying otherwise is committing blasphemy.
If ALLAH altered the Quran over a short period (relative to history of this universe) of Mohammed's life, then it implies that the copy of Quran revealed to Mohammed was not the exact copy of the master copy of Quran. This is a big contradiction to Islams core belief.

ALLAH knows what will happen in the future, how do you know that the book in heaven and in here are different ? :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom