Who Wrote the Bible? Who knows

The Book of Genesis:
"Historically, Jews and Christians alike have held that Moses was the author/compiler of the first five books of the OT. These books, known also as the Pentateuch (meaning "five-volumed book"), were referred to in Jewish tradition as the five fifths of the law (of Moses). The Bible itself suggests Mosaic authorship of Genesis, since Ac 15:1 refers to circumcision as "the custom taught by Moses," an allusion of Ge 17. However, a certain amount of later editorial updating does appear to be indicated (see, e.g., notes on 14:14; 36:31; 47:11).   (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 2)"
So in reality, the book of Genesis had been tampered with by man.  It had been corrupted.  It is dangerous to consider all of it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty, because by doing so, we are running into the risk of committing a crime against Him since we are claiming that He spoke words that He never spoke.


The Book of Numbers:
"It is not necessary, however, to claim that Numbers came from Moses' hand complete and in final form. Portions of the book were probably added by scribes or editors from later periods of Israel's history. For example, the protestation of the humility of Moses (12:3) would hardly be convincing if it came from his own mouth.   (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 183)"
So in reality, we don't know who were all the authors who wrote the book of Numbers.   How is it possible then to call the book of Numbers the True Living Revelations of GOD Almighty if the book had been tampered with by the man-made laws of the scribes?
As you clearly saw in Jeremiah 8:8 in the introduction above, GOD Almighty condemned the laws of the scribes and accused them for turning the Bible into a lie.

The book of Deuteronomy:
"The book itself testifies that, for the most part, Moses wrote it (1:5; 31:9,22,24), and other OT books agree (1Ki 2:3, 8:53; 2ki 14:6; 18:12)--though the preamble (1:1-5) may have been written by someone else, and the report of Moses' death (ch.34) was almost certainly written by someone else.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 240)"
As we clearly see, there is ample evidence that proves beyond the shadow of the doubt that Moses was not the sole author of the book.  He couldn't have possibly have written about his own death.  Again, another corrupted book by man in the Bible.  How can you claim that the book of Deuteronomy was indeed all revealed by GOD Almighty?   If you're not sure, and you still insist on your claim, then you are committing a crime against GOD Almighty's Revelations.

The book of Joshua:
"It seems safe to conclude that the book, at least in its early form, dates from the beginning of the monarchy. Some think that Samuel may have had a hand in shaping or compiling the materials of the book, but in fact we are unsure who the final author or editor was.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 286)"
Again, another book whom we don't know who in the world wrote it.  Yet, Jews and Christians consider this nonsense as a Revelation from GOD Almighty.

The book of Judges:
"Although, according to tradition, Samuel wrote the book, authorship is actually uncertain."
"The date of the composition is also unknown, but it was undoubtedly during the monarchy."
(From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 322).
Another book with many doubts had been inserted into the Bible.  How much more evidence do you need to be convinced that the Bible is corrupted, or to say the least, not a perfect book?

The book of Ruth:
"The author is unknown. Jewish tradition points to Samuel, but it is unlikely that he is the author because the mention of David (4:17,22) implies a later date.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 360)"
Same as above.

The books of 1 and 2 Samuel:
"Many questions have arisen pertaining to the literary character, authorship and date of 1,2 Samuel."
"Who the author was cannot be known with certainty since the book itself gives no indication of his identity."
(From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 368).
Again, unknown books with unknown authors had been inserted into the Bible and are now considered GOD's Revelations.  What a joke!  Since when do we consider man-made stories and narrations as GOD's Revelations?

The books of 1 and 2 Kings:
"There is little conclusive evidence as to the identity of the author of 1,2 Kings."
"Whoever the author was, it is clear that he was familiar with the book of Deuteronomy."
(From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 459).
Again, another unknown books with unknown authors had corrupted the Bible.

The books of 1 and 2 Chronicles:
"According to ancient Jewish tradition, Ezra wrote Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah (see Introduction to Ezra: Literary Form and Authorship), but this cannot be established with certainty.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 569)"
Again, another doubtful nonsense had been considered to be GOD's Revelations.

The book of Esther:
"Although we do not know who wrote the book of Esther, from internal evidence it is possible to make some inferences about the author and the date of composition.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 707)"
Same as above.

The book of Job:
"Although most of the book consists of the words of Job and his counselors, Job himself was not the author."
"The unknown author probably had access to oral and/or written sources...."
(From the NIV Bible commentary [1], page 722).
Ironically, the book is named as "The book of Job", but yet, Job was not the author, and no one in this world knows who wrote the book.  Today, it is considered GOD's Revelations.
It's quite pathetic to consider unknown people as GOD's Messengers and attribute their work to GOD's real Messengers.
It's obvious that like most of the Bible's book and gospels, the Book of Job had been lost.

The books of Psalm:
"Regarding authorship, opinions are even more divided.  The notations themselves are ambiguous since the Hebrew phraseology used, meaning in general "belonging to", an also be taken in the sense of "concerning" or "for the use of" or "dedicated to".   The name may refer to the title of a collection of Psalms that had been gathered under a certain name.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 773)"
"The Psalms consist of one hundred fifty poems of Israel written at different times by different authors, though mainly by David, around 1000 B.C.
..........
Because of the vast range of human feelings expressed in the Psalms, this book remains one of the best loved and most used books of the Bible.  (From the King James Version Bible Commentary [1], page 801)"
As we clearly see above from the NIV and KJV Bibles' commentaries, this book can not be considered as the True Words of GOD Almighty, because it was written by many unknown authors!  There is no proof that these authors were True Messengers of GOD Almighty.  Another corruption and man-made alterations had invaded the Bible and corrupted it.
This corrupted book claims that the Earth is flat and never moves:
"He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.   (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 104:5)"
Since when the Earth is flat and can never move?!  We all know that the Earth and the other planets rotate and move in space around the Sun.
For those Jews and Christians who would like to see where in the Noble Quran does Allah Almighty say that the planets in space rotate and move, read the following Noble Verse:
"It is He who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its orbit with its own motion.  (The Noble Quran, 21:33)"
For more information and other Noble Verses, please visit:
Science in the Noble Quran and Islam.
The Earth is round according to Islam.
Also visit The Earth is flat according to the Bible.

The book of Proverbs:
"Although the book begins with a title ascribing the proverbs to Solomon, it is clear from later chapters that he was not the only author of the book.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 935)"
Can anyone please tell me who that other author was?  And did GOD Almighty speak those words through his tongue?
These are fair questions, aren't they?

The book of Ecclesiastes:
"No time period or writer's name is mentioned in the book, but several passages strongly suggest that King Solomon is the authors. On the other hand, the writer's title, his unique style of Hebrew and his attitude toward rulers may point to another person and a later period.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 988)"
Was it or was it not Solomon who wrote this book?  If you say it was Solomon, then how can you prove it?
And by the way, was this book a revelation to Solomon, or just Solomon's own personal writings, if it were Solomon's book from the first place?
This corrupted book claims that the Sun hurries back to where it rises:
"The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.  (From the NIV Bible, Ecclesiastes 1:5)"
Since when the Sun hurries back to where it rises, like if there is some hole it rises from and another hole it sets through on Earth?!
For those Jews and Christians who would like to see where in the Noble Quran does Allah Almighty say that the planets in space rotate and move, read the following Noble Verse:
"It is He who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its orbit with its own motion.  (The Noble Quran, 21:33)"
For more information and other Noble Verses, please visit:
Science in the Noble Quran and Islam.
The Earth is round according to Islam.
Also visit The Earth is flat according to the Bible.

The Book of Ecclesiasticus:
This book does not even exist in the NIV Bible!  It however exists in the Roman Catholics "The New Jerusalem Bible" [3].  This book consists of 51 chapters that apparently the NIV Bible Historians and Theologians don't believe that they are the True Words of GOD Almighty.
Talk about major and serious differences and corruptions in the Bibles today.
Let us look at this verse from this book: "....and the birth of ANY daughter is a loss.  (From the New Jerusalem Bible, Ecclesiasticus 22:3)"  Since when does GOD give stupid generalizing statements for ALL the members of a certain group of His creation?

The Book of Wisdom:
Again, this book does not even exist in the NIV Bible!  It however exists in the Roman Catholics "The New Jerusalem Bible" [3].  This book consists of 19 chapters that apparently the NIV Bible Historians and Theologians don't believe that they are the True Words of GOD Almighty.
Again, talk about major and serious differences and corruptions in the Bibles today.

The book of Song of Songs:
"Verse 1 appears to ascribe authorship to Solomon. Solomon is referred to seven times, and several verses speak of the 'king', but whether he was the author remains an open question.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 997)"
"Two lovers, Solomon and a Shulamite girl, express their feelings for one another, with occasional comments made by friends.  (From the King James Version Commentary [2], page 945)"
Again, we don't know who wrote the book.  Please visit X-Rated Pornography in the Bible regarding this pornful and sick book; the book of:
1- She wished if her lover was her brother nursed at her "mother's breasts" so she wouldn't have to take him home in secret.
2- Her breasts and vagina taste like wine for him.
The KJV Bible's Theologians and Historians say that the porn-full book talks about Solomon and his lover.  But we don't know whether it was Solomon who wrote this book or not, nor do we know whether this is some ridiculous poem and a lie written after he died or not.
One must ask a simple question here:  Why should there be "lovers" in the Bible?  Why should there be illegal sex and disgusting pornography in the Bible?

The book of Lamentations:
"Although Lamentations is anonymous and we cannot be certain who wrote it, ancient Jewish and Christian tradition ascribes it to Jeremiah.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1207)"

The Gospel of Matthew:

"The unknown author, whom we shall continue to call Matthew for the sake of convenience, drew no only up the Gospel according to Mark but upon a large body of material (principally, sayings of Jesus) not found in Mk that corresponds, sometimes exactly, to material found also in the Gospel according to Luke.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1008)"

"As for the place where the gospel was composed, a plausible suggestion is that it was Antioch, the capital of the Roman province of Syria.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1009)"

So we clearly see, both the author or authors and the place of composition of the "Gospel of Matthew" are unknown.

The Gospel of Mark:
Note:   This gospel is the oldest and supposedly the most original one in the New Testament!

"Although the book is anonymous, apart from the ancient heading "According to Mark" in manuscripts, it has traditionally been assigned to John Mark, in whose  mother's house (at Jerusalem) Christians assembled.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)"
"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1488)"

We certainly do not know whether Mark was the author or not!  The quote clearly states "no direct internal evidence of authorship".  Also, the so-called unanimous testimony of the early church:
  
-  Does not prove that the author was Mark.
   
-  Nor does it prove that other people did not alter and modify the book, especially when the book was written at least 40-50 years after Christ.  We don't even know if Mark even wrote the book.

   "Traditionally, the gospel is said to have been written shortly before A.D. 70 in Rome, at a time of impending persecution and when destruction loomed over Jerusalem.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)"
"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark.  They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark.  His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost.  (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes [1], page 1528)"
"This verse, which reads, "But if you do not forgive, neither will your heavenly Father forgive your transgressions," is omitted in the best manuscripts.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1081)"
"This passage, termed the Longer Ending to the Marcan gospel by comparison with a much briefer conclusion found in some less important manuscripts, has traditionally been accepted as a canonical part of the gospel and was defined as such by the Council of Trent.  Early citations of it by the Fathers indicate that it was composed by the second century, although vocabulary and style indicate that it was written by someone other than Mark.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1088)"

The Book of 1 and 2 Peter:
"Some modern scholars on the basis of a number of features that they consider incompatible with Petrine authenticity, regard the letter as the work of a later Christian writer.  Such features include the cultivated Greek in which it is written, difficult to attribute to a Galilean fisherman, together with its use of the Greek Septuagint translation when citing the Old Testament; the similarity in both thought and expression to the Pauline literature; and the allusions to widespread persecution of Christians, which did not occur until at least the reign of Domitian (A.D. 81-96).  In this view the letter would date from the end of the first century or even the beginning of the second, when there is evidence for persecution of Christians in Asia Minor.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1348)"
"Nevertheless, acceptance of 2 Peter into the New Testament canon met with great resistance in the early church.  The oldest certain reference to it comes from Origen in the early third century.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1354)"
"Among modern scholars there is wide agreement that 2 Peter is a pseudonymous work, i.e., one written by a later author who attributed it to Peter.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1354)"
So like the rest of the books and gospels of the Bible, we don't even know regarding 1 Peter:

1. Who wrote it.
2. How many people wrote it.
3. When it was written.
4. Where it was written.

The Book of Acts:
"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1643)"
So based on some conclusion, you're willing to die for defending the idea that the Book of Acts was the True Word of GOD Almighty? If the book was inspired by GOD Almighty, then how come it wasn't mentioned in the book itself to help us filter it out from the many other "Satanic false books"? Are we sure that this book too is not a man-made Satanic book?
After all, its just a conclusion, isn't it?
Beside, what evidence are they talking about?!  The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus.  So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering it as the True Living Word of GOD.


The Gospel of Luke:
"The identification of Luke as the author is primarily based on the "we" passages in Acts (beginning in Acts 16:10), which indicate that Luke was associated with Paul in his ministry and wrote down the account of his activities.  (The Amplified Bible, Page 1153)"
The only proof that they have about Luke being the sole author of this gospel is a weak speculation on "we".  This is absurd at best!  This speculation shows:

1. The gospel was likely to have been altered or written by others beside Luke.
2. It's place of documentation is unknown.
3. It's date of documentation is also unknown.

It is also worth mentioning that the author of the book of Acts is also unknown as shown above:
"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1643)"
 
The Book of Hebrews:
"The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1856)"

The Gospel of John:
Here is what the Bible's theologians and historians said about this gospel:
"Many scholars of the past two centuries have denied that John wrote this book, partly because of their belief that the author fabricated many details such as the miracles and the discourses of Jesus.  (The Holman Illustrated Study Bible, ISBN: 978-1-58640-275-4, Gospel of John, Page1540)"
"Critical Analysis makes it difficult to accept the idea that the gospel as it now stands was written by one person.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
"Within the gospel itself there are also some inconsistencies.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
"To solve these problems, scholars have proposed various rearrangements that would produce a smoother order.  However, most have come to the conclusion that the inconsistencies were probably produced by subsequent editingin which homogeneous materials were added to a shorter original.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
"Other difficulties for any theory of eyewitness authorship of the gospel in its present form are presented by its highly developed theology and by certain elements of its literary style.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
"The gospel contains many details about Jesus not found in the synoptic gospels.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"
"The final editing of the gospel and arrangement in its present form probably dates from between A.D. 90 and 100.  Traditionally, Ephesus has been favored as the place of composition, though many support a location in Syria, perhaps the city of Antioch, while some have suggested other places, including Alexandria.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1136)"

The Gospel of 1 John:
Here is what the Bible's theologians and historians said about this gospel:
"....Unlike most NT letters, 1 John does not tell us who its author is.  The earliest identification of him comes from the church fathers...(From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1904)"
"The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1905)"

The Books of 1 and 2 Corinthians:
"Scholars have noticed a lack of continuity in this document.  For example the long section of 2, 14-7, 4 seems abruptly spliced into the narrative of a crisis and its resolution.  Identical or similar topics, moreover, seem to be treated several times during the letter.  Many judge, therefore, that this letter as it stands incorporates several briefer letters sent to Corinth over a certain span of time.  If this is so, then Paul himself or, more likely, some other editor clearly took care to gather those letters together and impose some literary unity upon the collection, thus producing the document that has come down to us as the Second Letter to the Corinthians.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1252)"
Again, we have no idea how many people wrote and edited the letters, and we don't know where and when this happened.

The Book of Philippians:
"The early church was unanimous in its testimony that Philippians was written by the apostle Paul (see 1:1).  Internally the letter reveals the stamp of genuineness.  The many personal references of the author fit what we know of Paul from other NT books.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1803)"
Again, it was assumed that this book was written by Paul himself.  No one knows for sure whether it was Paul or somebody else.  The New Testament wasn't even documented until 150-300 years after the disappearance of Jesus peace be upon him.  If we're going to assume that Books that look appealing to us as the True Word of GOD Almighty, then we are committing a great crime against GOD Almighty and His Holy Words.  No where in this Book we see a statement saying that it was inspired by GOD Almighty Himself.
And again, Paul admitted that he wasn't even sure whether the Holy Spirit was inspiring him or not:  Paul's Delusions: In 1 Corinthians 7:40, he claimed that he "thinks" that he has the Holy Spirit in him!

The Book of Colossians:
"That Colossians is a genuine letter Paul is not usually disputed.  In the early church, all who speak on the subject of authorship ascribe it to Paul.  In the 19th century, however, some thought that the heresy refuted in ch. 2 was second-century Gnosticism.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1813)"
Again, it was assumed that Paul was the one who wrote the Book.  But again, who's to say that it was inspired by GOD Almighty Himself?
And again, Paul admitted that he wasn't even sure whether the Holy Spirit was inspiring him or not:  Paul's Delusions: In 1 Corinthians 7:40, he claimed that he "thinks" that he has the Holy Spirit in him!

The Books of 1 and 2 Thessalonians:
"Paul's authorship of 2 Thessalonians has been questioned more often than that of 1 Thessalonians, in spite of the fact that it has more support from early Christian writers.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1829)"
So basically we're not certain whether or not Paul wrote the Book.  And even if Paul was the one who wrote it, we still don't know whether it was the True Words of GOD Almighty or not, because no where in the Book we see any indication that it was inspired by the Almighty GOD.

1- The NIV Study Bible, 10th Anniversary Edition. 
General Editor: Kenneth Barker.
Associate Editors: Donald Burdick, John Stek, Walter Wessel and Ronald Youngblood.
Published at: Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI 49530, USA.
ISBN: 0-310-92589-4.
2- Holy Bible - King James Version.
KJV Giant Print, personal size reference Bible.
Published by Zondervan Publishing House.
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530, U.S.A.
Printed in the United States of America.
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

3- The New Jerusalem Bible.
Published by Doubleday, A division of Bantam Doubleday, Dell Publishing Group, Inc.
1540 Broadway, New York, New York 10036.
ISBN: 0-385-14264-1 (Regular Edition).
ISBN: 0-385-46961-6 (Deluxe Edition).

notes on video

Ibn Taymiyyah quoting hadith in his book that says Mohamed promised paradise for anyone who kills "Rafidas" (Shia Muslims) [Arabic] Al-Sarim al-Maslool book, pages 582-583 https://archive.org/stream/FP16239/16... Imam Malik ibn Anas (via the exegesis of Ibn Kathir) saying Shias are non-believers because of their hostility to Mohamed's companions http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?opti... - 48:29 Omar, the 2nd caliph, kicks out a Christian from the city because he was a Christian http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?opti... Mohamed in hadith saying Muslims should be careful to call others infidel, as the accuser would become one if his accusation is false http://www.sunnah.com/bukhari/78/130 [Arabic] Encyclopaedia of Fiqh volume 13 - pages 229 onwards Positions on 4 main Sunni schools of jurisprudence on when Muslims should be declared infidels and killed. https://ia801404.us.archive.org/21/it... Hadith of Abu Bakr fighting Muslims who refused to pay him zakat after Mohamed's death. http://www.sunnah.com/bukhari/88/7 Killing of Uthman in the History of Islam by al-Tabari Volume 15, page 131 how he changed his governors and played around pages 160-190 approx.. How rebellion occurred, details of tension, the siege on his home and his killing https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B76... Battle of Camel where Ali fought Aisha & 15,000 were left dead Tabari volume 16 on Ali getting caliphate and Battle of Camel p.52-56 Aisha stirring up trouble, p.122 the battle, p.127 Ali rebukes Aisha, p.164 death toll, p.171 accounts of carnage https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B76... Hadith by Mohamed claiming 10 were guaranteed heaven, he included Ali, Talhah and Az-Zubair in the list, despite the fact that they would later fight each other in battle. http://www.sunnah.com/urn/736260 Another hadith by Mohamed claiming any Muslims who are engaged in battle are going to hell. http://www.sunnah.com/muslim/54/19 Battle of Siffin where Ali fought Muawiya & 70,000 Muslims killed each other The death toll for this battle is found in volume 3 p.545 of Imam Dahabi's books on the history of Islam. [Arabic] https://ia801400.us.archive.org/28/it... Details on the Battle of Siffin are found in Tabari volume 17 pages 39-64 intensity of the fighting https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B76... Ash-Shuraat (Kharijites) get massacred at Nahrawan near Baghdad. [Arabic] Ibn Kathir al-Bidaya wal nihaya - volume 7 - p.487 https://archive.org/stream/Bidayahwan...

Pre Islamic Arabs knew of Abraham and Ishmael and them building the Kabba

Amazingly, this is precisely what the hadith literature suggests just as the following examples prove:

Narrated 'Aisha:

(the wife of the Prophet) that Allah's Apostle said to her, "Do you know that when your people (Quraish) rebuilt the Ka'ba, they decreased it from its original foundation laid by Abraham?" I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Why don't you rebuild it on its original foundation laid by Abraham?" He replied, "Were it not for the fact that your people are close to the pre-lslamic Period of ignorance (i.e. they have recently become Muslims) I would have done so." The sub-narrator, 'Abdullah (bin 'Umar ) stated: 'Aisha 'must have heard this from Allah's Apostle for in my opinion Allah's Apostle had not placed his hand over the two corners of the Ka'ba opposite Al-Hijr only because the Ka'ba was not rebuilt on its original foundations laid by Abraham. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 26, Number 653)

Narrated 'Abdullah bin Zaid:

The Prophet said, "The Prophet Abraham made Mecca a sanctuary, and asked for Allah's blessing in it. I made Medina a sanctuary as Abraham made Mecca a sanctuary and I asked for Allah's Blessing in its measures the Mudd and the Sa as Abraham did for Mecca. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 339)

Narrated Ibn Mirba' al-Ansari: Yazid ibn Shayban said: We were in a place of stationing at Arafat which Amr (ibn Abdullah) thought was very far away from where the imam was stationing, when Ibn Mirba' al-Ansari came to us and told (us): I am a messenger for you from the Apostle of Allah. He tells you: Station where you are performing your devotions for you are an heir to the heritage of Abraham. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 10, Number 1914)

Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah:

The Prophet sacrificed two horned rams which were white with black markings and had been castrated. When he made them face the qiblah, he said: I have turned my face towards Him. Who created the heavens and the earth, following Abraham's religion, the true in faith, and I am not one of the polytheists. My prayer, and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death are all for Allah, the Lord of the Universe, Who has no partner. That is what I was commanded to do, and I am one of the Muslims. O Allah it comes from Thee and is given to Thee from Muhammad and his people. In the name of Allah, and Allah is Most Great. He then made sacrifice. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 15, Number 2789)

In these hadiths Muhammad asserts that he and his followers are to follow the religion of their forefather Abraham who supposedly built the Kabah and instituted the rites of pilgrimage. This shows that the Meccans  knew and believed that Abraham had traveled there and were therefore aware that Allah had  revealed and made known the true religion to their ancestors long before Muhammad was born.

There is more. According to the follow narratives there were pictures of Mary, Abraham and Ishmael in the Kabah:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

The Prophet entered the Ka'ba and found in it the pictures of (Prophet) Abraham and Mary. On that he said' "What is the matter with them (i.e. Quraish)? They have already heard that angels do not enter a house in which there are pictures; yet this is the picture of Abraham. And why is he depicted as practicing divination by arrows?" (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 570)

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

When Allah's Apostle arrived in Mecca, he refused to enter the Ka'ba while there were idols in it. So he ordered that they be taken out. The pictures of the (Prophets) Abraham and Ishmael, holding arrows of divination in their hands, were carried out. The Prophet said, "May Allah ruin them (i.e. the infidels) for they knew very well that they (i.e. Abraham and Ishmael) never drew lots by these (divination arrows). Then the Prophet entered the Ka'ba and said. "Allahu Akbar" in all its directions and came out and not offer any prayer therein. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 584)

This shows that the Arabs of Mecca (as well as Medina) knew of and were aware of the Biblical characters such as Abraham and Ishmael. These next hadiths indicate that they also knew that they were  descendants of Ishmael and that both he and his mother had  settled in Mecca:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

The Prophet said, "May Allah be merciful to the mother of Ishmael! If she had left the water of Zam-Zam (fountain) as it was, (without constructing a basin for keeping the water), (or said, "If she had not taken handfuls of its water"), it would have been a flowing stream. Jurhum (an Arab tribe) came and asked her, 'May we settle at your dwelling?' She said, 'Yes, but you have no right to possess the water.' They agreed." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 40, Number 556)

Narrated Salama:

Allah's Apostle passed by some people from the tribe of Aslam practicing archery. He said, "O children of Ishmael! Throw (arrows), for your father was an archer. I am on the side of Bani so-and-so," meaning one of the two teams. The other team stopped throwing, whereupon the Prophet said, "What has happened to them?" They replied, "How shall we throw while you are with Bani so-and-so?" He said, "Throw for I am with all of you." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 710)

Narrated Abu Huraira:

I have not ceased to like Banu Tamim ever since I heard of three qualities attributed to them by Allah's Apostle (He said): They, out of all my followers, will be the strongest opponent of Ad-Dajjal; 'Aisha had a slave-girl from them, and the Prophet told her to manumit her as she was from the descendants of (the Prophet) Ishmael; and, when their Zakat was brought, the Prophet said, "This is the Zakat of my people." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 652)

Muhammad knew he was a descendant from Ishmael

For Reference see Sahih Muslim Volume 6 Page 133 Hadith # 5938

Tafsir books contain false hadith

The truth about Sunni Tafseer books

In Faiz al-Qadeer, Volume 1 page 27 we read the following revelation of the Sunni commentaries of the Holy Quran:

قال ابن الكمال : كتب التفسير مشحونة بالأحاديث الموضوعة

Ibn al-Kamal said: ‘Tafseer books are filled with fabricated traditions’

Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti in his book Al-Itqan, Volume 2 page 471 has recorded the opinion of Imam Ahmed regarding the the Sunni books on Tafseer:

قال الإمام أحمد ثلاثة ليس لها أصل التفسير والملاحم والمغازي وذلك لأن الغالب عليها المراسيل

Imam Ahmad said: ‘Three things are unreliable, Tafseer, epics and battles (stories) because most of them are narrated through disconnect chains’.

does allah pray for muhammad refuting david wood references notes

4. Meaning of ‘Salah’ or ‘Rehmah’ when used along with ‘Barakah’ (Qur’an 11:73):

Yet another attempt to complicate the things made by them is discussing the word ‘Barakah’ along with ‘Salah’ and ‘Rehmah’ especially when it is used with either of them like in Quran 11:73 and the Salutations (durood) recited in ritual prayers.
Now as to the word ‘Barakah’, its meaning is:

البركة ثبوت الخير الالهى في الشئ


"Barakah in a thing shows the facilitation/ease/goodness endowed by Allah."
(See Mufradaat fi Ghraib Al-Quran by Isfahani 1/44)


This also shows that Barakah is the manifestation of Allah's Rehmah (Mercy). So in Quran 11:73 it means Allah bestows his Mercy and specially Barakah, a manifestation of the same which suits the context that Allah will make their having a son at an old age easy by His Mercy which otherwise seems improbable. And in the salutations (durood) where it is used along with ‘salah’ there we pray to Allah to bestow both the manifestations of his ‘Rehmah’ on the Holy Prophet (PBUH).

5. A weak narration brought forward also supports our contention:

Then these people try to use a tradition from Ibn Kathir which they translate as:

"The Israelites said to Musa: Does your Lord pray? Musa said: Fear Allah, O Sons of Israel!
Allah said: O Musa! What did your people say? Musa said: O my Lord, You already know? They said: Does your Lord pray? Allah said: Tell them My prayer for My servants is that My Mercy should precede My Anger. If it were not so, I would have destroyed them."

Firstly this tradition is not authentic according to the rules of reporting as mentioned by Albani in Silsala Ahadith Daeefa 3/387 Hadith 1388 thus it is not an evidence for us.

Secondly the last part of the narration above also belies the notion of taking ‘salah’ in the sense of supplication once used for Allah.

Refuting David Wood and The Masked Arab on Does The Quran say the sun sets in a muddy spring References

The main words in question in this verse are:

 مَغْرِبَ (Maghrib)

 وَجَدَ (Wajada)

 تَغْرُبُ (Taghrubu)

Until, when he reached the setting of the sun (maghrib), he found (wajada) it set (taghrubu) in a spring of murky water...(Quran 18:86)

according to:
Almu'jam Alwaseet المعجمالوسيط
Vocabulary of the Holy Qur'an page 447
Arabic-English Dictionary of Quranic Usage page 661
Al-Mawrid Arabic-English Dictionary page 1077
Hans Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary, 3rd Edition page 669

 مَغْرِبَ (Maghrib) means:
Place of Sunset, i,e west as the sun sets in the west
Time of Sunset
West
Sunset
According to:
Arabic-English Dictionary of Quranic Usage page 661
Hans Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary, 3rd Edition Page 669
مَغْرِبَ الشَّمْسِ used in Surah 18:86 should be understood to mean:

Time of Sunset
Place of Sunset, i.e. west as the sun sets in the west.

So when Allah says "Until, when he reached the setting of the sun (maghrib)" it can either mean:

He reached the time of Sunset.

Or Dhul-Qarnayn reached the western part of his empire where there was no longer any land.

وَجَدَ (Wajada) can mean to find/perceive/see/discover/experience.

According to Mini English-Arabic & Arabic-English Dictionary, Wagdi Rizk Ghali, Librairie du Liban Publishers, Page 340

according to:

Mini English-Arabic & Arabic-English Dictionary, Wagdi Rizk Ghali, Librairie du Liban Publishers, Page 340
Al-Mawrid Arabic-English Dictionary page 1223
Hans Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary, 3rd Edition, page 1049
A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran by John Penrice p.158
H. Anthony Salmoné. An Advanced Learner's Arabic-English Dictionary. Beirut. Librairie du Liban. 1889.
Arabic-English Dictionary by J.G.Hava p.884
Dictionary Of The Holy Quran, by Malik Ghulam Farid, M.A p.817
Arabic-English Dictionary of Quranic Usage page 1012
Edward William Lane’s Arabic-English Lexicon p. 2924
Mufradat al-Quran of Imam Raghib Isfahani

 وَجَدَ (Wajada) means:
To find.
To discover.
To perceive.
To see.
To experience.
Finding by means of any one of the five senses.
Also this action of Wajada is done with a strong emotion.

So when Allah says "wajada it set (taghrubu) in a spring of murky water" it can mean:

he found/discovered/perceived/saw the sun set in a spring of murky water.

the word ‘wajada’ refers to perception through any one of the five senses see Edward William Lane’s Arabic-English Lexicon p. 2924.

Meaning of  تَغْرُبُ (Taghrubu)

The word used to describe the setting of the sun ‘in the murky spring’ is تَغْرُبُ [stemming from the word غرب - meaning to leave, be absent, be hidden, to depart, to be distant].  تَغْرُبُ  just means setting or disappearing. Meaning Dhul-Qarnayn found/saw/perceived the sun setting/disappearing.

It is important to note that the word used doesn't mean to enter [دخل], neither to sink in/be swallowed up [خسف]. If the Quran wished to say the Sun entered the water it wouldn't have used تَغْرُبُ (taghrubu) as تَغْرُبُ (taghrubu) doesn't mean entering. It would of used  دخل meaning to enter.

Classical Muslims have always understood the verse like this:



In Tafsir Jalalayn co-authored by al-Suyuti (d. 911 A.H.) and al-Mahalli (d. 864 A.H.), we find the following words;
وغروبها في العين في رأي العين


“… its setting in a spring is [described as seen] from the perspective of the eye.” (ONLINE SOURCE)

Before them Ibn Kathir (d. 774 A.H.) wrote:
رَأَى الشَّمْسَ فِي مَنْظَرِهِ تَغْرُبُ فِي الْبَحْرِ الْمُحِيطِ، وَهَذَا شَأْنُ كُلِّ مَنِ انْتَهَى إِلَى سَاحِلِهِ، يَرَاهَا كَأَنَّهَا تَغْرُبُ فِيهِ، وَهِيَ لَا تُفَارِقُ الْفَلَكَ الرَّابِعَ الَّذِي هِيَ مُثَبَّتَةٌ فِيهِ لَا تُفَارِقُهُ


“… he saw the sun as if it were setting in the ocean. This is something which everyone who goes to the coast can see: it looks as if the sun is setting into the sea but in fact it never leaves its path in which it is fixed.” (ONLINE SOURCE)

And even before him Nasiruddin al-Baydhawi (d. 691 A.H.) said:
ولعله بلغ ساحل المحيط فرآها كذلك إذ لم يكن في مطمح بصره غير الماء ولذلك قال { وَجَدَهَا تَغْرُبُ } ولم يقل كانت تغرب


“Perhaps he reached shore of an ocean and saw it like that as there was nothing in his sight except water and for this reason it is said, “and he perceived it to set”, and not that it actually sets.” (Anwar al-Tanzil wa Asrar al-Tawil 4/14)

How did Classical Tafsirs and Scholars understand this verse? Did they support the understanding above? Undoubtedly yes:


Tafseer al-Jalalayn co-authored by al-Suyuti (d. 911 A.H.) and al-Mahalli (d. 864 A.H.):

until, when he reached the setting of the sun, the place where it sets, he found it setting in a muddy spring (‘ayn hami’a: [a spring] containing ham’a, which is black clay): its setting in a spring is [described as seen] from the perspective of the eye, for otherwise it is far larger [in size] than this world; and he found by it, that is, [by] the spring, a folk, of disbelievers. We said, ‘O Dhū’l-Qarnayn — by [means of] inspiration — either chastise, the folk, by slaying [them], or treat them kindly’, by [merely] taking them captive.

Tafseer ibn Katheer (d. 774 A.H.):

Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun,) means, he followed a route until he reached the furthest point that could be reached in the direction of the sun’s setting, which is the west of the earth. As for the idea of his reaching the place in the sky where the sun sets, this is something impossible, and the tales told by storytellers that he travelled so far to the west that the sun set behind him are not true at all. Most of these stories come from the myths of the People of the Book and the fabrications and lies of their heretics.

(he found it setting in a spring of Hami’ah) meaning, he saw the sun as if it were setting in the ocean. This is something which everyone who goes to the coast can see: it looks as if the sun is setting into the sea but in fact it never leaves its path in which it is fixed…

Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi (d. 745 A.H) said in his Tafsir al-Bahr al-Muhit:

"And the meaning of setting in a spring is that it is according what the eye sees, not that it it actually does so, just as we see it (the sun)on the smooth earth (land) as if it as if it goes into the earth. It is also permissible (possible) that this spring a part of the sea"
(Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi, Muhammad bin Yusuf,Tafsir al-bahr al-muhit, 1993, First print, Dar al-kutub al-''ilmiyya, vol.6, p. 151)

Imam Al-Baidawi (d. 691 A.H.):
He probably reached shore of the ocean and saw it like that because there was but water at the furthest of his sight that’s why He says “he found it set” and does not say “it sets”. (Al-Baidawi, Anwar-ut-Tanzil wa Asrar-ut-Taw’il, Volume 3, page 394. Published by Dar-ul-Ashraf, Cairo, Egypt)

Imam Al-Qurtubi (d. 651 A.H.):
Al-Qaffal said: It is not meant by reaching the rising or setting of the sun that he reached its body and touched it because it runs in the sky around the earth without touching it and it is too great to enter any spring on earth. It is so much larger than earth. But it is meant that he reached the end of populated land east and west, so he found it – according to his vision – setting in a spring of a murky water like we watch it in smooth land as if it enters inside the land. That is why He said, “he found it rising on a people for whom we had provided no covering protection against the sun.” (Holy Qur’ân 18:90) and did not mean that it touches or adheres to them; but they are the first to rise on. (Al-Qurtubi, Al-Game’ le Ahkam-el-Qur’an, Volume 16, page 47. Published by Dar-ul-Hadith, Cairo, Egypt.)

Imam Fakhr-ud-Deen Ar-Razi (d. 587 A.H.) in At-Tafsir-ul-Kabir:
When Zul-Qarnain reached the furthest west and no populated land was left, he found the sun as if it sets in a dark spring, but it is not in reality. The same when sea traveller sees the sun as if it sets in the sea if he cannot see the shore while in reality it sets behind the sea. (Ar-Razi, At-Tafsir-ul-Kabir, Volume 21, page 166)

According to Al-Mawardi (d.450 A.H) in his tasir (al-Nukat wa al-'uyun) the verse can be understood as:

That He (Dhul Qarnayn) wajadaha (found it, saw it) setting behind the spring ('ayn) AS IF it was setting in the very spring"
:فيه وجهان


الثاني انه وجدها تغرب وراء العين حتى كانها تغرب في نفس العين

(Al-Mawardi, 'Ali bin Muhammad bin Habib, Al-Nukat wa al-'Uyun, Unknown year, Dar al-kutub al-'ilmiyya, vol 3, p. 450)


According to Al-Qutaybi (Ibn Qutayba , the famous scholar of Arabic language, d. 276 A.H):

it is permissible for the verse to mean from the perspective of the eye (في راي العين)
و قال القتيبي: يجوز ان يكون معنى قوله(( في عين حمئة)) اي عندها عين حمئة او في راي العين

(Al-Baghawi, Al-Hussayn bin Mas'ud, Ma'alim al-tanzil, Dar Ibn Hazm, First print, 2002, p. 795)

What about the tafsirs that mention that the sun goes into a spring of water? First off even if those tafsirs say that that dosent mean the Quran says that. Its just the opinion of the author of the tafsir. Secondly the tafsir books are generally not reliable according to Muslim scholars. Only some were considered reliable like Ibn Kathir but the rest were filled with weak and fabricated traditions as Muslim scholars have pointed out:

In Faiz al-Qadeer, Volume 1 page 27 we read the following revelation of the Sunni commentaries of the Holy Quran:

قال ابن الكمال : كتب التفسير مشحونة بالأحاديث الموضوعة
Ibn al-Kamal said: ‘Tafseer books are filled with fabricated traditions’

Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti in his book Al-Itqan, Volume 2 page 471 has recorded the opinion of Imam Ahmed regarding the the Sunni books on Tafseer:

قال الإمام أحمد ثلاثة ليس لها أصل التفسير والملاحم والمغازي وذلك لأن الغالب عليها المراسيل
Imam Ahmad said: ‘Three things are unreliable, Tafseer, epics and battles (stories) because most of them are narrated through disconnect chains’.

Refuting Arguements made against Prophet Muhammads marriage to Aisha

LIES ABOUT PROPHET MUHAMMAD & AISHA – Part 2

Several lies have been invented recently against Islam regarding Prophet Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha. These lies manipulate invented interpretations that contradict the legislation of all the 4 Islamic Schools of thought, or “mathaheb”.

1)     Abu Bakr Urged the Marriage

The 1^st lie claims that “Prophet Muhammad forced Aisha’s father to accept the marriage”.

·         This lie distorts a summarized narration about Abu Bakr. The detailed hadith narrated by Aisha herself provides 4 facts that disprove the lie:[1]

1.     Prophet Muhammad did not initiate the engagement. Khawla suggested the marriage,(1) because the companions feared for the Prophet’s health after the death of Khadijah.[2]

2.     The Prophet did not approach Abu Bakr directly, rather, using the applicable etiquette, he replied to Khawla's suggestion: "So go, and mention me to them".(1)

3.     Abu Bakr’s question to Khawla “Is she good for him? She is his brother’s daughter” was not an objection, rather, a question due to the pre-Islamic norm that assigned blood ties which do not actually exist, such as in adoption. The Prophet corrected this false notion through Khawla.

4.     If Abu Bakr had any hesitation, he would simply have used the acceptable justification that she was already engaged, but instead he told Khawla to “Wait” and went immediately to request permission from Aisha’s previous fiancé.

·         More importantly, even the consummation itself was urged by Abu Bakr, which disproves any reluctance from his side. Lady Aisha narrated: “Abu Bakr told him ‘What prevents you from consummating with your wife?’ So he consummated (our marriage)“.[3]

·         Last, any doubt about Abu Bakr’s compassion for his daughter’s best interests is rejected, because he was very well known for his "Shafaqa",[4]  [5]  which is a term normally used to praise a compassionate father.[6]  [7]  [8]  [9]  [10]

As a result, not only did Abu Bakr consent, but both the engagement and the consummation were initiated and urged by people other than the Prophet.

2)     Sexual Acts Prohibited Before Puberty

The 2^nd lie claims that “sexual acts were performed when Aisha was 6 years old”.

·         The lie does not cite any hadith, but merely repeats a falsified fatwa against Saudi scholars who denied ever having made it, as declared on their website, and they added "Our Prophet prohibits even seclusion with a fiancee."[11]

·         In Islam, "approaching" even ones wife intimately even without penetration is only allowed “if she has reached puberty (itha balaghat)…” as stated by Hasan al Basri, leader of the "followers" of the companions.[12]

·         The relevant hadith by Aisha proves that she had passed puberty because she said “The Prophet used to tell us during our period to wear a skirt before (physically) approaching us".[13]

Therefore, the only sexual acts with prepubescent girls were actually just fantasized in the perverted imagination of the person fabricating the lie in his sick mind about “thighing” and “rubbing” repeatedly a 6 year old girl.

3)     Lady Aisha was a Mature Adult

The 3^rd lie claims that “Lady Aisha had not reached puberty when her marriage was consummated.”

·         The fallacy claims that the proof of Aisha’s childhood is her saying that “her dolls were with her” when “she was taken to his house as a bride when she was 9”.(14) But Ibn Hajar cites in Fathulbari that the Muslim scholars deduced from the context of this hadith, the permission to play with dolls regardless of age as a means to learn about matters of the home and raising children.[14]  [15]

o    Indeed, playing with dolls by adults is also common in many recent societies,[16]  [17]  [18] as educational preparation for motherhood.[19]  [20] It is ridiculous to claim that merely playing with dolls or swings is evidence of physical or even mental maturity.

·         The evidence for Aisha’s adulthood is quite explicit:

1.     As shown in part 1 of this presentation, even until the 18^th century, psychological maturity coincided with puberty, (see part 1: ref. 58 to 86) and all societies recognized puberty as the requirement to give informed consent for marriage. (see part 1: ref. 31 to 50)

2.     In her parents' opinion, Aisha had reached puberty and was fit for marriage when Abu Bakr requested the consummation,(3) just like the Jewish princess Safiyyah, who married when she became "capable of marriage" in her neighboring Jewish tribe.[21]  [22]

3.     Lady Aisha said: “If the young girl reaches 9 years, then she is a woman”.[23] She is obviously describing herself and her acquaintances.

4.     Not merely did she reach menstruation, the great Malki scholar Dawudi commented about her marriage “Aisha then had physically matured well indeed”.[24]

As a result, not only had Lady Aisha reached puberty when her marriage was consummated, she was also a physically and psychologically mature adult.

4)     Aisha Consented & Was Overjoyed

The 4^th lie dares to claim that “Aisha did not consent to the marriage.”

·         Not only did she consent to the marriage according to Islam’s requirements,[25]  [26]    [27]  [28]  [29]  [30] Lady Aisha was overjoyed, and stated 6 priveleges directly relating to her marriage: “I have been given features not given to any woman. The Prophet (peace be upon him) married me when I was seven, the angel brought him my image in his hand to look at it, he consummated our marriage when I was nine, I saw the angel Gabriel, I was his most beloved wife, and I attended his disease till he died, not witnessed but by me and the angels."[31]

It is clear from this hadith that Aisha not only consented, but was even ecstatic about this privilege.

5)     Puberty, Maturity, & Consent Required

The 5^th lie claims that “Quranic verses permit consummation to prepubescent girls”.

·         To disfigure the truth, the fallacy ommits the very 1^st verse revealed regarding the waiting period after divorce. In the correct context and order:

o    the 1^st verse sets the waiting period to 3 menstrual cycles.[32]

o    Since old and young women do not menstruate, the 2^nd verse was subsequently revealed setting their waiting period to 3 months, as explained by Ibn Kathir.[33]

o    And finally, the 3^rd verse sets the exception for any marriage that has not been consummated.[34] This exception applies to marriages that cannot be consummated, such as not only prepubescent girls, but even women who have menstruated but who are not yet ready physically or emotionally for intercourse.(24)

·         In fact, the only verse in the Quran using the term “bulugh al nikah”, or "age of procreation", to describe puberty mentions the additional requirement of mental maturity for orphans to receive their financial assets.[35]
This Islamic requirement of maturity, which is even correctly relayed in Encyclopedia Britannica,[36] undeniably applies even more to marriage contracts, because it entails responsibility towards other people.[37]

·         Furthermore, Imam Abu Hanifa legislated that since a woman who reached puberty has authority over her own financial affairs, then she has authority over her own marriage.[38] Consummation before puberty cannot occur, because it would violate this right of women to consent.(26)

o    Indeed, an authentic hadith shows that “A young girl who was still a virgin came to the Prophet and she mentioned that her father married her (to someone), while she was forced, so the Prophet gave her the choice (to remained married or not).”[39]

As a result, prior to consummating a marriage, Islam not only requires menstruation, but physical and mental maturity followed by consent as well.

6)     Islam Curtailed Sexual Freedoms

The 6^th ridiculous claim is that “Muhammad invented Islam to satisfy his sexual desires.”

·         First of all, there were already Talmud and Church laws permitting vast sexual aberrations. But while affirming the divine source of Judaism and Christianity, Islam rejected these obviously false interpretations or alterations. Please read the following examples:

o    Bible: no mention of a minimum age for marriage.

o    Talmud: “a girl who is 3 years and 1 day old may be betrothed through sexual intercourse”.[40]  [41]  [42]  [43]

o    Canon: 7 years is the minimum age for consummation (passed on to 19th century Europe & US Common Law). (see part 1: ref. 31 to 50)

o    Talmud: "A proselyte (non-Jewish girl) who is under the age of 3 years and 1 day is permitted to marry a priest" citing Numbers 31:17.[44]

o    "Saint" Constantine: legalized sale of infants as slaves (313 AD).[45]

o    Talmud: fathers permitted to sell daughters as slaves, citing Exodus 21:7.[46]

o    Talmud: For pederasty and incest of boys under 9 and girls under 3, “no guilt is incurred” by the adult.[47]  [48]  [49]

o    Deuteronomy 22:13-18 requires parents to deflower their daughters before marriage to show “tokens of her virginity”.[50]

·         Secondly, Islam actually opposed the extreme sexual permissiveness of that time, such as:

o    Prostitution and pederasty were cherished from the Greeks up until the 15^th century Roman Byzantine society.[51]  [52]  [53]  [54]

o    Talmud: did not require consent of women under 12 for marriage.[55]

o    Pagan Arabs: used to perform their public worship completely naked.

o    Child prostitution was legal at age 7 from Greco-Roman times (remained legal at age 10 even until 1885 in US and UK).[56]  [57]  [58]  [59]  [60]

o    Arab and Jewish people could marry an unlimited number of simultaneous wives.

Therefore, to satisfy abnormal sexual desires in 7^th century Arabia, no new religion was needed: all one had to do was take his pick from the existing religions and norms. In contrast, Islam protected people from these shameful laws.

                          

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we have seen that these attacks against Islam necessitated disfiguration, concealing the truth, and incompetent, twisted interpretations. This unacceptable approach puts into serious question the morality, system of values and beliefs of anyone perpetrating such lies.

 

---

[1]  From Imam Ahmed (Good Hadith according to Ibn Hajar in Fathul Bari, with other hadiths corroborating many of the details including Tabarani as good, Al Hakim in Mustadrak as authentic, and Abdulrazaq in Mustadrak):“After Khadijah died, Khawlah bint Hakeem,...said: ‘Wouldn’t you marry, O prophet of Allah?’ He said: ‘Who?’ She said: ‘If you like, a virgin, or a previously married woman.’ He said: ‘Who is the virgin?’ She said: ‘The daughter of the most beloved creature to you, Aisha daughter of Abu Bakr.’ He said: ‘And who is the previously married?’ She said: ‘Sawda bint Zama; she believed in you and followed you, in what you say.’ He said: ‘So go, and mention me to them.’
So she entered Abu Bakr’s house and said: ‘O Um Ruman, what great good and blessing did Allah grant you!’ She said: ‘And what is that?’ She said: ‘The Prophet PBUH sent me to propose his marriage to Aisha.’ She said: ‘Wait for Abu Bakr to come.’ Abu Bakr came and she said: ‘O Abu Bakr, what great good and blessings did Allah grant you!’ He said: ‘And what is that?’ She said: ‘The Prophet PBUH sent me to propose his marriage to Aisha.’ He said: ‘Is she good for him? She is his brother’s daughter.’
She returned to the Prophet PBUH and mentioned that to him. He said: ‘Return and tell him I am your brother and you are my brother in Islam, and your daughter is good for me.’
She returned and mentioned that to him. He said: ‘Wait.’ And he went out. Um Ruman said that Mutim Ibn Adiyy had proposed for her to his son, and by Allah, Abu Bakr never made a promise and broke it... He returned and told Khawlah: ‘Invite the Prophet PBUH to come over.’ She invited him, and he married him to her, while Aisha was six years old then...
Aisha said: ‘Then we moved to Madinah and lived among bani al Harth al Khazraj, in al Zanh.’
She said: ‘Then the Prophet PBUH came and entered our house, and men and women gathered around him. And my mother came to me... and then said: ‘These are your parents, so may Allah bless them for you and bless you for them’... And the Prophet consummated our marriage in our house… and I was nine years old that day’.”
روى الإمام احمد
لما هلكت خديجة جاءت خولة بنت حكيم امرأة عثمان بن مظعون قالت: يا رسول الله ألا تزوج قال: من قالت: إن شئت بكرا أو ثيبا قال: فمن البكر قالت ابنة أحب خلق الله عز وجل إليك عائشة بنت أبي بكر قال: ومن الثيب قالت: سودة بنت زمعة قد آمنت بك واتبعتك على ما تقول قال: فاذهبي فأذكريهما عليَّ فدخلت بيت أبي بكر فقالت: يا أم رومان ماذا أدخل الله عز وجل عليكم من الخير والبركة قالت: وما ذاك قالت: أرسلني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أخطب عليه عائشة قالت: انتظري أبا بكر حتى يأتي فجاء أبو بكر فقالت: يا أبا بكر ماذا أدخل الله عليكم من الخير والبركة قال وما ذاك قالت: أرسلني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أخطب عليه عائشة قال: وهل تصلح له إنما هي ابنة أخيه فرجعت إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فذكرت له ذلك قال: ارجعي إليه فقولي له أنا أخوك وأنت أخي في الإسلام وابنتك تصلح لي فرجعت فذكرت ذلك له قال: انتظري وخرج قالت أم رومان إن مطعم بن عدي قد كان ذكرها على ابنه فوالله ما وعد وعدا قط فأخلفه لأبي بكر ...
فرجع فقال لخولة: ادعي لي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم صلى الله عليه وسلم فدعته فزوجها إياه وعائشة يومئذ بنت ست   ... قالت عائشة فقدمنا المدينة فنزلنا في بني الحرث بن الخزرج في السنح  قالت: فجاء رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فدخل بيتنا واجتمع إليه رجال من الأنصار ونساء فجاءتني أمي ... ثم قالت: هؤلاء أهلك فبارك الله لك فيهم وبارك لهم فيك... وبنى بي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في بيتنا ... وأنا يومئذ بنت تسع سنين.

[2]  “Al Isabah” by Ibn Hajar, “Al Bidayah wal Nihayah” by Ibn Kathir“The Prophet PBUH pained for Khadijah’s (death) to the point they feared for him (to die), until he married Aisha.”
وَجَدَ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم على خديجة حتى خـُشِـيَ عليه حتى تزوج عائشة

[3]  Ibn Hajar (in “Fathul Bari”) and Al Tabaraani“Aisha said:...’Until we arrived at Madinah, so I dwelt among the family of Abu Bakr...So Abu Bakr told him: ‘What prevents you from consummating with your wife?’ So he consummated with me’.”
قال ابن حجر في فتح الباري: وأخرج الطبراني … عن عائشة قالت
لما هاجر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وأبو بكر خلفنا بمكة، فلما استقر بالمدينة ... حتى قدمنا المدينة فنزلت في عيال أبي بكر...فقال له أبو بكر: ما يمنعك أن تبني بأهلك؟ فبني بي

[4]  Tafseer Al Qurtubi
"Abu Bakr al Siddiq was called the weeper (alawah) for his compassion and kindness."قال القرطبي في تفسيره:
...وكان أبو بكر الصديق رضي الله عنه يسمى الأواه لشفقته ورأفته.

[5]  Kanzul Ummal,
"Uthman told Abu Bakr: 'I see you a good counselor to people of this religion and compassionate to them'…Khalid Ibn Said told Abu Bakr: 'and you are the compassionate and counseling leader'."
كنز العمال
مسند أبي بكر: ...قال عثمان بن عفان (لأبي بكر): إني أرى أنك ناصح لأهل هذا الدين شفيق عليهم...
...قال خالد ابن سعيد (لأبي بكر): ... وأنت الوالي الناصح الشفيق

[6]  The Explanation of Riyadh al Saliheen"Ibn Alan said: 'So if the merciful (shafiq) father fears harm for his child after him…"
قال ابن علان، في شرح رياض الصالحين
...فإن الوالد الشفيق يخشى على ولده الضيعة بعده...

[7]  Al Tabari, "Al Tareikh""The action of the merciful (shafiq) father with his son, and the loving leader with his followers…"
قال الطبري، في "التاريخ":
...فعل الوالد الشفيق على ولده والراعي الحب عى رعيته...

[8]  Al Suyuti, Al La-ale Al Masnua"Just as the merciful (shafiq) father cares for goodness towards his child"
قال السيوطي في اللآلئ المصنوعة
...  كما يتعاهد الوالد الشفيق ولده بالخير ...

[9]  Ibn Taymiya, Al Fatawa al Kubra"…Just like the father constrains his child to what is better for him…"
قال ابن تيمية في الفتاوى الكبرى
...  كما يلزم الأب الشفيق ولده ما هو أصلح له ...

[10]  Imam Al Ghazali, "Ihya Ulum al Deen""…Just like the merciful (shafiq) father would prevent his child the pleasure of fruits (if medically necessary) or imposes the pain of medical cuts out of compassion (shafaqa) and love for him."
قال الغزالي في الإحياء
 كما يمنع الوالد الشفيق ولده لذة الفواكه ويلزم ألم الفصد والحجامة شفقة عليه وحبا له

[11]  http://www.imanway1.com/horras/showthread.php?t=8044

[12]  AbdulRazzaq, “al Musannaf”"citing  Maymoonah, the Prophet’s wife, that if his wife had the period, he would approach his wife provided she was dressed till the middle of the thighs (not less), or till the knees (this is the recommended practice of all Muslims).
Then Abdul Razzaq added, citing Al Hasan: It is OK, IF SHE HAS REACHED PUBERTY, if it is on her belly or between her thighs."
(Hasan Al Basri was the most eminent authority in the generation succeeding the Prophet -Muhaddith MR)
عَنْ مَيْمُونَةَ زَوْجِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَليه وسلَّم، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَليه وسلَّم كَانَ يُبَاشِرُ المَرْأَةَ مِنْ نِسَائِهِ وَهِيَ حَائِضٌ إذَا كَانَ عَلَيْهَا إزَارٌ يَبْلُغُ أَنْصَافَ الفَخِذَيْنِ أَوْ الرُّكْبَتَيْنِ مُحْتَجِرَةً بِهِ.
حَدَّثَنَا وَكِيعٌ عَنْ الرَّبِيعِ عَنْ الحَسَنِ قَالَ: لاَ بَأْسَ إنْ بَلَغَتْ عَلَى بَطْنِهَا وَبَيْنَ فَخِذَيْهَا.

[13]  Bukhari  (Book 6, Hadith 296), Muslim (Kitab Al Hayd, Hadith #2), Ibn Majah, Al Hakim, “Al Mustadrak” (Hadith # 614/169), Abu Dawud (Hadith #272)The Prophet used to tell us during our period to wear a skirt before (physically) approaching us, AND WHO AMONG YOU CAN CONTROL HIS DESIRE (TO DO MORE THAN THAT) LIKE THE PROPHET USED TO BE ABLE TO CONTROL HIS DESIRE.
حدثنا عُثْمَانُ بنُ أبي شَيْبَةَ أخبرنا جَرِيرٌ عن الشّيْبَانِيّ عن عَبْدِالرّحْمَنِ بنِ الأسْوَدِ عن أبِيهِ عن عَائِشَةَ قَالَتْ "كَانَ رسولُ الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يَأْمُرُنَا في فَوْحِ حَيْضَتِنَا أنْ نَتّزِرَ ثُمّ يُبَاشِرُنَا، وَأيّكُمْ يَمْلِكُ إرَبَهُ كَمَا كَانَ رسولُ الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يَمْلِكُ إرَبَهُ".

[14]  Sahih Muslim, Vol. 8, #3311“Aisha reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she 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.”
*(the majority of scholars permit dolls to train women starting from youth about matters of their homes and raising children)
“Fath-ul-Bari, Explanation of Sahih Bukhari”, page 143, vol 13, Imam Ibn Hajar
(I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet... the Prophet would call them to join and play with me)
“And from this hadith was deduced the permission to keep dolls and toys for girls to play with them, and that this was excluded from the general prohibition of keeping images (statues), and (The Judge) Iyad affirmed it, and related it was the majority (opinion), and that they (the majority) allow selling dolls to girls to train them from (the time of) their youth, about the matter of their homes and children; He (Iyad) said and some (the minority) had the opinion that it (the permission) is abrogated.”
This quote of Judge Iyad is also in “The Explanation of Sahih Muslim”.
قوله: (عَنْ عَائِشَةَ: أَنَّها كَانَتْ تَلْعَبُ بِالْبَنَاتِ عِنْدَ رَسُولِ اللهِ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ-).  قال القاضي(القاضي عياض): فيه جواز اللعب بهن. قال: وهن مخصوصات من الصور المنهي عنها لهذا الحديث ولما فيه من تدريب النساء في صغرهن لأمر أنفسهن وبيوتهن وأولادهن ... قال: ومذهب جمهور العلماء جواز اللعب بهن. ... وقالت طائفة: هو منسوخ بالنهي عن الصور، هذا كلام القاضي.

[15]  “Fathul Bari, The Explanation of Sahih Bukhari”, Ibn Hajar“Abu Dawud and Nasaii related that Aisha said: ‘Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) came from the battle of Tabuk or Khaybar...so he uncovered the curtained area above my dolls...he asked ‘What is this Aisha?’ Aisha said ‘My dolls.’...Aisha was in the battle of Khaybar a girl of about 14 years old...in the battle of Tabuk absolutely more...”
(This hadith contradicts the “minority” opinion referred to in the previous hadith, because Aisha here is seen to have toys and dolls when she was at least 14 years old, and far beyond puberty – Muhaddith MR)
‏فتح الباري، شرح صحيح البخاري، الإصدار 2.09
للإمام ابن حجر العسقلاني
وأخرج أبو داود والنسائي من وجه آخر عن عائشة قالت: " قدم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من غزوة تبوك أو خيبر "... فكشف ناحية الستر على بنات لعائشة لعب ...قال ما هذا يا عائشة، قالت: بناتي  ... لأن عائشة كانت في غزوة خيبر بنت أربع عشرة سنة إما أكملتها أو جاوزتها أو قاربتها. وأما في غزوة تبوك فكانت قد بلغت قطعا فيترجح رواية من قال في خيبر، ويجمع بما قال الخطابي لأن ذلك أولى من التعارض.‏

[16]  "Perfect Little Girls' Dolls", Temporary Exhibit, 2007 & 2008"The museum’s new temporary exhibit highlights the role of dolls in the upbringing of perfect little girls since 1840...continue in their role as an idealized model for children to imitate...As we can see it in « Les malheurs de Sophie », good manners were taught by using dolls that were first made of wax or papier maché, than bisque, composition, celluloïd, cloth or plastic. As the materials changed due to technical advances so did the dolls morphologies in order to adapt to children’s tastes : from the fashion doll with a papier mache head and a leather body representing the women the little girl would become, to the caracter baby or baby doll which represents a baby or a young child that enables the child girl to play « mummy »...By playing with dolls, children have learnt sewing, embroidery, knitting, tapestry and even making trousseaus but also cooking and childcare. Doll accessories and doll furniture like sewing machines, tea sets, cradles, layettes…also helped to teach these skills.”

[17]  "Voices from the Past", Jay Teague, 2005 July, Houston Teachers Institute“Dolls were not strictly limited to children alone. Examples of female adults carrying or possessing dolls are also noted during the medieval period. Children also must have played with whatever was at hand.”

[18]  "Anecdotal evidence for child marriage in America", Jane Galt, 2007"Child marriage may not have been the norm in America in the 19th century, but it clearly wasn't too rare, because it's featured in some of the most popular historical novels based on real experiences...mountain patterns where it was the accepted custom for a girl to get married when she should still be skipping around, climbing trees, catching lightning bugs, pumping high in a homemade swing, and playing elves and fairies in a cool glen."

[19]  "Yes, Polish Women are Good Wives and Mothers", PolishMarriage.org & Gosia & Robert"Most, if not all, Polish girls prepare early for their roles of wives and mothers, dressing up, playing with dolls, kitchen utensils, etc."

[20]  "The value of playing with dolls for girls and boys", Randa Morris, Helium“Realizing that all your children's toys can be wonderful teaching tools, helping to engage them in developing essential life-skills, can open up a whole new realm of interactive play experiences for you and your child...Using these "toys" to role-play with your child can assist them in learning "positive" ways to communicate, and aid in social and educational development...Showing your little one how to rock, cuddle, be gentle with, bathe, feed, change and just "love" the baby, are all ways to begin to teach future parenting skills.”

[21]  “Al Bidayeh wal Nihayeh” (The Beginning and the End), Ibn Kathir, vol.4, Mention of the story of Safiyyah daughter of Huyayy, from the Bani Nudayr tribe“Concerning her, when Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) expelled the Jewish tribe of Bani Nudayr from Madinah, as was mentioned, most of them went to Khaibar, among them Huyay ibn Akhtab, and the descendents of Abi al Haqiqa, and they were financially affluent and of high lineage among their people, and Safiyyah was then a child below puberty. Then when she became capable of marriage one of her cousins married her, so when she was brought to him and was entered into his (house) he consummated the marriage with her…”
(The Arabic scholars' terminology to identify "being capable or fit for marriage" applies to both Princess Safiya and Lady Aisha – Muhaddith MR)
البداية والنهاية، للإمام إسماعيل بن كثير الدمشقي. الجزء الرابع. فصل فتح رسول الله عليه السلام للحصون. ذكر قصة صفية بنت حيي النضرية
كان من شأنها أنه لما أجلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يهود بني النضير من المدينة كما تقدم، فذهب عامتهم إلى خيبر، وفيهم حيي بن أخطب، وبنو أبي الحقيق، وكانوا ذوي أموال وشرف في قومهم، وكانت صفية إذ ذاك طفلة دون البلوغ. ثم لما تأهلت للتزويج تزوجها بعض بني عمها، فلما زفت إليه وأدخلت إليه بنى بها...

[22]  “Al Isabah”, by Ibn Hajar“Safiyyah daughter of Huyayy Ibn Akhtab…she was  married to Salam son of Mishkim...Then Kinaanah son of Haqeeq succeeded him as her husband…that Umayyah daughter of Abi Qays from Ghufar said: ‘I am among the women who accompanied Safiyyah, in her marriage ceremony, to the Prophet PBUH, and I heard her say: I had not reached seventeen, the day I entered unto the prophet of Allah (peace be upon him)’.”

[23]  “Awn Al Mabood”, Al Aabadi“… Aisha said: ‘If the “jariyah” (young girl) reaches nine years, then she is a woman”, Al Munzhiri (the hadeeth expert) said: Narrated by Tirmizhi and Nasaa’i; Al Tirmithi said: Good Hadeeth.‏

[24]  Explanation of Muslim by Imam Nawawi, Book of Marriage, Hadeeth 75, Vol 9, p.207Aisha said: ‘Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) engaged me when I was six years old, and consummated the marriage when I was a girl of nine years old.’...
And Malik and Shafii and Abu Hanifa said: ‘The limit for that (consummation) is her (the female’s) capability for (sexual) intercourse.’
Dawudi said: ‘And Aisha then had physically matured well indeed’.”
(When Malik, and Shafii and Abu Hanifa all say that the limit for consummation is the female's capability for intercourse, this includes any and all ways in which this can be defined. For example, whether it is being fully physically or psychologically developed.Muhaddith MR)
صحيح مسلم بشرح النووي
فيه: حديث عائشة -رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهَا- قالت: (تَزَوَّجَنِي رَسُولُ اللهِ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيهِ وَسَلَّمَ- لِسِتِّ سِنِينَ، وَبَنَى بِي وَأَنَا بِنْتُ تِسْعِ سِنِينَ).
وقال مالك والشَّافعيُّ وأبو حنيفة: حدُّ ذلك أن تطيق الجماع
قال الدَّاوديُّ: وكانت عائشة قد شبَّت شباباً حسناً -رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهَا- (ج/ص: 9/207)

[25]  Sunan Abi Dawud, Nasaii, ibn Majah, and Musnad Imam Ahmad from the hadith of ibn Abbas:“A young girl who was still a virgin came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and she mentioned that her father married her (to someone), while she was forced, so the Prophet (peace be upon him) gave her the choice (to remained married or not).
ibn al Qattan said: this hadith of ibn Abbas is authentic.”
وفي سنن أبي داود والنسائي وابن ماجه ومسند الإمام أحمد من حديث ابن عباس:
أن جارية بكراً أتت النبي صلى اللّه عليه وسلم، فذكرت أن أباها زوجها، وهي كارهة، فخيرها النبي صلى اللّه عليه وسلم
قال ابن القطان: حديث ابن عباس هذا صحيح.

[26]  Abu Hanifah in his Musnad (collection of hadiths that he narrated with his personal chain to the Prophet PBUH)“The virgin cannot be made to marry without requesting her command, and if she keeps silent, then this is her permission (Qari: The reason is that modesty overcomes her) and the previously married cannot be made to marry without her permission.”
(Even here, when a prepubescent girl does not object to an engagement, her acceptance is only temporary until she reaches menstruation and psychological maturity, at which time her acceptance can be accepted. Her rejection of a suitor as a minor is accepted. – Muhaddith MR)
روى أبو حنيفة في مسنده:
لا تنكحْ البكر حتى تُسْتَأمر، وإذا سكتت فهو إذنها (القاري: وسبب ذلك، أن الحياء غالب عليها) ولا تنكح الثيب حتى تستأذن

[27]  Sahih Muslim and “Musanaf” by AbdulrazzaqCiting Aisha: ‘I asked the Prophet (PBUH) about the young girl, her parents want to marry her (to someone); is she asked for her command or not?’
The Prophet PBUH told her: ‘Yes, she is asked for her command.’
Aisah said: ‘But she gets shy.’
The Prophet PBUH said: ‘So this is her permission, if she is silent’.”
روى الإمام مسلم في صحيحه عن عائشة...سَأَلْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيهِ وَسَلَّمَ- عَنِ الْجَارِيَةِ يُنْكِحُهَا أَهْلُهَا أَتُسْتَأْمَرُ أَمْ لاَ؟ فَقَالَ لَهَا رَسُولُ اللهِ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيهِ وَسَلَّمَ-: "نَعَمْ، تُسْتَأْمَرُ". فَقَالَتْ عَائِشَةُ: فَقُلْتُ لَهُ: فَإِنَّهَا تَسْتَحْيِي. فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيهِ وَسَلَّمَ-: "فَذَلِكَ إِذْنُهَا إِذَا هِيَ سَكَتَتْ".

[28]  Fath ul Bari (The Explanation of Sahih Bukhari), Ibn Hajar“Ibn Sad narrated…that Al Ni’man ibn abi al Jawn the Kindi, came to the Prophet … and said: ‘O Prophet of Allah, shouldn’t I marry you to the most beautiful lady among the Arabs, she was married to a cousin of hers who died, and she wanted you in marriage?’
He (the Prophet) said yes.
He (Kindi) said: ‘So send someone to bring her to you.’
(Narrated by Bukhari and Al Hakim in al Mustadrak, and Abdul Razzaq in al Musannaf, that:)
When the (female) from the Kilaab tribe entered into the Prophet (‘s house) she said: ‘I take refuge in Allah from you.’
So he said: You took refuge in a Great One, rejoin your people.”
في فتح الباري، شرح صحيح البخاري:
ثم أخرج (ابن سعد) من طريق عند الواحد بن أبي عون قال " قدم النعمان بن أبي الجون الكندي على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم مسلما فقال: يا رسول الله ألا أزوجك أجمل أيم في العرب، كانت تحت ابن عم لها فتوفي وقد رغبت فيك؟ قال: نعم. قال: فابعث من يحملها إليك.
(روى البخاري والحاكم في المستدرك وعبد الرزاق في المصنف وابن ماجة والنسائي)
عن عُرْوَةُ عَنْ عَائِشَةَ: أَنّ (ابنة الجون) الْكِلاَبِيّةَ لَمّا دَخَلَتْ عَلَى النّبِيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَتْ: أَعُوذُ بِاللّهِ مِنكَ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم: "لَقَدْ عُذْتِ بِعَظِيمِ الْحَقِي بِأَهْلِكِ"

[29]  The Status of Women under Islamic Law and under Modern Islamic Legislation by Jamal J. Nasir"The analysis includes both the rights and the obligations of women under the Shari’ah and modern Arab legislation...’far from being a subordinate and powerless follower of the man, be he a father, a husband, or a brother, the woman under Islam, whether she is Muslim or not, has the last word, and the ultimate power to choose her life-partner. She enjoys full autonomy as far as her property is concerned, and is the beneficiary of securities that must be the envy of her western sister in terms of respect, marital rights, maintenance, guardianship, and custody of minors’."

[30]  “Awn al Mabud”, Al AbadiAl Khattabi said in al Ma’aalim:
The outward (meaning) of the hadeeth indicates that if the virgin is made to marry before asking her permission and (obtaining) her silence (or her express permission), that the marriage becomes invalid just like the marriage of previously married becomes invalid (if performed) before she is asked for her command. And this is the view of Al Awzaii (great Mujtahid like “the Four”) and Sufyan al Thawri (famous Aalim and Hadeeth scholar), and this is the view of people of raii (Abu Hanifah).
وقال أيضا في عون المعبود:
قال الخطابي في المعالم: ظاهر الحديث يدل على أن البكر إذا أنكحت قبل أن تستأذن فتصمت، أن النكاح باطل كما يبطل إنكاح الثيب قبل أن تستأمر، فتأذن بالقول. وإلى هذا ذهب الأوزاعي وسفيان الثوري وهو قول أصحاب الرأي

[31]  “al Isabah fi Tamyeez al Sahabah (The correct differentiation between the Companions”, Ibn Hajar“Ibn Sa’d said:...Aisha said (in appreciation): ‘I have been given features not given to any woman. The Prophet (peace be upon him) married me when I was seven, the angel brought him my image in his hand to look at it, he consummated our marriage when I was nine, I saw the angel Gabriel, I was his most beloved wife, and I attended his diseased till he died, not witnessed but by me and the angels’.”
الإمام ابن حجر العسقلاني (مؤلف  فتح الباري، شرح حيح البخاري) قال في كتابه: الإصابة في تمييز الصحابة
وقال ابن سعد: أخبرنا هشام هو ابن عبد الملك الطيالسي حدثنا أبو عوانة عن عبد الملك بن عمير عن عائشة قالت: أعطيت خلالاً ما أعطيتها امرأة ملكني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم وأنا بنت سبع وأتاه الملك بصورتي في كفه لينظر إليها وبنى بي لتسع ورأيت جبرائيل وكنت أحب نسائه إليه ومرضته فقبض ولم يشهده غيري والملائكة

[32]  Al Suyuti, in "Al Durr Al Manthoor" wrote:Abu Dawood and Ibn Abi Hatim and Al Bayhaqi in his "Sunan"  related, that Asmaa'... al Ansariyyah said:
I got divorced during the time of the Prophet PBUH, when the divorced had no iddah (waiting period), so when I got divorced Allah revealed the waiting period for divorce: {and the divorced (women) wait for themselves three periods}.
Thus she was the first (woman) concerning whom was revealed the divorce's waiting period.
قال السيوطي في الدر المنثور
أخرج أبو داود وابن أبي حاتم (وزاد في الدر المنثور: والبيهقي في سننه) عن أسماء بنت يزيد بن السكن الأنصارية قالت: طلقت على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولم يكن للمطلقة عدة، فأنزل الله حين طلقت العدة للطلاق {والمطلقات يتربصن بأنفسهن ثلاثة قروء}
 فكانت أول من أنزلت فيها العدة للطلاق.

[33]  "Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged)", Darussalam 2^nd edition, July 2003, Volume 10, p.44"Ibn Abi Hatim recorded a simpler narration than this one from Ubay bin Ka'b who waid, 'O Allah's Messenger! When the Ayah in Surat Al-Baqarah was revealed prescribing the 'iddah of divorce, some people in Madinah said, 'There are some women whose Iddah has not been mentioned in the Quran. There are the young, the old whose menstruation is discontinued, and the pregnant.' Later on this Ayah was revealed:
Quran 65:4 (Surah At-Talaq): {Those in menopause among your women, for them the 'iddah, if you have doubt, is three months; and for those who have no courses}

[34]  Al Suyuti, in "Al Durr Al Manthoor" wrote:Abd Ibn Humaid related, citing Qatadah: "and the divorced (women) wait themselves for three periods"
so he made the waiting period for divorce three periods
then he abrogated (i.e. excluded) from it the divorced who was divorced before her husband consummated with her, so He said in Al Ahzab 49:
"O you who believe if you marry the believing women then divorce them before you touch them, then there is no waiting period for you to observe"
so this one marries the same day if she wants
وتابع السيوطي في الدر المنثور
وأخرج عبد بن حميد عن قتادة {والمطلقات يتربصن بأنفسهن ثلاثة قروء} فجعل عدة الطلاق ثلاث حيض، 
ثم أنه نسخ منها المطلقة التي طلقت ولم يدخل بها زوجها فقال: في سورة الأحزاب
 (يا أيها الذين آمنوا إذا نكحتم المؤمنات ثم طلقتموهن من قبل أن تمسوهن فما لكم عليهن من عدة تعتدونها) (الأحزاب الآية 49)
 فهذه تزوج إن شاءت من يومها.

[35]  {وَابْتَلُواْ الْيَتَامَى حَتَّىَ إِذَا بَلَغُواْ النِّكَاحَ فَإِنْ آنَسْتُم مِّنْهُمْ رُشْداً فَادْفَعُواْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ...} {Test the orphans, so that if they have reached the age of procreation* (Balaghu Al Nikah), and if (you) discerned from them sound judgement then deliver to them their fortune} Quran: Al Nisaa (The Women) 4:6, p. 77(The responsibility of another person or children is far more important to test than the responsibility of money alone. Furthermore, this is the only verse in the Quran using the term “Balaghu Alnikah“, age of procreation or marriageable age for puberty, and it is to mention the condition of sound judgement before gaining the responsibilities normally associated with puberty.
* While most translations of “Balaghu Al Nikah” have used “reached the marriageable age”, there is an important distinction. Most other verses to describe puberty use the term “Balagh Al Huluma”, while this verse specifically relates puberty to marriage. On the other hand, the term “marriageable age” could be construed to mean the age at which someone can conduct a marriage contract (or engagement) with no relation to puberty, which is not the meaning of the verse. - Muhaddith MR)

[36]  “Shari'ah”, Encyclopedia Britannica, 2008
“A legal capacity to transact belongs to any person “of prudent judgment” (rashid), a quality that is normally deemed to arrive with physical maturity or puberty...Persons who are not rashid, on account of minority, mental deficiency, simplicity, or prodigality, are placed under interdiction: their affairs are managed by a guardian and they cannot transact effectively without the guardian's consent.”

[37]  (Muslim scholars agree that no Islamic legislative qualifications are needed to reach this conclusion that the rights of people supercede monetary issues concerning the condition of "rushd" in the previous verse) - Muhaddith MR)

[38]  Imam Muslim wrote, in his explanation of Saheeh Muslim:

And Abu Hanifah said: ‘He (the guardian) is not required for the post-pubescent girl, whether she is a virgin or previously married; on the contrary, she can perform her own marriage without her guardian’s permission.’ And Abu Haneefah brought argument based on comparison (qiyaas) with selling and other (transactions) for she is autonomous in this, without (the necessity of) a guardian; and he interpreted that the hadeeths requiring the guardian concerned the slave and the young, and he restricted their general wording by this comparison (qiyas) And restricting the general wording through the logic of comparison (qiyas) is allowable according to numerous among the people of usool (experts in deducing legislation).
وقال أبو حنيفة: لا يشترط في الثَّيِّب ولا في البكر البالغة بل لها أن تزوِّج نفسها بغير إذن وليِّها. واحتجَّ أبو حنيفة بالقياس على البيع وغيره فإنَّها تستقلُّ فيه بلا وليٍّ، وحمل الأحاديث الواردة في اشتراط الوليِّ على الأمة والصَّغيرة وخصَّ عمومها بهذا القياس،  وتخصيص العموم بالقياس جائز عند كثيرين من أهل الأصول

[39]  Sunan Abi Dawud, Nasaii, ibn Majah, and Musnad Imam Ahmad from the hadith of ibn Abbas:“A young girl who was still a virgin came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and she mentioned that her father married her (to someone), while she was forced, so the Prophet (peace be upon him) gave her the choice (to remained married or not).
ibn al Qattan said: this hadith of ibn Abbas is authentic.”
وفي سنن أبي داود والنسائي وابن ماجه ومسند الإمام أحمد من حديث ابن عباس:
أن جارية بكراً أتت النبي صلى اللّه عليه وسلم، فذكرت أن أباها زوجها، وهي كارهة، فخيرها النبي صلى اللّه عليه وسلم
قال ابن القطان: حديث ابن عباس هذا صحيح.

[40]  Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Niddah 44b
"Mishnah: A girl of the age of three years and one day may be betrothed by intercourse...Gemara: Our Rabbis taught: A girl of the age of three years may be betrothed by intercourse; so R. Meir. But the Sages say: Only one who is three years and one day old...
Gemara: Our Rabbis taught: A girl of the age of three years may be betrothed by intercourse; so R. Meir. But the Sages say: Only one who is three years and one day old."

[41]  ”Insiders or outsiders: women and rabbinic literature”, Judaism, Summer-Fall, 2003, Dvora Weisberg"A girl who is three years and one day old may be betrothed through sexual intercourse...(Mishnah Niddah 5:4)"

[42]  Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 55b“R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his.”

[43]  Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Kethuboth Folio 6a“R. Hisda objected: If a girl, whose period [14]  to see [blood] had not arrived yet, got married, Beth Shammai say: One gives her four nights,[16]  and the disciples of Hillel say: Until the wound is healed up.[17]  If her period to see [blood] had arrived [18]  and she married, Beth Shammai say: One gives her the first night,[19]  and Beth Hillel say: Until the night following the Sabbath [one gives her] four nights.[20] 
[16] In which she can have intercourse with her husband.
[17] The blood that comes out is attributed to the wound and not to menstruation. Ordinarily, after the first intercourse further intercourse is forbidden until the coming out of blood, i.e., menstruation, is over. But in this case, in which the young bride had never yet had any menstruation, it is assumed that the blood is not due to menstruation but to the wound caused by the intercourse. According to Beth Shammai this assumption holds good for four nights, and according to Beth Hillel it holds good 'until the wound is healed up.' As to the definition of this phrase, v. Nid. 64b. V. also Nid. 65b, where it is finally decided that after the first coition no further intercourse must take place until the flowing of blood has stopped, even in the case of a young bride who had not yet had any menstruation. V. also Eben ha-'Ezer, 63, and Yoreh De'ah, 193.
[18] But she had in fact not yet seen blood; that is, she had the maturity for it, but the maturity had not yet manifested itself. A girl has reached the period of maidenhood (puberty) when she is twelve years and one day old. When she is twelve and a half years old she has reached the state of bogereth, (v. Glos.), full maturity, womanhood. V. infra 39a.
[19] He may repeat the intercourse during the first night.
[20] Mishnah in Nid. 64b”

[44]  Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Yebamoth 60b"It was taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai stated: A proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest, for it is said, But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves, and Phinehas surely was with them. And the Rabbis? — [These were kept alive] as bondmen and bondwomen. If so, a proselyte whose age is three years and one day should also be permitted!"

[45]  "Child-Exposure in the Roman Empire", W. V. Harris, The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 84, 1994 (1994), pp. 1-22“Disapproval of exposure seems slowly to have gained ground. Then, after the sale of infants was authorized by Constantine in A.D. 313, the need for child-exposure somewhat diminished.”

[46]  Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Kethuboth, Folio 47aWhence is it deduced that a daughter's handiwork belongs to her father? — (From Scripture) where it is stated, And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant,[2]  as the handiwork of a maidservant belongs to her master so does the handiwork of a daughter belong to her father...It is but logical to assume that it should belong to her father; for should it be imagined that her handiwork does not belong to him [the objection could well be advanced against] the right6  which the All-Merciful has conferred upon a father to consign his daughter to the bridal chamber...— (The fact), however, (is that in the case of) a minor no Scriptural text was necessary.[12]  For since [13] is he may even sell her was it at all necessary (to state that her handiwork belongs to him)?[14]
[2] Ex. XXI, 7
[12] To confer upon her father the right to her handiwork.
[13] Lit., 'now'.
[14] Obviously not.

[47]  Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 54b“Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that.[24] What is the basis of their dispute? — Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject of pederasty throw guilt [upon the active offender]
[24] (rabbi scholar footnote) I.e. Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.”

[48]  Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 55a“[he] who commits bestiality, whether naturally or unnaturally; or a woman who causes herself to be bestially abused, whether naturally or unnaturally, is liable to punishment.[1]
[1] There are thus three distinct clauses in this Baraitha. The first — a male aged nine years and a day — refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning — because firstly, the active offender is never explicitly designated as a male, it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned; and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty: in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha supports Rab's contention that nine years (and a day) is the minimum age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable.”

[49]  Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Sanhedrin 69b“Our Rabbis taught: If a woman sported lewdly with her young son [a minor], and he committed the first stage of cohabitation with her, — Beth Shammai say, he thereby renders her unfit to the priesthood.[4]   Beth Hillel declare her fit. R. Hiyya the son of Rabbah b. Nahmani said in R. Hisda's name; others state, R. Hisda said in Ze'iri's name: All agree that the connection of a boy aged nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not:[5]   their dispute refers only to one who is eight years old,...
[4] I.e., she becomes a harlot, whom a priest may not marry (Lev. XXI, 7).
[5] So that if he was nine years and a day or more, Beth Hillel agree that she is invalidated from the priesthood; whilst if he was less than eight, Beth Shammai agree that she is not.”

[50]  King James Version Bible, Deuteronomy 22:13-18[13] If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,
[14] And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:
[15] Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:
[16] And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;
[17] And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.
[18] And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;

[51]  “A Comparison Between the Roman and Modern Views of Homosexuality” Nathanael Blake, Oregon State University"The upper classes were much more likely to indulge in homosexual acts, and masters had the sexual use of their slaves...The measure of sexual manhood was to penetrate, while to be penetrated was regarded as effeminizing.  The first was seen as an assertion of dominance, the latter as a degrading submission...Despite the temptation, Rome never seems to have adopted pedastry as an accepted part of its bisexual repertoire.  In contrast to Greece, where the sexual apprenticeship of adolescent males by their elders was a regular part of life, the Romans decided against the use of their sons in such a manner."

[52]  "Growing Up Sexually, Europe, Historical Generalia", Janssen, D. F. (Oct., 2002). Growing Up Sexually. Volume I: World Reference Atlas“A small Roman elite adopted at least the narrative of Greek pederasty, but the general attitude was a negative one; boy prostitutes were probably slaves...The common notion that [buggery of boys in Greece / Rome] occurred only at "adolescence" is quite mistaken. It began around age seven, continued for several years and ended by puberty”

[53]  "History of Marriage in Western Civilization", Magnus Hirshfeld Archive for Sexology“Marriage in Ancient Greece and Rome...For their erotic needs, men often turned to prostitutes and concubines. As Demosthenes, the orator, explained it: 'We have prostitutes for our pleasure, concubines for our health, and wives to bear us lawful offspring'.”

[54]  Child sexual abuse: historical cases in the Byzantine Empire (324–1453 A.D.), John Lascaratos & Effie Poulakou-Rebelakou“Furthermore, cases of child prostitution, pederasty, and incest are included in the historical texts and some contemporary authors confirmed the presence of many such cases in all classes of Byzantine society... The research of original Byzantine literature disclosed many instances of child sexual abuse in all social classes even in the mediaeval Byzantine society which was characterized by strict legal and religious prohibitions.”

[55]  Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Gittin, Folio 21aOr if you prefer, I can reply that we find cases where an agent for receiving [the Get is also appointed] without the consent [of the wife], since a father can accept a Get for his daughter who is still a child [14] without her consent.
[14] I.e., under twelve years of age, v. Keth. 47a.

[56]  "Protection, Harm and Social Evil: the Age of Consent since 1885", D'Cruz, Evil, Law and the State Conference, July 2004“When Victoria came to the throne, the age of consent for girls was effectively 10. The 1861 Offences against the Person Act was a major consolidating statute...In enacting that it was ‘no offence to have sexual intercourse with a girl under 12 who ‘freely consented’ however ignorant’, the 1861 Act maintained the age of consent at 10, two years before the age of valid marriage. Consent (from a 10 year old) thus negatived violence...These laws implicitly acknowledged prostitution as a necessary outlet for the sexual imperatives of [initially, though of course not exclusively] the military – a potentially disorderly male population with a significant working-class component. The furore about child prostitution of the 1880s however, had as its legislative outcome in the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885, a raising of the age of consent to 16.”

[57]  The Progressive Era's Health Reform Movement: A Historical Dictionary By Ruth Clifford Engs, p.4"American age-of-consent laws gained attention in 1885 when a sensational British report by William Stead on forced prostitution resulted in the age of consent being raised in that country...As a result of this public pressure, many states between 1887 and 1893 raised their age of consent from ten to at least fourteen years of age; Congress in 1880 passed legislation raising the age from ten to sixteen years in Washington D.C....By 1900, thirty-two states had raised the age of consent to sixteen or eighteen...Age-of-consent agitation spanned more than fifteen years..."

[58]  “Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse: Science, Religion, and the Slippery Slope”, Mark E. Pietrzyk“As of 1886, twenty-five of the American states, following earlier English law, had an age of consent of ten years; four states, following Christian canon law on marriage, had an age of consent of twelve; Delaware, following Christian canon law on the age of discretion, set its age of consent at seven.”

[59]  "The Crazy-Quilt of Our Age of Consent Laws", Jonathan Dolhenty, Ph.D.“The common law, from which America gets much of its precedents in the legal field, set the age of consent at age ten. In other words, participating in sexual activity with someone above the age of ten did not result in the crime of "statutory" rape or child molesting. The activity may have come under other statutory or informal social regulations, but anyone over the age of ten could consent to a sexual activity. During the latter part of the last century and the early part of the present one, attitudes towards sexual activity began to change in America and so did attitudes toward the age of consent. California was one of the first states to raise the age of consent. It raised it from ten to fourteen in 1889 and then from fourteen to sixteen in 1897.  Then, in 1913, California again raised it from sixteen to eighteen.”

[60]  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#_ref-waites_3 “ages from 10 to 13 were typically acceptable in western countries during the mid-19th century
source: Waites, Matthew (2005) The Age of Consent: Young People, Sexuality and Citizenship, (New York States and Houndmills, Basingstoke Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan) ISBN 1-4039-2173-3”