Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Muslim honor killings and Sharia family violence

With Muslim immigration to the West continuing, Westerners have learned about honor killings the hard way (Aqsa Pervez, 16 in Canada, Amina Yaser Said, 18, and Sarah Yaser Said, 17 in Texas, Ghazala Khan in Denmark, Hina Saleem, 21 in Italy ). Many have asked if they are connected with Islam. Muslims have been quick to deny it. Rather than going through a long explanation, I will leave the reader with two sets of facts: a UN report on the prevalance of honor killings in certain (mostly Muslim) countries and the Quran and Hadith that incite the activity. The reader can then make up their own mind. My final comment is that although Muslims will try to avoid discussing the horrific penalties for lewd activities and adultery, it is interesting to find that my inspiration for this post was comments posted to me by a Muslim supporting stoning and 100 lashes as the correct solution from Sharia law to America's decadent society (check comments to this post on violent sexism and wife beating).

The UN estimates that there are thousands of honor killings every year. They also have some ideas where they are from (United Nations High Commission for Human Rights (2002)):
"The report of the Special Rapporteur ... concerning cultural practices in the family that are violent towards women (E/CN.4/2002/83), indicated that honour killings had been reported in Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey, Yemen, and other Mediterranean and Persian Gulf countries, and that they had also taken place in such countries as France, Germany and the United Kingdom, within migrant communities."
Hmm...migrant communities. Now from the Quran and Hadith (thanks to FaithFreedom.org )

Quran- 4:15 “If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four (reliable) witness from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them. Or God ordain for them some (other) way.”

Quran-24:2 “The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornicationflog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day.”

Quran-17:32 “ Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils).

Quran-33:33 “stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display.”

Now some sahih hadiths:

Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 63, Number 196:
Narrated Abu Huraira: A man from Bani Aslam came to Allah's Apostle while he was in the mosque and called (the Prophet ) saying, "O Allah's Apostle! I have committed illegal sexual intercourse." On that the Prophet turned his face from him to the other side, whereupon the man moved to the side towards which the Prophet had turned his face, and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I have committed illegal sexual intercourse." The Prophet turned his face (from him) to the other side whereupon the man moved to the side towards which the Prophet had turned his face, and repeated his statement. The Prophet turned his face (from him) to the other side again. The man moved again (and repeated his statement) for the fourth time. So when the man had given witness four times against himself, the Prophet called him and said, "Are you insane?" He replied, "No." The Prophet then said (to his companions), "Go and stone him to death." The man was a married one. Jabir bin 'Abdullah Al-Ansari said: I was one of those who stoned him. We stoned him at the Musalla ('Id praying place) in Medina. When the stones hit him with their sharp edges, he fled, but we caught him at Al-Harra and stoned him till he died.
(See also Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 63, Number 195.)


Sahi Bukhari: 8:6814:
Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah al-Ansari: “A man from the tribe of Bani Aslam came to Allah’s Messenger [Muhammad] and informed him that he had committed illegal sexual intercourse; and he bore witness four times against himself. Allah’s Messenger ordered him to be stoned to death as he was a married person.”

Sahi Muslim No. 4206:
A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification by seeking punishment. He told her to go away and seek God’s forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted she was pregnant. He told her to wait until she had given birth. Then he said that the Muslim community should wait until she had weaned her child. When the day arrived for the child to take solid food, Muhammad handed the child over to the community. And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al-Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on her face he cursed her.”

Sahih Al-Bukhari Vol 2. pg 1009; and Sahih Muslim Vol 2. pg 65:
Hadhrat Abdullah ibne Abbaas (Radiallahu Anhu) narrates the lecture that Hadhrat Umar (Radiallaahu Anhu) delivered whilst sitting on the pulpit of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam). Hadhrat Umar (Radiallahu Anhu) said, "Verily, Allah sent Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) with the truth, and revealed the Quran upon him. The verse regarding the stoning of the adulterer/ess was from amongst the verse revealed (in the Quraan). We read it, secured it and understood it. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) stoned and we stoned after him. I fear that with the passage of time a person might say, ‘We do not find mention of stoning in the Book of Allah and thereby go astray by leaving out an obligation revealed by Allah. Verily, the stoning of a adulterer/ress is found in the Quraan and is the truth, if the witnesses are met or there is a pregnancy or confession."

Al-Bukhari:
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever guarantees me that he will guard his chastity, I will guarantee him Paradise”.

Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, An-Nisa’i and others:
Abu Hurayrah reports that the Messenger of Allah said, “No one commits adultery while still remaining a believer, for faith is more precious unto Allah than such an evil act!” In another version, it is stated, “When a person commits adultery he casts away from his neck the bond that ties him to Islam; if, however, he repents, Allah will accept his repentance”.

Al-Bayhaqi:
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “O mankind! Beware of fornication/adultery for it entails six dire consequences: three of them relating to this world and three to the next world. As for the three that are related to this world, they are the following: it removes the glow of one’s face, brings poverty, and reduces the life-span. As for its dire consequences in the next world they are: it brings down the wrath of Allah upon the person, subjects him to terrible reckoning, and finally casts him in hell-fire.”

Update:

Here's a nutty, but scary story from NY about a woman who met an Al Qaeda-connected imam on a Muslim dating site. Already sounds loony, but it gets worse. Notice that the newspaper decides to defend the imam immediately without even researching the matter:
Dr. Yasser Shalaby, editor in chief of Al Zalzala, an Arabic-language paper, said he also ran an article to protect Saleh. "I felt it was very dangerous for someone to come to the mosque and try to get the leader in trouble," he said
The imam dishonored her, and now she's fearing an honor killing:

"This is a dishonor to my entire family, every member. My parents disowned me. Basically, he's ruined my life," she told The Post. "I have to clean my name."

Worst of all, she fears she is now a target for an "honor killing" by al Qaeda, according to court papers. Saleh admitted to The Post that a distant relative is a member of the terrorist organization, but said he has had no communication with him.

Typical of Muslims, the imam uses the adjective "Jewish" freely to insult her without realizing that other non-Muslims don't get it:
sheik sent her an e-mail describing her as "a trashy and lustful woman, a weeping and cursed Jewish woman."

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Ezra (Uzair) and the next Quran error

Let's go to the third Quran (Koran) error I use in my opening with Muslims:

009.030
YUSUFALI: The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
PICKTHAL: And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!
SHAKIR: And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!


The Quran claims that Jews called Ezra (Uzair) "the son of Allah." BTW, you'll notice Yusuf Ali trying to soft-pedal the point by using "a son" instead of "the son." Clearly, this is an attempt to obfuscate the matter because here's the original Arabic:
Waqalati alyahoodu AAuzayrun ibnu Allahi
waqalati alnnasara almaseehu ibnu Allahi
Notice that the phrase referring to the Jews (al yahoodu) and the phrase referring to the Christians (al nnasara) look exactly the same.

It is common knowledge that Jews do not have a specific person who they believe in "the son of God." This is a key contentious point between Jews and Christians, and a blasphemous comment for a Jew to make. The closest you can get in the Bible are references to one of three things (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_God):
  • Angels are sometimes referred to as sons - "Benei Elohim"
  • The real king of Israel -( II Samuel 7: 14, with reference to King David and those of his descendants who carried on his dynasty; comp. Psalm 89:27, 28)
  • Israel as a people (comp. Exodus 4: 22 and Hosea 11:1)
Remember this quote from the Old Testament:
Do not have any other gods before Me. Do not represent [such] gods by any carved statue or picture of anything in the heaven above, on the earth below, or in the water below the land. Do not bow down to [such gods] or worship them. I am God your Lord, a God who demands exclusive worship
It's blasphemous to refer to any other gods but YHWH. That's it.

Even the coming of Messiah is referred to as God or "king. " Let's even consider the blasphemous thought that maybe, possibly, the Messiah could be referred to as the "son" of God...still, there is no mention of Ezra as either the Messiah or "The Son of God" in modern or ancient Judaism. None. Thus, a clear mistake.

I think Edward Henry Palmer said it best
The Moslem tradition is that Ezra, after being dead 100 years, was raised to life, and dictated from memory the whole of the Jewish Scriptures which had been lost during the captivity, and that the Jews said he could not have done this unless he had been the son of God. There is no Jewish tradition whatever in support of this accusation of Mohammed's, which probably was entirely due to his own invention or to misinformation.

Muslim Apologetics

What do the Muslim apologists have to say? Has anybody found a single Jew in history that said Ezra was the son of God? Funny enough, I can only find one response on the Net: http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/ezra.html

Unfortunately for Muslims, not even this response is able to quote a single Jew referring to Ezra as the son of God. Basically, the best part of this response is just a quote of another Muslim apologist, this one from the 300 years after Mohammad. Apologists quoting apologists do not quite solve a critical mistake made in a supposedly "perfect" book by a supposed infallible God.

Let me take this response apart in more detail:

It opens with a discussion of Ezra's life, and a quote discussing where he might be buried. The point here is that Ezra was a key figure in reforming Jewish law.

G. D. Newby

Next, it continues with a quote from Newby where an attempt is made to place a connection between Ezra, the human, and Enoch, the angel:
It is easy, then, to imagine that among the Jews of the Hijaz who were apparently involved in mystical speculations associated with the merkabah, Ezra, because of the traditions of his translation, because of his piety, and particularly because he was equated with Enoch as the Scribe of God, could be termed one of the Bene Elohim. And, of course, he would fit the description of religious leader (one of the ahbar of the Qur'an 9:31) whom the Jews had exalted
So Newby is trying to explain the verse by equating Ezra to Enoch, and angel. Now, "Benei Elohim" literally means "sons of God," and refer to angels, as described above. Nowhere is he saying that Jews referred to Ezra as "the Son of God." Also, as the reader can easily see, Newby is engaging in a rather convoluted train of thought to help him understand the verse not to assert that "the Jews" believe Ezra is "the Son of God."

Ibn Hazm

Next, we get another quote that appears to be the most damaging at first light:
"H. Z. Hirschberg proposed another assumption, based on the words of Ibn Hazm, namely, that the 'righteous who live in Yemen believed that 'Uzayr was indeed the son of Allah.' According to other Muslim sources, there were some Yemenite Jews who had converted to Islam who believed that Ezra was the messiah. For Muhammad, Ezra, the apostle (!) of messiah, can be seen in the same light as the Christian saw Jesus, the messiah, the son of Allah.[4]"
Let's look at the Quran again:
"The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah."
It doesn't say some Jews, it says "The" Jews.

Now, let's look at the quote. The quote speaks of Muslim converts not "The Jews"!

OK, even then, the text says "proposed another assumption" - so it is not a well-known conclusion among Jews, but an assumption. Second, it says, "based on the words of Ibn Hazm" - Ibn Hazm was a Muslim philosopher who was born in Spain 300 years after Mohammad. Using the words of a Muslim apologist to prove Islam without a fact basis is called circular reasoning.

George Sale (or Al-Baidawi)

OK, now the last major quote from George Sale, and 18th century orientalist. This quote, funny enough, actually looks to disprove the Quran by saying that it was not "The Jews," but "
some ancient heterdox Jews, or else of some Jews of Medina" that declared Ezra were the Son of God. And it gets worse because it is not George Sale declaring this fact, rather he is repeating "the commentators" that "endeavour to support" the charge against the Jews. Who are the commentators? Let's go to the original source to find out who is claiming the Jews declared Ezra the Son of God. In the original source, you will find that George Sale footnotes Al Beidawi (Baidawi) making the claims. Who is Al Baidawi? A 13th century Muslim scholar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baidawi). This 13th century scholar claims to know "this verse was read to the Jews and they did not contradict it." That's the best he has to offer. So, we are back to circular reasoning again because we see just hearsay by Muslim apologists and no new facts.

The conclusion: an error

So what are we left with? A bunch of smoke and mirrors from Muslim apologists. There is no proof from a single Jew in history that "The Jews" refer to Ezra as "the Son of God." Moreover, there is proof that ancient and modern Jews do not refer to Ezra as the Son of God. Thus, we can only conclude that the Quran is in error again.

Finally, if Allah was all-knowing, he would have created a perfect book. A perfect book would be timeless and always perfect. Thus, even if the Muslim apologists were correct, the Quran should've said, "some Jews at the time of Mohammad believed that Ezra could have been a son of God." The Quran is not perfect for two reasons, 1. It incorrectly asserts that "the Jews" believe Ezra to be "the son of God." 2. It is not timeless in its assertions. The Quran is just a book.



Wednesday, January 9, 2008

Interesting email from Yahoo

Taking a break from the usual contradictions, horrors and mistakes in Islamic holy book to discuss a recent email I received from Yahoo.

Here's the background: I was surfing through Yahoo Answers, and saw a question by a 15 year old that was about to convert to Islam. If I remember correctly, the person was female. I immediately thought - oh no, a 15 year old girl is going to subject herself to life as a second class citizen, and risk death if she later decides to deconvert to an apostate (if she lives in the wrong country). So I wrote back to the question with quotes from the Quran and Hadith. So other than a few words here and there, I just quoted from Islamic "holy" books. Well, apparently, Islamic holy books violate Yahoo's terms of service as you'll see below, so Yahoo decided to delete my post. Well, now I know to continue my migration away from Yahoo to their competitors (this won't be hard since their site has been awfully slow lately). Here's the email (with my post included - oh, and the post was in paragraph form when I wrote it, but Yahoo Answers mangles everything):

Hello Silly Allah

You have posted content to Yahoo! Answers in violation of our Community Guidelines or Terms of Service. As a result, your content has been deleted. Community Guidelines help to keep Yahoo! Answers a safe and useful community, so we appreciate your consideration of its rules.

Question: Islam related question... Help me...?

Question Details: I am a 15 year old who is going to convert to is lslam in a few days... Cam any1 help me in explaining how to pray and purify oneself B4 praying?? thx a lot...

Deleted Answer: Are you ready to be beaten as a second-class citizen? 4:34 Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and BEAT THEM; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. Do you like pedophiles? Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was SIX YEARS OLD and he consummated his marriage when she was NINE YEARS OLD, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death). Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151 Narrated 'Aisha: I used to PLAY WITH DOLLS in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Do you like violence? 9:5 Then when the Sacred Months have passed, then kill the Mushrikun {unbelievers} wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat {the Islamic ritual prayers}), and give Zakat {alms}, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. 8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do. 8:67. It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allah desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise. 9:29. Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

If you feel this content was removed in error, please contact Customer Care and tell us why.

Regards,
Yahoo! Customer Care

The inheritance mistake in detail - Part 4

Usual responses to Quran inheritance math mistakes

Inheritance math mistakes are very cut and dry. The apologetic responses are, frankly, not very good here, which is why it's a good place to start in a logical discussion on Islam. Let me go further, I have shown just a fraction of the total math mistakes that exist here (go here for some more: http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/i001.html and http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/inheritance.htm ). Here's a fun one - what do you do for pregnant wife? Anyway, if you have an afternoon free, find some more on your own. I encourage you to do so and comment on this blog post.

Here are the standard responses:

You have not looked at all the verses. This is my favorite response because it actually opens up more issues. The other verses are 2:180-182, 2:233, 2:240, 4:33. None of them go through any math except for 2:240:
002.240
YUSUFALI: Those of you who die and leave widows should bequeath for their widows a year's maintenance and residence; but if they leave (The residence), there is no blame on you for what they do with themselves, provided it is reasonable. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.
PICKTHAL: (In the case of) those of you who are about to die and leave behind them wives, they should bequeath unto their wives a provision for the year without turning them out, but if they go out (of their own accord) there is no sin for you in that which they do of themselves within their rights. Allah is Mighty, Wise.
SHAKIR: And those of you who die and leave wives behind, (make) a bequest in favor of their wives of maintenance for a year without turning (them) out, then if they themselves go away, there is no blame on you for what they do of lawful deeds by themselves, and Allah is Mighty, Wise.
So, if you include this verse in your calculations. You have to make sure that you leave behind one year's provisions for their wives. And now we have another contradiction! Remember, 4:12 is very detailed;
In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth; after payment of legacies and debts.
So which is it, one year's provisions or 1/8? What if the 1/8 didn't include enough for even a fraction of a year? What if you had to take away a portion from somebody else to provide that one year provision? Well, you get a contradiction between verse 2:240 and 4:12.

Men should get more than women. This excuse is funny because, you may have noticed already, I don't bring this up as an issue. I just focus on the math mistake. However, I get this one a lot. My theory is that Muslims are just repeating apologetics without even listening to the issue.

Unfortunately for the Muslim, another contradiction pops up when taking this angle. 4:11 states:
as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females:
So the men always get twice as much as the women according to silly Allah. First of all, I believe all readers can see that this makes no sense as a definitive rule for all times (simple example: the son is wealthy and the daughter is an extremely poor widow with 5 kids). Let's follow on, though, and see if there's another contradiction.

In 4:11, it says, "if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half." What happens if there are sons? Do they get 4/3 and 2/2? You can quickly see the problems. What happens if there are sons and daughters? Say 1 son and 3 daughters.

3 daughters: 2/3
1 son: twice that of the female or 2 x ( (2/3)/3) = 4/9

Total = 10/9. Another contradiction!

I think you can see that it's possible to do this all day long. What about if it's the reverse, 3 sons and 1 daughter? It's not even clear because the verse seems to specify the split for just daughters, but we know that sons get twice that of daughters. You can clearly see, though, that the daughter will get nothing close to 1/2. More confusion!

Anything left over goes to the nearest male relative. This excuse is also funny because Muslims have stated this is a counterargument when my two simple cases were for situations where the opposite occurred (more than 100% given away). Anyway, this is the law of "Usbah" from the following Hadith:

Sahih Bukhari 8. 80. 724
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
The Prophet said, "Give the Fara'id (the shares of the inheritance that are prescribed in the Qur'an) to those who are entitled to receive it. Then whatever remains, should be given to the closest male relative of the deceased."

Before we take one step further, let's immediately recognize that the "perfect" Quran is again imperfect and therefore false. We have to go to the Hadith to find the answer because the Quran can't stand on its own.

If we continue, I'm sure the reader can come up with quick examples of unfairness and contradiction. For unfairness, imagine the widow has 5 children to support and will receive only 1/4 of the inheritance while the distant male relative (maybe even wealthy) receives 3 X that amount or 3/4! For a contradiction, imagine the case where there is only a widower - he should receive 1/2, but now has 2/2 because he also receives the remainder. This is a clear contradiction between the Quran and the Hadith.

You need to interpret properly. This one is a fallacy, and has already been discussed. Either the Quran is a word of a God and, therefore, perfect for all time or it's not. Additionally, in these inheritance verses, the Quran even states, "Allah makes clear to you." So we get one more contradiction...if three Muslims give three different answers and all three answers require changing the text of the Quran to make it work, well, then...Allah didn't make it clear.