| Answering FaithFreedom.org |
| Response to Baloch (FFI.org Member) "Do we get dick in heaven?" |
| STRICT READERS DISCRETION REQUIRED: USAGE OF FOUL LANGUAGE INSIDE BY 'BALOCH' |
This discussion is also available on the forum at following location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baloch Writes:
Squeamishness about sex and violence is a product of Christian West. To day Muslims are exposed to western education to
learn the Science and technologies of the West. But with this they are also exposed to western sensibility and artificially
sanitized ideas about sex and violence.
Allah does not mince words when talking to Mohammad. In Quran and Hadith you will find words like “Dakhlah” which is the
exact equivalent of “fuck” . The English Translators are embarrassed and turn it into “consummate the marriage”.
Arabic word “Qatalookum” occurs in the Quran hundreds of times and is rendered in English as “Kill”. But the sense of
merciless violence and savage brutality that is present in the word “Qatalookum” is totally absent in “Kill”
Today’s Muslims are embarrassed to talk about sex. Mohammad had no such compunction. He, and his fellow Arabs, talked
about sexual matters openly and in very earthy terms.
Now we come to the 72 Virgins.
The Islamic paradise is described in great sensual detail in the Koran and the Traditions; for instance, Koran sura 56 verses
12 -40 ; sura 55 verses 54-56 ; sura 76 verses 12-22. I shall quote the celebrated Penguin translation by NJ Dawood of sura
56 verses 12- 39:
"They shall recline on jewelled couches face to face, and there shall wait on them immortal youths with bowls and
ewers and a cup of purest wine (that will neither pain their heads nor take away their reason); with fruits of their
own choice and flesh of fowls that they relish. And theirs shall be the dark-eyed houris, chaste as hidden pearls: a
guerdon for their deeds... We created the houris and made them virgins, loving companions for those on the
right hand..."
One should note that most translations, even those by Muslims themselves such as A Yusuf Ali, and the British Muslim
Marmaduke Pickthall, translate the Arabic (plural) word Abkarun as virgins, as do well-known lexicons such the one by John
Penrice. I emphasise this fact since many pudic and embarrassed Muslims claim there has been a mistranslation, that "virgins"
should be replaced by "angels".
In sura 55 verses 72-74, Dawood translates the Arabic word " hur " as "virgins", and the context makes clear that virgin is the
appropriate translation: "Dark-eyed virgins sheltered in their tents (which of your Lord's blessings would you deny?) whom
neither man nor jinnee will have touched before." The word hur occurs four times in the Koran and is usually translated as a
"maiden with dark eyes".
Two points need to be noted. First, there is no mention anywhere in the Koran of the actual number of virgins available in
paradise, and second, the dark-eyed damsels are available for all Muslims, not just martyrs.
It is in the Islamic Traditions that we find the 72 virgins in heaven specified: in a Hadith (Islamic Tradition) collected by Al-
Tirmidhi (died 892 CE [common era*]) in the Book of Sunan (volume IV, chapters on The Features of Paradise as described by
the Messenger of Allah [Prophet Muhammad], chapter 21, About the Smallest Reward for the People of Paradise, (Hadith
2687).
The same hadith is also quoted by Ibn Kathir (died 1373 CE ) in his Koranic commentary (Tafsir) of Surah Al-Rahman (55),
verse 72: "The Prophet Muhammad was heard saying: 'The smallest reward for the people of paradise is an abode
where there are 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and
ruby, as wide as the distance from Al-Jabiyyah [a Damascus suburb] to Sana'a [Yemen]'." Modern apologists of Islam
try to downplay the evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says,
even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual
pleasures into paradise".
The sensual pleasures are graphically elaborated by Al-Suyuti (died 1505 ), Koranic commentator and polymath. He wrote:
"Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the pe*nis of the Elected never softens. The
erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world
and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic]
houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetizing vaginas."
One of the reasons Nietzsche hated Christianity was that it "made something unclean out of sexuality", whereas Islam, many
would argue, was sex-positive. One cannot imagine any of the Church fathers writing ecstatically of heavenly sex as Al-Suyuti
did, with the possible exception of St Augustine before his conversion. But surely to call Islam sex-positive is to insult all Muslim
women, for sex is seen entirely from the male point of view; women's sexuality is admitted but seen as something to be feared,
repressed, and a work of the devil.
And that , my friends!, is the point that Dr. Mohja Kahf is trying to make in her article.
Khuda Hafiz
Zuher writes:
Baloch,
I have noted you for quite a while squirming your way in out of this forum, like the little fire starter you are. Pretty mature for a
65 year old, I must add. Let me also add this:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47734&sid=8503c14a360dd2dcbb0e14ba201b3555
You are quite the celebrity on FFI and quite a poet too I must add. All I am surprised about is that you wasted 60 years of your
pathetic life as a Muslim and then spent the last 5 in Islamic research just to find out Islam was a hoax. Don’t you think you
have put into the garbage can those 60 years for your sorry excuse for a life? You are the second old idiot I have had to
handle who, at an age similar to yours, has nothing better to discuss but sex and erectile functionality. Are you suffering from
erectile dysfunction and looking for solace form the cooked up concept of sex in heaven so that at least you have something to
look forward to if not in this world then the next? When people reach your age, we say they are living on borrowed time. Why?
Life expectancy where you come from is 55 max. You now have borrowed 10 years of someone’s life and that person may have
to die 45 so that you can start writing inane poetry and talk of sex with virgins in heaven and wet vaginas subsequently making
a show that after all the wasted 60 years, and the “awakening” of the last 5, you have finally settled to one major issue of
contention on which your religious life deeply revolves and that is sex in heaven with virgins possessing regenerating vaginas!!
And lo and behold your life’s ambition of exposing the truth has been achieved. Islam talks of sex in heaven, and that’s the
lopsided facet of the religion. Look how lewd your mind is and how twisted your thinking is you insolent moron. I will show this
readership how lewd an old man you are with the meanings of the words that you have implied to twist to fit your required
context.
I just wonder how shameless can one get when in old age and not even considerate of impending death? You are supposed to
be counting the last few days of your life and maybe thinking what you have gained in your wasted life, and where you may end
up with one leg of yours hanging inside a shallow grave most probably scheduled to be dug up by a stray dog looking for
scraps in the middle of the night. But no! Our dear friend baloch here has to talk of sex and how the Arabs like chatting about it
and while he is at it, throw in a word or two against the prophet PBUH. I wonder what you discuss with your family and if you
allow them to see what you are posting on the Internet. Why don’t you show the suyuti passage that you have fraudulently
formulated to your daughter? You copy pasted didn’t you? You silly old man. Ibn Warraq your main instrument of inspiration
isn’t he?
http://nowscape.com/islam/koran_sura2.htm
Not only has your life been wasted in these years, you have also abused your dead mother for being quite frivolous on her own
death bed, but you have nothing to show in terms of gaining knowledge for the past 65 years apart from copy/paste from your
favourite male. I will take it as killing 2 birds with one stone, you and your male friend together with this article.
An Nisaa 4:36
Serve Allah and join not any partners with Him: and do good to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are
near neighbours who are strangers, the Companion by your side, the way-farer (ye meet) and what your right hands possess:
for Allah loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious
This is what the Quran teaches, you old fool. To respect and do well to your parents. It doesn’t mention if they are dead or
alive, believers or non-believers. That too, you fall short of when you called your mother a fool and misguided while she was on
her death bed as she mentioned the name of God. You deserve no respect and the likes of you are suffering now because of
the lack of respect. I spit on your old age that you have reached with no knowledge, wisdom or respect to show for it. You are
woeful.
Let us go step by step in this article and see how your mind ticks and you can take pride in it, because, old man, you are truly
childish and you have wasted your life.
Baloch:
Squeamishness about sex and violence is a product of Christian West.
You stand corrected. You haven’t even learnt the simple dictums that Islam offers in your 60 year sojourn in Islam. You got
your facts jumbled up. It’s very sad. Let me edify you on the matter of “squeamishness about sex” and your assertion that it
comes from the Christian west. This is what the Christian west gave in the past and still does:
Sex in the Bible
Forget those dirty smut books that conservative Christians always want to ban because they have hot sex in them, the Bible
has in it all the greatest dirty hot sex stories of all time, stories so good they were canonized in the Holy Bible. That's right, Holy
smut stories. The Bible has lots of sex with virgins outside of marriage solely for the sake of pleasure. Supposedly the Bible is a
bastion of moral values, but as we shall see it is also a seething cauldron of rape, incest, prostitution, seduction, adultery, lots
and lots of unwanted pregnancies, and sometimes bloody violent revenge and outright murder, it's great! And you thought the
Bible was boring? No way! We're going to dive right in and get to these good juicy stories. And hey, it's the Bible, what are you
going to do, censure the Bible?
A Drug Deal for Sex
"If you give me your son's drugs I'll let you sleep with my husband."
A Drug Deal for Sex (Genesis 30:14-17)
The Rape of Tamar
This young virgin gets raped by her own brother. He gets away with it and is never punished, but two years later he gets
murdered by one of his own brothers. It's all in the family. 2 Samuel 13:1-19
Judah and the Prostitute
Genesis 38:13-29
This guy Judah, who is alleged to be an ancestor of Jesus Christ according to Matthew 1:2, has sex with a prostitute. Three
months later he is told "Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant." Judah says,
"Bring her out and have her burned to death!" But suddenly all is forgiven when she exposes him as the one who got her
pregnant. That's right, Judah got his own daughter-in-law pregnant and she gave birth to Perez, who is another ancestor of
Jesus Christ! (Matthew 1:3).
Take My Daughters, Please.
Sodom and Gomorrah
Sodom and Gomorrah "Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you
can do what you like with them." In one version of the story the people refuse the offer and God destroys their town. (Genesis
19:1-11)
In another version of the story (Judges 19) the man offers his woman, the people accept the offer and violently rape and abuse
the woman all night long. The woman is found dead in the man's doorway the next morning, so he cuts her up into twelve
pieces. Gross!
Let's Have Sex With Daddy!
Genesis 19:31-38
"there is no man around here to lie with us, as is the custom all over the earth." Yes, all over the earth it's "customary" to have
sex, at least according to the Bible. And hey, if there's no one else around, then have sex with daddy! And get pregnant by
daddy! Well that's what these two daughters did, and babies they did have. That's right, both Moab, father of the Moabites,
and Ben-Ammi, father of the Ammonites, are a result of inbreeding. There is no comment anywhere that this behavior might be
immoral. Not even the Lord had anything negative to say about it.
King David and Bathsheba
King David our hero has sex with a beautiful married woman, gets her pregnant and then has her husband murdered so he
can marry the beautiful woman for himself which he does, bringing the total number of wives he's married to nine.
Song of Songs, Songs of Solomon, Canticles
"Your nose is like the tower of Lebanon looking toward Damascus." (hu?) A book of lusty erotic poetry. Yes, lusty erotic poetry
is a part of the Bible.
The Rape of Dinah
Genesis 33:18 - 34:31
In a foreign city Dinah gets raped. The rapist afterwards is very sorry and tries everything to make amends, but three days
later Dinah's family gets brutal revenge by attacking and destroying the entire city. It's sex and unforgiveness and bloody
violent brutal revenge at its very best!
Esther
Esther 2:2-18
The best way for a king to find a new wife is to spend each night with a beautiful virgin until one particularly pleasing is found,
and the best way to become queen is to be a sexually attractive virgin and prostitute yourself before the king.
The Book of Ruth
Naomi has her daughter-in-law Ruth sexually seduce a man because she wants her to get married.
Judges 21:23
"While the girls were dancing, each man caught one and carried her off to be his wife."
Some people worry that TV and movies have far too much violence and sex in them. But as we see above the Bible has the
best most brutal violence and shocking sex stories of all time! At least in the movies the bad guys always lose in the end -- they
are caught and sent to prison or they die a horrible death befitting an evil man. Goodness always prevails on TV and in
movies, but in the Bible the people committing these heinous crimes are our heroes and they always get away with it.
These stories in the Bible are of such a shocking nature that in 1926 Joseph Lewis was compelled to write, "I cannot
understand how public men, men of learning and experience, can insist that the Bible, which contains the stories quoted that
shock even the vulgar-minded, should be our pre-eminent guide in all earthly affairs, and that it should not only be read by, but
actually taught to the growing generation in search of high moral ethics."
Again I ask; squeamishness about sex from Christian west?? Not by a long shot. So much for that sentence. Remember and
remember well, old man, this is NOT tu-quoque where I am trying to prove two wrongs make a right. I have merely shown you
that the nonsense you perpetrate by saying “Squeamishness about sex and violence is a product of Christian West”. So lets us
act our age here ok and not our shoe size, please.
Read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_in_the_Bible
Baloch:
To day Muslims are exposed to western education to learn the Science and technologies of the West. But with this they are
also exposed to western sensibility and artificially sanitized ideas about sex and violence.
This shameless old man wants to know how Muslims are “exposed to western sensibility and artificially sanitized ideas about
sex and violence.”
Refer my article below. This is the response to the email sent to Allah SWT by another inane writer, abulkasem.
I can give you all the stats you want to your punch-line to a joke type sentence so that it shuts your mouth for good, well at
least until when you end up in your shallow grave, after which you will have to open it for your pathetic defense. That won’t be
too long seeing your borrowed time that you are living on right now.
"An Email to Abul Kasem - From a Slave of Allah" - Response to Abul Kasem's article "An Email to Allah"
Truly baloch you have a wasted life, if you didn’t know this at 65 years. I hope by now, you wont say that by reading this post
you added to your knowledge as you didn’t have any in the first place to add on to for the past 65 years. This is the first taste
of knowledge.
Baloch:
Allah does not mince words when talking to Mohammad. In Quran and Hadith you will find words like “Dakhlah” which is the
exact equivalent of “fuck” . The English Translators are embarrassed and turn it into “consummate the marriage”.
Let us look at this word that you purport to be lewd in the Quran. Sometimes I am compelled to think, even if the Holy Book did
mean “fuck” for “dakhlah”, how useful would it be when your little head needs a ton of Viagra to make the big head stop
thinking, baloch.
Several verses have used the word “dakhlah” in context. The following verses are pertinent:
Al Baqara 2:58,
Ale Imran 3:97,
An Nisaa 4:13, 4: 23, 4:14, 4:57
I will pick only a few to explain. I don’t feel you’re worth the waste of my time on this lewdness which your senile mind is trying to
perpetrate. Maybe you’re looking for kicks from literature when physicality has left you high and dry, you naughty old man. I will
use Yusuf Ali, Pickthall and M H Shakir. All of them a consistent with the meaning of this word.
2:58
And remember We said: "Enter ( ٱدۡخُلُواْ) this town and eat of the plenty therein as ye wish; but enter the gate with humility, in
posture and in words, and We shall forgive you your faults and increase (the portion of) those who do good."
A verb: an action word: “Udkhuluu” from the root word “dakhlah” meaning “enter”
3:97
In it are signs manifest; (for example), the Station of Abraham; whoever enters (دَخَلَهُ) it attains security; pilgrimage thereto is a
duty men owe to Allah―those who can afford the journey; but if any deny faith; Allah stands not in need of any of His
creatures.
A verb in future continuous tense “dakhalahu” meaning “enters”
Now replace these underlined words with baloch’s favourite dreamland word “fuck”. Think about it. Is it not utter nonsense?
Why because this what this old man keeps dreaming of day in day out. He can’t do it, at least he can dream it.
This is the word clarified literally.
Now let us look at it contextually.
4:23
Prohibited to you (for marriage) are:― your mothers, daughters, sisters, father's sisters, mother's sisters; brother's daughters,
sister's daughters, foster-mothers (who gave you suck) foster-sisters; your wives' mothers; your step-daughters under your
guardianship, born of your wives to whom ye have gone in
( دَخَلۡتُم ),―no prohibition if ye have not gone in,― (those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins; and
two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time, except for what is past; for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
Dakhaltum descriptive meaning those you have “gone into”. Can I sense a smile on baloch’s aged face? You dirty old man.
'Dakhaltum' is the most of soothing word that Quran could use to describe 'consummation'. Quran just gave a sign by saying
'gone into' or 'enter into' in verse 4:23. Is this not the same way a father was to explain this sensitive topic and law to his
children. There is no mention of fuck or vagina in this particular verse. These vestigial body parts especially for baloch exist
only in his mind and this is how he has clearly interpreted this verse and so has Ibn Warraq. Allah just gave the inkling for
intellectual people in using the word dakhla which I think actually means 'to enter'. This is not derogative at ll. In fact, if
anything the Quran has adopted very sober stance on the special relationship of marriage the rights of the spouses in this
sacred bond. Of course for baloch, this means “fuck”. Can anyone here notice the dirt in the mind of this lewd old man staring
at death straight in the face?
If the above holds true, then the word 'dakhlah' is not derogative in Arabic sense. If it is in English then it is not our problem
however it is the dilemma of English language. This is an inability on th part of the English language that it has not yet evolved
to appropriately translate the word into its actual contextual meaning. This copy/paste fool has not read this article of
researched well at all before pasting it nor has the original writer ibn warraq done anything to understand this verse in all its
clarity and contextual sense. Its is not their fault, it is the incapability of a disbelieving mind to think clearly compounded by the
inadequacy of the translating language, in this case English. But when an old mind is already corrupted even if English had the
true interpretative contextual word, who is there who can teach an old dog new tricks?
The Arabic word for fu** is 'nikah-noun' 'nikh-verb' and Arabic word for fu**ing is 'sakheef'.
Fu** in Arabic - Source
Fu**ing in Arabic – Source
I plead for pardon from the referee, moderators and my respected sisters on this website as regards this issue. I am
forced by this lewd man to cut him down in this old age using such words.
But rest assured, the moment you figure out how this man thinks and that his main argument is useless and baseless, that will
render his whole life a pathetic sojourn into nothingness and that it didn’t require the pangs of death and the enticement of
shaytan at the time to divert his faith, he is a murtad by choice before death and facing it right in the face. La’anatullah alal
qaumil murtadeen.
Baloch:
One should note that most translations, even those by Muslims themselves such as A Yusuf Ali, and the British Muslim
Marmaduke Pickthall, translate the Arabic (plural) word Abkarun as virgins, as do well-known lexicons such the one by John
Penrice. I emphasise this fact since many pudic and embarrassed Muslims claim there has been a mistranslation, that "virgins"
should be replaced by "angels".
I do not see the point of any lewdness that the issue of “virgins” being mentioned. I think you have been trying to paint this
statement in the pathetic colours of your own life that has been spent in acquiring nothing and ending up with the curses of
your own mother who dies in the right way, while with the words of God on her mouth, for which you hold her criminal. You are
a pathetic foolish incongruent fool on whose old age I would feel ashamed. So what is the virgins were mentioned? Does it
mean one can blow the issue out and start looking at dreams of things which they cant achieve anymore such as yourself, you
erectile dysfunctional old man. It would be a shame for a man at your age to indulge in such lewd pathetic interpretation of
verses, which you end up extrapolating for your own shameless ends.
Baloch:
In sura 55 verses 72-74, Dawood translates the Arabic word " hur " as "virgins", and the context makes clear that virgin is the
appropriate translation: "Dark-eyed virgins sheltered in their tents (which of your Lord's blessings would you deny?) whom
neither man nor jinnee will have touched before." The word hur occurs four times in the Koran and is usually translated as a
"maiden with dark eyes".
Let us stick to the accepted translations and the one you called celebrated is somewhat short and dysfunctional just like yours.
You might as well have used the Ali Sina translation of the Holy Quran and then get orgasmic all over the words after all that is
all that you are now capable of, at this time when you’re staring a death right in the face. Now read and read well.
55:70-74
In them will be fair (companions), good, beautiful― (70) Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? (71) Companions
restrained (as to their glances), in (goodly) pavilions (72) Then which of the favour of your Lord will ye deny? (73) Whom no
man or Jinn before them has touched― (74)
There are several verses that corroborate the verse above. 37:48-49, 44:54, 52:20, 56:22 all describe the Hurs. The hur is
described generally a beautiful virtuous woman created perfect by the Creator. This perfection is beyond comparison with the
mortal being hence the immaculate and respectable quality of virginity and virtue. Virginity is a virtue in this context of the
Quran and is a characteristic that is desirable in your own sister, unmarried, untouched by any man or animal, baloch. You do
have sisters and daughters don’t you. So wouldn’t you want them to have qualities of a Hur and that she be a mate, married to
a virtuous man? These are qualities described by the Lord that are desirable for believing women on earth and these are the
virtuous women who are in heaven who are created perfect by the Creator as virtuous COMPANIONS and not as sex objects
the way your lewd mind expresses them. That’s why I now repeat that it’s a shame on your old age if this what your whole life
has taught you that finally after spending so much time on earth, all you can show for the experience is your stupidity and lewd
thinking that would make your won mother turn in her grave and put to shame your won sisters and daughters.
Baloch:
Two points need to be noted. First, there is no mention anywhere in the Koran of the actual number of virgins available in
paradise, and second, the dark-eyed damsels are available for all Muslims, not just martyrs.
It is in the Islamic Traditions that we find the 72 virgins in heaven specified: in a Hadith (Islamic Tradition) collected by Al-
Tirmidhi (died 892 CE [common era*]) in the Book of Sunan (volume IV, chapters on The Features of Paradise as described by
the Messenger of Allah [Prophet Muhammad], chapter 21, About the Smallest Reward for the People of Paradise, (Hadith
2687).
The same hadith is also quoted by Ibn Kathir (died 1373 CE ) in his Koranic commentary (Tafsir) of Surah Al-Rahman (55),
verse 72: "The Prophet Muhammad was heard saying: 'The smallest reward for the people of paradise is an abode where
there are 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as
the distance from Al-Jabiyyah [a Damascus suburb] to Sana'a [Yemen]'." Modern apologists of Islam try to downplay the
evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says, even orthodox
Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into
paradise".
The sensual pleasures are graphically elaborated by Al-Suyuti (died 1505 ), Koranic commentator and polymath. He wrote:
"Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the pe*nis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal;
the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in
this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth,
and all will have appetizing vaginas."
My apologies once again to the referee/moderators and my sisters. Please do note how lewd this old man is at his ripe
death facing age that he has to quote such unfounded quotations with no basis whatsoever.
Baloch, this is your male friends ibn warraq’s creation and interpretation which you have put on suyuti. Can you give us actual
references; page number etc? You are true waste of a human life. It’s a shame that old men who are elders and considered
equal to prophets among their clansmen, today you come up and put to shame all what the elders stand for. I don’t think I need
to explain further on this issue of hurries as I have already explained their countenance with virtuosity and not as sexual
objects. It is you lewd mind that makes the interpretation of the verse depicting the manner which suits your foul ends. I am
sure you would expect the same virtuosity from your daughter or sister. Or you may not have either, one probably you never
were entitled for the blessing of a sister and then maybe you never had the capability of producing a daughter no wonder your
wet dreams at this age. Be as it may, even if that was suyuti’s words, what right do you have to blanket-cover all the Muslims
under a single interpretation that may have either been flawed or doctored to suit foul ends. After all you and your
dysfunctional male friend ibn warraq have not given a single reference with titles and page numbers to set your ball rolling. You
are bigots and pathetic at it anyway.
Baloch:
One of the reasons Nietzsche hated Christianity was that it "made something unclean out of sexuality", whereas Islam, many
would argue, was sex-positive. One cannot imagine any of the Church fathers writing ecstatically of heavenly sex as Al-Suyuti
did, with the possible exception of St Augustine before his conversion. But surely to call Islam sex-positive is to insult all Muslim
women, for sex is seen entirely from the male point of view; women's sexuality is admitted but seen as something to be feared,
repressed, and a work of the devil.
And that , my friends!, is the point that Dr. Mohja Kahf is trying to make in her article.
Maybe you should refer to Islamic laws as regards marriage the mutual and individual rights of a husband and wife in marriage
towards each other. You will then realse3 that ther lewdness yuou purport and so staunchly put forth is ill founded and that
your won female family members would be ashamed of an old man such as yourself pasting such articles that show how lewd
this old man can get when he is supposed to be counting his final days and trying to earn the little virtue he can in the little time
left in this world. Your one foot is in the grave the other barely on earth and you are talking of erections and regenerative
vaginas? You are shame on your age mates. You are a childish old man hit with senility.
I challenge you bigot to come forth and spend your final days debating on whether your mother was foolish to die the way she
did. May Allah grant her soul eternal peace, but I know she is turning in her grave after bearing a bigot such as yourself.
Remember what you told Peacebwu:
Baloch:
First, it is common decency to quote the source if you copy-paste something. So that one can judge for oneself where the
idiocy originates.
This was your statement you moronic hypocrite. Practice your own dictum and tell us where your male friend wrote his article
and where you copy/pasted this from…. ohh no need, we already got it and we already know where you asininity originates
from, you lewd old man.
I await you.
Baloch writes:
Zuher,
You remind me of a boxer who after receiving a stunning blow goes berserk throwing futile punches. Overall you have nothing
to offer except personal insults and meaningless non-sequitars. No wonder Ali sina knocked you out cold.
I also find it amusing that as a follower of a pedophile and lecherous prophet you have the temerity to call me lewd when all I
did was to draw attention to an authentic Muslim website dealing with the subject of female sexuality in heaven in rather
unconventional style. You also belittle me because of my age. But let me assure you I have never run after a six year old girl
even when I was six let alone at sixty. If you want to contemplate a quintessential “Dirty Old Man”, think of Mohammad.
You belittle Ibn Warraq. But he is more dependable as an Islamic scholar learned In Arabic than most partisan Muslims who
only make fools of themselves trying to extract modern science from the verses of Quran a la Zakir Naik. In all his books he is
objective, fair and absolutely scholarly in the academic way.
It is obvious to me that Islam is a fraud started by Mohammad and whereas all that is good in Quran is plagiarized from earlier
sources, Mohammad’s original contribution is the commoditization of sex and sanctification of violence.
That the promise of sex in the heaven is the driving force behind the Muslim fanatics who blow themselves up to the shout of
‘Allahu Akbar” was driven home when it was found that the lower part of their bodies were wrapped in newspapers and towels
to preserve the genitals. I know this from my friend who is a police officer in Karachi. This has also been observed in Iraq.
While most of what you quote from Bible may be true it does not belie my point that Christian west was squeamish about sex. In
Victorian England they used to cover the legs of the chairs and tables. This is just a value free observation.
The main point being discussed here, if I may clarify it for you, is that Mohammad, through Allah in the Quran, bribes the
Muslim men with sexual rights over women in this world and the next. This sexual gestalt informs the sexual attitude of Muslim
man and it is the main cause of the wretched condition of women in Muslim society. That is what the enlightened Muslim woman
like Dr. Mohja Kahf thinks and trying to set it right. And that is what I pointed out.
Now there remains the passage by Al-Suyuti. Yes, the translation is by Ibn Warraq. It is taken from his book “Why I am not a
Muslim” I do not see it on the web. May be it is there. If it matters that much to you, I could find the exact book of Suyuti where
this occurs. I am sure it is there. But how will it change your attitude if I can prove its existence?
Through ideaologue’s willingness to suppress what he suspects to be true has flowed much evil.
Khuda hafiz.
Suhail writes:
Readers Discretion Required: Foul Language Inside.
My dearest apologies to sisters/brothers/moderators on using such a language. However, we were compelled and we have to
defend now.
---
Dear Uncle Baloch,
Assalamu Alaikum. May (I seriously doubt) peace and blessings of Allah be upon you.
The only motive I am calling you uncle is that you are more than twice the age of mine, brother zuher and most of the
members on this forum. Ordinarily, life offers surprises; however, it seems it is not the first time you befall being the victim of
much younger youth in critically criticizing your lewd thoughts. More often than not, grown-ups have to lower down the level of
their understanding in order to educate young; but in your case it appears vice versa. If you are levelheaded enough then you
will deduce the actual gist of what I am trying to elucidate. Over here, my reply, shall gravely probe the way of your thoughts
and I shall also award you an opportunity to come back with a rebuttal. Toting up to that, my humble request to you is to please
rope in some concrete arguments and try your level best to rebuff the evidence put forth by brother zuher and this time by me.
Baloch:
Zuher,
You remind me of a boxer who after receiving a stunning blow goes berserk throwing futile punches. Overall you have nothing
to offer except personal insults and meaningless non-sequitars. No wonder Ali sina knocked you out cold.
"Drowning man clutches a straw", you have proven zilch but yourself a dirty old man. Sincerely, is this what you call a rebuttal?
You are throwing arrows in the air; consequently, deeming that brother zuher would be your target. Get out of your negligence
and think sanely. Such statements of yours are only concealing the humiliation and disgrace of your filthy heart and not
actually imposing anything on us to retort.
On the contrary, you remind me of a boxer who is, on the other hand, not aware of any rules of the fight and at the
commencement of it, ended up in committing serious fouls. Moreover, during his frenzy mood he punched (your first post) his
opponent only once. Keeping such a scenario in consideration, this is out of rules and regulations of a fight; therefore, sadly
there is no score for you. However, in the second fight (brother zuher's post) you reminded of rules and regulations and
knocked out without even a sole punch from you.
Wonderful! Ali Sina knocked out brother zuher. Read the version on Answering FaithFreedom.org.
DEBATE: Zuher VS Ali Sina
Your man of dreams 'Ali Sina' tampered this precise debate on his website. If you lay similar allegation on us; then please be
my guest as this is not going to win you any 'converts' anyways. However, we are, in spite of everything, waiting eagerly if your
reason of wet-dreams (Ali Sina) is man enough to engage once more with brother zuher on our turf. Brother zuher is readily
available once a day and twice on Sundays to tackle your ‘over-shadower’ (Ali Sina). Please bring to our knowledge what Ali
Sina has to cite in his response to brother zuher’s challenge. Or, are you going to come back with lame excuse that now Ali
Sina does not debate with “Anonymous” Muslims? Can you please elucidate us that why “ANONYMOUS” Ali Sina himself does
not intend to debate with “ANONYMOUS” Muslims?
Baloch:
I also find it amusing that as a follower of a pedophile and lecherous prophet you have the temerity to call me lewd when all I
did was to draw attention to an authentic Muslim website dealing with the subject of female sexuality in heaven in rather
unconventional style. You also belittle me because of my age. But let me assure you I have never run after a six year old girl
even when I was six let alone at sixty. If you want to contemplate a quintessential "Dirty Old Man", think of Mohammad.
Superb! A term 'pedophile'; populace like you frame standards of your own to conceal the disgusting society of west, whereas
the only reason they came up with such a term is only to put a leash on their 'freedom of sex', which is only and only their own
creation. They frame their own standards and judge others by their own creations. World was going along fine; however, some
day ONLY one man came up with the idea of 'pedophilia' and fixed all the derogative senses to it and started judging others by
his self-created wet-dream.
It seems like you have a dilemma with a person who is legally married to a woman. As far as Muslims are concerned, we are in
encouragement of marriage. As it is far superior than having illicit sex with neighbor's wife, lady secretary, own daughters and
mothers, mistresses, with boss' wife, with prostitutes, with the girl next door, with the postman's wife, with man-friend, with dog
and pig, with an inanimate object like the hole down the sink and so on. Hey uncle, I see you smiling again on the latter part of
my example? These are some of the soiled paradigms of your 'freedom of sex'. Getting married is much more far superior than
involving your young youth in the lustful exemplars that I have furnished above. However, choice is yours? And we are already
aware where you are going to lay your hands on.
I am in no where in agreement with the constructed concept of pedophilia concocted by Westerners in order for them to justify
their own ruling of 'free sex' that ended up actually getting stuck in their own throats and transformed into a huge dilemma of
their own disgusting society. Afterwards, where they had found fathers running after their own female children; similarly, they
had located scores of people who started running after juvenile youth. Subsequently, when they perceived the ugly face of
their own ruling, they plant a benchmark age of consensus. How ironic it is that the same absurd law defines that one is a child
and too young to buy and drink alcohol, but old enough to join armed forces and die in a combat for his and/or her country. I
wonder why USA has different puberty laws in different states varying between 18 and 21. Why would I agree to their standards
and not to what my religion says? According to Islam, a child after reaching to his/her puberty never to be labeled as a 'child'
anymore but to consider as a man/woman and fit for marriage. Why God/nature constructed such a young woman to bear the
seed of human being? Islam entertains and urges early marriages in order to rebuff the chances of mind deviation among
young men and women that results in a gutter western society we have these days. 'Pedophilia" is your own debris and only
and only applies to you where the only reason you people had originated such a term is to cover the viciousness of outcome of
'freedom of sex'.
However, besides all these facts I am open to discuss any time. I can take you on any time on this precise topic. I challenge
you, old man.
Baloch:
You belittle Ibn Warraq. But he is more dependable as an Islamic scholar learned In Arabic than most partisan Muslims who
only make fools of themselves trying to extract modern science from the verses of Quran a la Zakir Naik. In all his books he is
objective, fair and absolutely scholarly in the academic way.
Uncle Baloch! I thought for a moment that you are adequately mature and are capable of performing little gymnastics on trivial
meat that is located over your elderly bent shoulders and is making my tongue disgusting by labeling it as your brain. Thank
you for proving me wrong, once again. You brought your evidence by quoting Ibn Warraq. I have some questions for you:
1) Why do you deem that Muslims are going to believe Ibn Warraq?
2) Why you only choose Ibn Warraq?
3) Why didn't you quote us other Islamic Scholars that are in harmony with the exegesis done by brother zuher?
4) Is it going to be logical for us to choose Ibn Warraq only, over scores of other Islamic Scholars who are in tandem in
exegesis done by brother zuher?
5) Why do you desire that Muslims should rebuff their own Islamic Scholars over yours?
6) Why do you deem that it must be very grueling for Muslims to reject Ibn Warraq as authentic evidence from you?
Waiting anxiously for your replies.
Baloch:
It is obvious to me that Islam is a fraud started by Mohammad and whereas all that is good in Quran is plagiarized from earlier
sources, Mohammad's original contribution is the commoditization of sex and sanctification of violence.
Wonderful! When you miserably failed to locate anything else to hit back brother Zuher, you started firing other topics. Do no
throw arrows in the air, uncle. No Muslim is going to be your target. If you do not afford your evidence and keep your rants on,
then it is only framing you dim-witted in the end. Reverse your gears and read the reply of brother Zuher again, and read it
well, look for evidences and you will definitely find some. This is what I am talking about. I am quite aware from where you have
learnt such a game of firing up new topics; every one knows Ali Sina and his childish games as they are quite evident in his
debate with brother Zuher (A-FFI.org version) and with every one else.
Baloch:
That the promise of sex in the heaven is the driving force behind the Muslim fanatics who blow themselves up to the shout of
'Allahu Akbar" was driven home when it was found that the lower part of their bodies were wrapped in newspapers and towels
to preserve the genitals. I know this from my friend who is a police officer in Karachi. This has also been observed in Iraq.
Hello! Where is your proof, uncle?
Baloch:
The main point being discussed here, if I may clarify it for you, is that Mohammad, through Allah in the Quran, bribes the
Muslim men with sexual rights over women in this world and the next. This sexual gestalt informs the sexual attitude of Muslim
man and it is the main cause of the wretched condition of women in Muslim society. That is what the enlightened Muslim woman
like Dr. Mohja Kahf thinks and trying to set it right. And that is what I pointed out.
At the outset, you have to straighten up your own western women who are wretched up in a great deal. Do not tell me the
driving force behind such a demeanor as everyone is aware. Status of women is so drenched up in western society that most
of them are merely used as sex objects. And who are drowning them in such a gutter; is again your western men.
Islam elevates women; there is a hadith ordaining sons and daughters to show more compassion towards mothers as
compared to fathers. Compassion should be three times higher than that of the latter. Pregnant woman is again elevated in
Islam as there is a great deal of rewards for her in here and hereafter for a reason the pain in which she bears a child. Women
are not required to work in Islam; it is the utmost duty of a man either husband, brother or a father to look after their respective
women. If they are not performing their ordained duties willfully then they are accountable on the Day of Judgment. If women,
somehow, willing to work then she is allowed in Islam; however, she is not liable to spend her money on household or on any
one else. She has a right to keep her money with herself only; whether, in a safe, under her pillow or anywhere else. Men are
not allowed to take her money. In Islam women have their own duties and men have their own. There are equal rewards for
everyone if they obediently perform their own duties. However, such traits are not going to be fruitful for you, as populace
likewise you already transformed so dungy in their own intellects that they never label women as pure as they should be,
besides deeming about their sexual parts. Your post was evident enough. Show me a single religion on the face of the Earth
that gives more right to women than Islam. Do not quote me followers; rather quote me scriptures. Followers are not true
picture of their religion or faith. My evidence: take a good look at yourself.
As regards to your false allegation that Allah has ordained Muslims in Quran and from the blessed mouth of Prophet
Muhammad (Peace be upon him) to have sexual rights over women in this world and next; is just only a by-product of your
soiled wet-dreams and nothing else. If some one is doing so, then he is not following the teachings of Quran. You are following
the traits of so-called followers; if I were to follow the same trend then it will not impede me in any aspect labeling your roots as
debauched as they could be, for a definite reason that they have transformed you into such a filthy old man. If you are sensible
enough then try replacing the word 'roots' with your parents and you will definitely perceive the gist I am trying to impose upon
you. If you are grimy and dungy in your own self then it does not mean your parents are the same from where you have taken
your first schooling. It is very grueling for me to label your mother as debauched as she has already met her Lord with His
name on her mouth. May Allah bless her soul? Therefore, if some one is not following the teachings of his religion then it is the
dilemma with him and it never depicts that the religion is erroneous. I am aware that I haven't really answered your question;
please read more below:
Baloch:
Now there remains the passage by Al-Suyuti. Yes, the translation is by Ibn Warraq. It is taken from his book "Why I am not a
Muslim" I do not see it on the web. May be it is there. If it matters that much to you, I could find the exact book of Suyuti where
this occurs. I am sure it is there. But how will it change your attitude if I can prove its existence?
Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! "Falsehood is by its nature bound to perish". (Quran 21:18).
Jazak Allah brother zuher. Another infidel bowed down.
Uncle Baloch! Get back to your senses and answer my questions:
1) Why do you deem that it is very arduous for us to rebuff Al-Suyuti? Did he authored Quran? Is he a Prophet?
2) Why didn't you quote us consensus of scores of Islamic Scholars besides quoting ONLY ONE non-Muslim Islamic Scholar?
3) Why did you afford us with the quotations of Al-Suyuti; whereas the translation was done by a non-Muslim? Can't you quote
a translator who is a Muslim?
We are ready to change our attitude; are you ready to alter your trait? Please read below what I am trying to elucidate;
You said, "In Quran and Hadith you will find words like "Dakhlah" which is the exact equivalent of "fuck". Are these your words,
uncle? Can you show me the proof? Show me your evidence, old man? You are laying false allegations on Quran without
engendering proofs. Where does it say that the word "Dakhlah" is the exact equivalent of "fuck"? Show me evidence from
Quran.
Brother zuher has already afforded you with his evidences in an attire of couple of verses from Holy Quran where the word
"Dakhlah" has been used as "to enter" or "gone into". He provided few verses; However, I shall offer you more 2:114, 2:58, 3:
97, 4:13, 4:14, 4:57, 4:122, 4:175, 5:22, 5:24, 7:46, 9:99, 15:46, 17:7, 24:28, 39:73, 40:8, 45:30, 47:6, 48:17, 50:34, 58:22,
64:9, 65:11. Show me a single place in all of these verses where this precise Arabic word "Dakhlah" has been used as the way
your filthy and dungy mind label it as "fuck". Who told you that "Dakhlah" means "fuck"?
Populace likewise Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina have blinded your intellects in such a way that you are not able to look at the beauty
of Quran. "Dakhlah" is the most suitable word and the most beautiful word that has been incorporated by Allah in His word.
There is no other word available that can be used instead of it. Consequently, it dearly shows that how filthy you are in your
own intellect that there is another English word 'consummation' available that describe 'fuck" in a very soothing manner.
However, you have chosen the latter and it is greatly portraying how your intellect is rotten. You had a choice and you could
easily pick 'consummation' as a replacement of "fuck"; but no, you didn't do it? Brother zuher had rightly revealed your
disgusting thoughts to the world.
Can you please tell the world that why did you choose "fuck" as a literal meaning of Arabic word "Dakhlah" besides picking a
replacement word which is "consummation" where it was always at hand?
Get the book of Al-Suyuti and show us the reference? Your man-friend and your reason of wet-dreams "Ibn Warraq" didn't
provide any reference as well in his book. If some how you get the reference then please also let me know that:
Why do you think it is very grueling for Muslims to reject Al-Suyuti as an authentic Islamic Scholar?
Ball is in your court now. Please do not get me wrong on usage of English word ‘Ball’. You know what I mean.
Kindest regards.
Baloch writes:
Suhail:
Readers Discretion Required: Foul Language Inside.
My dearest apologies to sisters/brothers/moderators on using such a language. However, we were compelled and we have to
defend now.
If you can only produce decent argument and express them in plain and simple English you would not have to indulge in this
kind of grandstanding. (Fonts smaller than this would be unreadable.)
Suhail:
The only motive I am calling you uncle is that you are more than twice the age of mine, brother zuher and most of the members
on this forum. Ordinarily, life offers surprises; however, it seems it is not the first time you befall being the victim of much
younger youth in critically criticizing your lewd thoughts. More often than not, grown-ups have to lower down the level of their
understanding in order to educate young; but in your case it appears vice versa. If you are levelheaded enough then you will
deduce the actual gist of what I am trying to elucidate. Over here, my reply, shall gravely probe the way of your thoughts and I
shall also award you an opportunity to come back with a rebuttal. Toting up to that, my humble request to you is to please rope
in some concrete arguments and try your level best to rebuff the evidence put forth by brother zuher and this time by me.
You are just wasting lines uttering irrelevant inanities. Age, old or young, ipso facto, has nothing to do with person’s maturity.
Jesus gives such insightful sermons at twenty five whereas Mohammad is lusting after six year old girl at sixty.
Suhail:
baloch-
I also find it amusing that as a follower of a pedophile and lecherous prophet you have the temerity to call me lewd when all I
did was to draw attention to an authentic Muslim website dealing with the subject of female sexuality in heaven in rather
unconventional style. You also belittle me because of my age. But let me assure you I have never run after a six year old girl
even when I was six let alone at sixty. If you want to contemplate a quintessential "Dirty Old Man", think of Mohammad.
Suhail-
Superb! A term 'pedophile'; populace like you frame standards of your own to conceal the disgusting society of west, whereas
the only reason they came up with such a term is only to put a leash on their 'freedom of sex', which is only and only their own
creation. They frame their own standards and judge others by their own creations. World was going along fine; however, some
day ONLY one man came up with the idea of 'pedophilia' and fixed all the derogative senses to it and started judging others by
his self-created wet-dream.
OK. You don’t like the word ‘pedophile’ How about ‘degenerate lecher’ ? suits better, too.
Suhail:
It seems like you have a dilemma with a person who is legally married to a woman. As far as Muslims are concerned, we are in
encouragement of marriage. As it is far superior than having illicit sex with neighbor's wife, lady secretary, own daughters and
mothers, mistresses, with boss' wife, with prostitutes, with the girl next door, with the postman's wife, with man-friend, with dog
and pig, with an inanimate object like the hole down the sink and so on. Hey uncle, I see you smiling again on the latter part of
my example? These are some of the soiled paradigms of your 'freedom of sex'. Getting married is much more far superior than
involving your young youth in the lustful exemplars that I have furnished above. However, choice is yours? And we are already
aware where you are going to lay your hands on.
Grandstanding again. I have no dilemma. Dilemma is for people who want to choose. I have only contempt for a sixty year old
lout who imposes himself on a six year old girl, legal marriage or not. Morally repugnant behavior does not get sanitized by
making it legal.
Rest of the ranting needs no response.
Suhail:
I am in no where in agreement with the constructed concept of pedophilia concocted by Westerners in order for them to justify
their own ruling of 'free sex' that ended up actually getting stuck in their own throats and transformed into a huge dilemma of
their own disgusting society. Afterwards, where they had found fathers running after their own female children; similarly, they
had located scores of people who started running after juvenile youth. Subsequently, when they perceived the ugly face of
their own ruling, they plant a benchmark age of consensus. How ironic it is that the same absurd law defines that one is a child
and too young to buy and drink alcohol, but old enough to join armed forces and die in a combat for his and/or her country. I
wonder why USA has different puberty laws in different states varying between 18 and 21. Why would I agree to their standards
and not to what my religion says? According to Islam, a child after reaching to his/her puberty never to be labeled as a 'child'
anymore but to consider as a man/woman and fit for marriage. Why God/nature constructed such a young woman to bear the
seed of human being? Islam entertains and urges early marriages in order to rebuff the chances of mind deviation among
young men and women that results in a gutter western society we have these days. 'Pedophilia" is your own debris and only
and only applies to you where the only reason you people had originated such a term is to cover the viciousness of outcome of
'freedom of sex'.
However, besides all these facts I am open to discuss any time. I can take you on any time on this precise topic. I challenge
you, old man.
stay with the topic of discussion.I have nothing to do with this. I couldn’t care less.
Suhail:
You belittle Ibn Warraq. But he is more dependable as an Islamic scholar learned In Arabic than most partisan Muslims who
only make fools of themselves trying to extract modern science from the verses of Quran a la Zakir Naik. In all his books he is
objective, fair and absolutely scholarly in the academic way.
Uncle Baloch! I thought for a moment that you are adequately mature and are capable of performing little gymnastics on trivial
meat that is located over your elderly bent shoulders and is making my tongue disgusting by labeling it as your brain. Thank
you for proving me wrong, once again. You brought your evidence by quoting Ibn Warraq. I have some questions for you:
Why are you discussing my anatomy here?
I haven’t quoted Ibn Warraq at all.
I have quoted Al-Suyuti.
It was Zuher who mentioned Ibn Warraq first.
Let me answer your question.
1) Why do you deem that Muslims are going to believe Ibn Warraq?
People are free to believe what they want.
2) Why you only choose Ibn Warraq?
What makes you say that. I used his translation of Al-Suyuti. That’s all.
3) Why didn't you quote us other Islamic Scholars that are in harmony with the exegesis done by brother zuher?
I sure will do so. I haven’t indulged in any exegesis.
4) Is it going to be logical for us to choose Ibn Warraq only, over scores of other Islamic Scholars who are in tandem in
exegesis done by brother zuher?
No. You choose what you like.
5) Why do you desire that Muslims should rebuff their own Islamic Scholars over yours?
Don’t put words in my mouth. I have no such desire.
6) Why do you deem that it must be very grueling for Muslims to reject Ibn Warraq as authentic evidence from you?
My God ! Stop babbling. You are stuck in a groove.
Suhail:
baloch-
It is obvious to me that Islam is a fraud started by Mohammad and whereas all that is good in Quran is plagiarized from earlier
sources, Mohammad's original contribution is the commoditization of sex and sanctification of violence.
suhail-
Wonderful! When you miserably failed to locate anything else to hit back brother zuher, you started firing other topics. Do no
throw arrows in the air, uncle. No Muslim is going to be your target. If you do not afford your evidence and keep your rants on,
then it is only framing you dim-witted in the end. Reverse your gears and read the reply of brother zuher again, and read it
well, look for evidences and you will definitely find some. This is what I am talking about. I am quite aware from where you have
learnt such a game of firing up new topics; every one knows Ali Sina and his childish games as they are quite evident in his
debate with brother Zuher (A-FFI.org version) and with every one else
For once you are right. That is another topic. But it would not have happened if Zuher himself had kept to the topic under
consideration.
Suhail:
baloch-
That the promise of sex in the heaven is the driving force behind the Muslim fanatics who blow themselves up to the shout of
'Allahu Akbar" was driven home when it was found that the lower part of their bodies were wrapped in newspapers and towels
to preserve the genitals. I know this from my friend who is a police officer in Karachi. This has also been observed in Iraq.
suhail-
Hello! Where is your proof, uncle?
Proof of what ? You don’t believe that suicide bombers are blowing themselves up ? That they do it to get to heaven so that
Allah can give them plenty of virgins and eternal sex ? Have you ever met any of these poster boys of Islam ? I have. Some of
them used to call me ‘uncle’.
Suhail:
The main point being discussed here, if I may clarify it for you, is that Mohammad, through Allah in the Quran, bribes the
Muslim men with sexual rights over women in this world and the next. This sexual gestalt informs the sexual attitude of Muslim
man and it is the main cause of the wretched condition of women in Muslim society. That is what the enlightened Muslim woman
like Dr. Mohja Kahf thinks and trying to set it right. And that is what I pointed out.
At the outset, you have to straighten up your own western women who are wretched up in a great deal. Do not tell me the
driving force behind such a demeanor as everyone is aware. Status of women is so drenched up in western society that most
of them are merely used as sex objects. And who are drowning them in such a gutter; is again your western men.
Western women can take care of themselves. It is not my problem. No need to make it yours.
Suhail:
Islam elevates women; there is a hadith ordaining sons and daughters to show more compassion towards mothers as
compared to fathers. Compassion should be three times higher than that of the latter. Pregnant woman is again elevated in
Islam as there is a great deal of rewards for her in here and hereafter for a reason the pain in which she bears a child. Women
are not required to work in Islam; it is the utmost duty of a man either husband, brother or a father to look after their respective
women. If they are not performing their ordained duties willfully then they are accountable on the Day of Judgment. If women,
somehow, willing to work then she is allowed in Islam; however, she is not liable to spend her money on household or on any
one else. She has a right to keep her money with herself only; whether, in a safe, under her pillow or anywhere else. Men are
not allowed to take her money. In Islam women have their own duties and men have their own. There are equal rewards for
everyone if they obediently perform their own duties. However, such traits are not going to be fruitful for you, as populace
likewise you already transformed so dungy in their own intellects that they never label women as pure as they should be,
besides deeming about their sexual parts. Your post was evident enough. Show me a single religion on the face of the
Earth that gives more right to women than Islam. Do not quote me followers; rather quote me scriptures.
Followers are not true picture of their religion or faith. My evidence: take a good look at yourself.
I respond to the highlighted part.
Islam does nothing of that sort. Show me a single Islamic society, country, region or nation, past or present, that has given
human rights to women let alone elevate them.
Followers ARE the true picture of their religion and faith. To say otherwise would be a lie. I would also say that the founder is
also the true picture of the faith. His life is the basis of Sharia.
You shouldn't aske ME for scriptural reference. You should know your subject. However I will oblige you. I give them to you in a
different link under the title "For Suhail". Look them up here.
http://www.answering-faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=370
Suhail:
As regards to your false allegation that Allah has ordained Muslims in Quran and from the blessed mouth of Prophet
Muhammad (Peace be upon him) to have sexual rights over women in this world and next; is just only a by-product of your
soiled wet-dreams and nothing else. If some one is doing so, then he is not following the teachings of Quran. You are following
the traits of so-called followers; if I were to follow the same trend then it will not impede me in any aspect labeling your roots as
debauched as they could be, for a definite reason that they have transformed you into such a filthy old man. If you are sensible
enough then try replacing the word 'roots' with your parents and you will definitely perceive the gist I am trying to impose upon
you. If you are grimy and dungy in your own self then it does not mean your parents are the same from where you have taken
your first schooling. It is very grueling for me to label your mother as debauched as she has already met her Lord with His
name on her mouth. May Allah bless her soul? Therefore, if some one is not following the teachings of his religion then it is the
dilemma with him and it never depicts that the religion is erroneous. I am aware that I haven't really answered your question;
please read more below:
Never mind all that. Don't demean yourself so low just to insult me.
Suhail:
baloch-
Now there remains the passage by Al-Suyuti. Yes, the translation is by Ibn Warraq. It is taken from his book "Why I am not a
Muslim" I do not see it on the web. May be it is there. If it matters that much to you, I could find the exact book of Suyuti where
this occurs. I am sure it is there. But how will it change your attitude if I can prove its existence?
suhail-
Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! "Falsehood is by its nature bound to perish". (Quran 21:18).
Jazak Allah brother zuher. Another infidel bowed down.
Uncle Baloch! Get back to your senses and answer my questions:
OK. OK. calm down. Don't blow yourself up please. I am going to answer your question right away.
1) Why do you deem that it is very arduous for us to rebuff Al-Suyuti? Did he authored Quran? Is he a Prophet?
I don’t deem that at all.
No.
I don't know.I never met him.
2) Why didn't you quote us consensus of scores of Islamic Scholars besides quoting ONLY ONE non-Muslim Islamic Scholar?
I am satisfied with the authenticity of what I quote. You can refute it.
3) Why did you afford us with the quotations of Al-Suyuti; whereas the translation was done by a non-Muslim? Can't you quote
a translator who is a Muslim?
I could and I would if I found one. Why don’t you find one.
Suhail:
We are ready to change our attitude; are you ready to alter your trait? Please read below what I am trying to elucidate;
You said, "In Quran and Hadith you will find words like "Dakhlah" which is the exact equivalent of "fuck". Are these your words,
uncle? Can you show me the proof? Show me your evidence, old man? You are laying false allegations on Quran without
engendering proofs. Where does it say that the word "Dakhlah" is the exact equivalent of "fuck"? Show me evidence from
Quran.
Brother zuher has already afforded you with his evidences in an attire of couple of verses from Holy Quran where the word
"Dakhlah" has been used as "to enter" or "gone into". He provided few verses; However, I shall offer you more 2:114, 2:58, 3:
97, 4:13, 4:14, 4:57, 4:122, 4:175, 5:22, 5:24, 7:46, 9:99, 15:46, 17:7, 24:28, 39:73, 40:8, 45:30, 47:6, 48:17, 50:34, 58:22,
64:9, 65:11. Show me a single place in all of these verses where this precise Arabic word "Dakhlah" has been used as the way
your filthy and dungy mind label it as "fuck". Who told you that "Dakhlah" means "fuck"?
Populace likewise Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina have blinded your intellects in such a way that you are not able to look at the beauty
of Quran. "Dakhlah" is the most suitable word and the most beautiful word that has been incorporated by Allah in His word.
There is no other word available that can be used instead of it. Consequently, it dearly shows that how filthy you are in your
own intellect that there is another English word 'consummation' available that describe 'fu**" in a very soothing manner.
However, you have chosen the latter and it is greatly portraying how your intellect is rotten. You had a choice and you could
easily pick 'consummation' as a replacement of "fuck"; but no, you didn't do it? Brother zuher had rightly revealed your
disgusting thoughts to the world.
Can you please tell the world that why did you choose "fuck" as a literal meaning of Arabic word "Dakhlah" besides picking a
replacement word which is "consummation" where it was always at hand?
OK. You asked for it. Pay attention.
Have a look at following hadith.
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.
In Arabic it reads like this.
An Ayeshath Radhiyallahu Anha : AnnaNnabiyya Sallallahu Alaihi Vasallama Thazawwajaha vahiya binthu sitha sineen, va
alaihi vahiya binthu this’in.
The word used here to describe the act of sex is " udkhilath"
The root of the verb “udkhilath” is “dakhala” which means to “enter, insert, thrust, admit, drive in, let in"
This is the common Arabic meaning though there are other definitions, none of which can be made to fit with the context of the
hadith above.
Now we consider "fuck".
the ancient meaning of English word fuck has the meaning “pierce “ “go through”
This word occurs in the most European languages with variant spelling but the same meaning.
I am sure Bukhari could have used a different word for “making love” in his Hadith. He choose to use “dakhala “stressing the
crass and crude physicality of the physical act.
And that is why I said “fuck” is most appropriate transaltion of "dakhala".
To render “dakhala” as “ consumating the marriage” is to cheat Bukhari and engage in mendecious tempering with the original.
Suhail:
Get the book of Al-Suyuti and show us the reference? Your man-friend and your reason of wet-dreams "Ibn Warraq" didn't
provide any reference as well in his book. If some how you get the reference then please also let me know that:
Haven't I done enough already. For a change make some effort yourself.
Anyway, I will see what I can do.
In the meantime you and Zuher take it easy and make the best of what your right hands possess.
Suhail:
Why do you think it is very grueling for Muslims to reject Al-Suyuti as an authentic Islamic Scholar?
Al-Suyuti has always been an authentic Muslims scholar. Any Muslim who says otherwise does not know what he is talking
about.
Khuda Hafiz.
Suhail writes:
Dear Uncle Baloch,
I am deliberately filching out your replies to my posts and straightaway coming to Hadith that you have quoted as your beefy
evidence.
Baloch:
OK. You asked for it. Pay attention.
I am always attentive.
Baloch:
Have a look at following hadith.
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.
In Arabic it reads like this.
An Ayeshath Radhiyallahu Anha : AnnaNnabiyya Sallallahu Alaihi Vasallama Thazawwajaha vahiya binthu sitha sineen, va
alaihi vahiya binthu this’in.
I am surprised! I was expecting something from Quran. However, you have quoted hadith. You have wasted your life or you
would be quoting Quran to us rather than quoting hadith; for a reason, that Muslims always have the liberty to reject any hadith
that goes against the teachings of Quran. Well, I still have an option left to reject this hadith if it is going against the preaching
of Quran. Again, you lost.
Baloch:
The word used here to describe the act of sex is " udkhilath"
The root of the verb “udkhilath” is “dakhala” which means to “enter, insert, thrust, admit, drive in, let in"
This is the common Arabic meaning though there are other definitions, none of which can be made to fit with the context of the
hadith above.
Alright! The same Arabic word ‘Dakhlah’ is used in Quranic verse 4:23.
born of your wives to whom ye have gone in,- no prohibition if ye have not gone in;
warabaibukumu allatee fee hujoorikum min nisaikumu allatee dakhaltum bihinna fain lam takoonoo dakhaltum bihinna fala
junaha
This particular Arabic word ‘Dakhlah’ has been incorporated in this precise Quranic verse 4:23 as a metaphor to an ‘act of sex’.
The literal meaning of the English word ‘fuck’ in Arabic was already provided to you by brother Zuher; as ‘Nikah-noun’, ‘Nikh-
verb’ and ‘fucking’ as ‘sakheef’. None of these words are incorporated in this Quranic verse and not even in Hadith as well. And
even the English translation of Hadith used ‘consummation’ and not ‘fuck'.
Arabic word ‘Dakhalah’ has been used as a figurative word to describe consummation of marriage. The same metaphor is used
in Hadith as well. The language of Quran to describe consummation as ‘Dakhalah’ ‘to enter’; is the same language in which a
father speaks to his children. The same word has been used in scores of other Quranic verses several times and you are not
talking about them. It is evident for intellectual populace that such a word ‘Dakhalah’ has been used as a metaphor by looking
at scores of other Quranic verses that I had provided you in my rebuttal.
Baloch:
Now we consider "fuck".
the ancient meaning of English word fu*k has the meaning “pierce “ “go through”
This word occurs in the most European languages with variant spelling but the same meaning.
Keeping your elucidation in consideration; then it means Quran should have used ‘Nikah-noun’ or ‘nikh-verb’ as the correct
and literal translation of English word ‘fu**’, instead of using ‘Dakhalah’ as a metaphor. Please explain!
Baloch:
I am sure Bukhari could have used a different word for “making love” in his Hadith. He choose to use “dakhala “stressing the
crass and crude physicality of the physical act.
Bukhari was a sensible and not senseless person; as he has incorporated the same Arabic word that was used in Quran as a
metaphor.
Baloch:
And that is why I said “fuck” is most appropriate transaltion of "dakhala".
I debunked your proof as erroneous. If you do not deem such is true then I give you another chance to refute me.
Baloch:
To render “dakhala” as “ consumating the marriage” is to cheat Bukhari and engage in mendecious tempering with the original.
Do I care? Who is Bukhari? A fallible human only. Original, what original? Uncle! Please talk only about Quran where I cannot
turn my back away.
Kindest regards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to the section of Zuher
Back to the section of Suhail Khalid
Send Email to Zuher
Send Email to Suhail Khalid
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baloch Writes:
Squeamishness about sex and violence is a product of Christian West. To day Muslims are exposed to western education to
learn the Science and technologies of the West. But with this they are also exposed to western sensibility and artificially
sanitized ideas about sex and violence.
Allah does not mince words when talking to Mohammad. In Quran and Hadith you will find words like “Dakhlah” which is the
exact equivalent of “fuck” . The English Translators are embarrassed and turn it into “consummate the marriage”.
Arabic word “Qatalookum” occurs in the Quran hundreds of times and is rendered in English as “Kill”. But the sense of
merciless violence and savage brutality that is present in the word “Qatalookum” is totally absent in “Kill”
Today’s Muslims are embarrassed to talk about sex. Mohammad had no such compunction. He, and his fellow Arabs, talked
about sexual matters openly and in very earthy terms.
Now we come to the 72 Virgins.
The Islamic paradise is described in great sensual detail in the Koran and the Traditions; for instance, Koran sura 56 verses
12 -40 ; sura 55 verses 54-56 ; sura 76 verses 12-22. I shall quote the celebrated Penguin translation by NJ Dawood of sura
56 verses 12- 39:
"They shall recline on jewelled couches face to face, and there shall wait on them immortal youths with bowls and
ewers and a cup of purest wine (that will neither pain their heads nor take away their reason); with fruits of their
own choice and flesh of fowls that they relish. And theirs shall be the dark-eyed houris, chaste as hidden pearls: a
guerdon for their deeds... We created the houris and made them virgins, loving companions for those on the
right hand..."
One should note that most translations, even those by Muslims themselves such as A Yusuf Ali, and the British Muslim
Marmaduke Pickthall, translate the Arabic (plural) word Abkarun as virgins, as do well-known lexicons such the one by John
Penrice. I emphasise this fact since many pudic and embarrassed Muslims claim there has been a mistranslation, that "virgins"
should be replaced by "angels".
In sura 55 verses 72-74, Dawood translates the Arabic word " hur " as "virgins", and the context makes clear that virgin is the
appropriate translation: "Dark-eyed virgins sheltered in their tents (which of your Lord's blessings would you deny?) whom
neither man nor jinnee will have touched before." The word hur occurs four times in the Koran and is usually translated as a
"maiden with dark eyes".
Two points need to be noted. First, there is no mention anywhere in the Koran of the actual number of virgins available in
paradise, and second, the dark-eyed damsels are available for all Muslims, not just martyrs.
It is in the Islamic Traditions that we find the 72 virgins in heaven specified: in a Hadith (Islamic Tradition) collected by Al-
Tirmidhi (died 892 CE [common era*]) in the Book of Sunan (volume IV, chapters on The Features of Paradise as described by
the Messenger of Allah [Prophet Muhammad], chapter 21, About the Smallest Reward for the People of Paradise, (Hadith
2687).
The same hadith is also quoted by Ibn Kathir (died 1373 CE ) in his Koranic commentary (Tafsir) of Surah Al-Rahman (55),
verse 72: "The Prophet Muhammad was heard saying: 'The smallest reward for the people of paradise is an abode
where there are 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and
ruby, as wide as the distance from Al-Jabiyyah [a Damascus suburb] to Sana'a [Yemen]'." Modern apologists of Islam
try to downplay the evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says,
even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual
pleasures into paradise".
The sensual pleasures are graphically elaborated by Al-Suyuti (died 1505 ), Koranic commentator and polymath. He wrote:
"Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the pe*nis of the Elected never softens. The
erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world
and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic]
houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetizing vaginas."
One of the reasons Nietzsche hated Christianity was that it "made something unclean out of sexuality", whereas Islam, many
would argue, was sex-positive. One cannot imagine any of the Church fathers writing ecstatically of heavenly sex as Al-Suyuti
did, with the possible exception of St Augustine before his conversion. But surely to call Islam sex-positive is to insult all Muslim
women, for sex is seen entirely from the male point of view; women's sexuality is admitted but seen as something to be feared,
repressed, and a work of the devil.
And that , my friends!, is the point that Dr. Mohja Kahf is trying to make in her article.
Khuda Hafiz
Zuher writes:
Baloch,
I have noted you for quite a while squirming your way in out of this forum, like the little fire starter you are. Pretty mature for a
65 year old, I must add. Let me also add this:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47734&sid=8503c14a360dd2dcbb0e14ba201b3555
You are quite the celebrity on FFI and quite a poet too I must add. All I am surprised about is that you wasted 60 years of your
pathetic life as a Muslim and then spent the last 5 in Islamic research just to find out Islam was a hoax. Don’t you think you
have put into the garbage can those 60 years for your sorry excuse for a life? You are the second old idiot I have had to
handle who, at an age similar to yours, has nothing better to discuss but sex and erectile functionality. Are you suffering from
erectile dysfunction and looking for solace form the cooked up concept of sex in heaven so that at least you have something to
look forward to if not in this world then the next? When people reach your age, we say they are living on borrowed time. Why?
Life expectancy where you come from is 55 max. You now have borrowed 10 years of someone’s life and that person may have
to die 45 so that you can start writing inane poetry and talk of sex with virgins in heaven and wet vaginas subsequently making
a show that after all the wasted 60 years, and the “awakening” of the last 5, you have finally settled to one major issue of
contention on which your religious life deeply revolves and that is sex in heaven with virgins possessing regenerating vaginas!!
And lo and behold your life’s ambition of exposing the truth has been achieved. Islam talks of sex in heaven, and that’s the
lopsided facet of the religion. Look how lewd your mind is and how twisted your thinking is you insolent moron. I will show this
readership how lewd an old man you are with the meanings of the words that you have implied to twist to fit your required
context.
I just wonder how shameless can one get when in old age and not even considerate of impending death? You are supposed to
be counting the last few days of your life and maybe thinking what you have gained in your wasted life, and where you may end
up with one leg of yours hanging inside a shallow grave most probably scheduled to be dug up by a stray dog looking for
scraps in the middle of the night. But no! Our dear friend baloch here has to talk of sex and how the Arabs like chatting about it
and while he is at it, throw in a word or two against the prophet PBUH. I wonder what you discuss with your family and if you
allow them to see what you are posting on the Internet. Why don’t you show the suyuti passage that you have fraudulently
formulated to your daughter? You copy pasted didn’t you? You silly old man. Ibn Warraq your main instrument of inspiration
isn’t he?
http://nowscape.com/islam/koran_sura2.htm
Not only has your life been wasted in these years, you have also abused your dead mother for being quite frivolous on her own
death bed, but you have nothing to show in terms of gaining knowledge for the past 65 years apart from copy/paste from your
favourite male. I will take it as killing 2 birds with one stone, you and your male friend together with this article.
An Nisaa 4:36
Serve Allah and join not any partners with Him: and do good to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are
near neighbours who are strangers, the Companion by your side, the way-farer (ye meet) and what your right hands possess:
for Allah loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious
This is what the Quran teaches, you old fool. To respect and do well to your parents. It doesn’t mention if they are dead or
alive, believers or non-believers. That too, you fall short of when you called your mother a fool and misguided while she was on
her death bed as she mentioned the name of God. You deserve no respect and the likes of you are suffering now because of
the lack of respect. I spit on your old age that you have reached with no knowledge, wisdom or respect to show for it. You are
woeful.
Let us go step by step in this article and see how your mind ticks and you can take pride in it, because, old man, you are truly
childish and you have wasted your life.
Baloch:
Squeamishness about sex and violence is a product of Christian West.
You stand corrected. You haven’t even learnt the simple dictums that Islam offers in your 60 year sojourn in Islam. You got
your facts jumbled up. It’s very sad. Let me edify you on the matter of “squeamishness about sex” and your assertion that it
comes from the Christian west. This is what the Christian west gave in the past and still does:
Sex in the Bible
Forget those dirty smut books that conservative Christians always want to ban because they have hot sex in them, the Bible
has in it all the greatest dirty hot sex stories of all time, stories so good they were canonized in the Holy Bible. That's right, Holy
smut stories. The Bible has lots of sex with virgins outside of marriage solely for the sake of pleasure. Supposedly the Bible is a
bastion of moral values, but as we shall see it is also a seething cauldron of rape, incest, prostitution, seduction, adultery, lots
and lots of unwanted pregnancies, and sometimes bloody violent revenge and outright murder, it's great! And you thought the
Bible was boring? No way! We're going to dive right in and get to these good juicy stories. And hey, it's the Bible, what are you
going to do, censure the Bible?
A Drug Deal for Sex
"If you give me your son's drugs I'll let you sleep with my husband."
A Drug Deal for Sex (Genesis 30:14-17)
The Rape of Tamar
This young virgin gets raped by her own brother. He gets away with it and is never punished, but two years later he gets
murdered by one of his own brothers. It's all in the family. 2 Samuel 13:1-19
Judah and the Prostitute
Genesis 38:13-29
This guy Judah, who is alleged to be an ancestor of Jesus Christ according to Matthew 1:2, has sex with a prostitute. Three
months later he is told "Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant." Judah says,
"Bring her out and have her burned to death!" But suddenly all is forgiven when she exposes him as the one who got her
pregnant. That's right, Judah got his own daughter-in-law pregnant and she gave birth to Perez, who is another ancestor of
Jesus Christ! (Matthew 1:3).
Take My Daughters, Please.
Sodom and Gomorrah
Sodom and Gomorrah "Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you
can do what you like with them." In one version of the story the people refuse the offer and God destroys their town. (Genesis
19:1-11)
In another version of the story (Judges 19) the man offers his woman, the people accept the offer and violently rape and abuse
the woman all night long. The woman is found dead in the man's doorway the next morning, so he cuts her up into twelve
pieces. Gross!
Let's Have Sex With Daddy!
Genesis 19:31-38
"there is no man around here to lie with us, as is the custom all over the earth." Yes, all over the earth it's "customary" to have
sex, at least according to the Bible. And hey, if there's no one else around, then have sex with daddy! And get pregnant by
daddy! Well that's what these two daughters did, and babies they did have. That's right, both Moab, father of the Moabites,
and Ben-Ammi, father of the Ammonites, are a result of inbreeding. There is no comment anywhere that this behavior might be
immoral. Not even the Lord had anything negative to say about it.
King David and Bathsheba
King David our hero has sex with a beautiful married woman, gets her pregnant and then has her husband murdered so he
can marry the beautiful woman for himself which he does, bringing the total number of wives he's married to nine.
Song of Songs, Songs of Solomon, Canticles
"Your nose is like the tower of Lebanon looking toward Damascus." (hu?) A book of lusty erotic poetry. Yes, lusty erotic poetry
is a part of the Bible.
The Rape of Dinah
Genesis 33:18 - 34:31
In a foreign city Dinah gets raped. The rapist afterwards is very sorry and tries everything to make amends, but three days
later Dinah's family gets brutal revenge by attacking and destroying the entire city. It's sex and unforgiveness and bloody
violent brutal revenge at its very best!
Esther
Esther 2:2-18
The best way for a king to find a new wife is to spend each night with a beautiful virgin until one particularly pleasing is found,
and the best way to become queen is to be a sexually attractive virgin and prostitute yourself before the king.
The Book of Ruth
Naomi has her daughter-in-law Ruth sexually seduce a man because she wants her to get married.
Judges 21:23
"While the girls were dancing, each man caught one and carried her off to be his wife."
Some people worry that TV and movies have far too much violence and sex in them. But as we see above the Bible has the
best most brutal violence and shocking sex stories of all time! At least in the movies the bad guys always lose in the end -- they
are caught and sent to prison or they die a horrible death befitting an evil man. Goodness always prevails on TV and in
movies, but in the Bible the people committing these heinous crimes are our heroes and they always get away with it.
These stories in the Bible are of such a shocking nature that in 1926 Joseph Lewis was compelled to write, "I cannot
understand how public men, men of learning and experience, can insist that the Bible, which contains the stories quoted that
shock even the vulgar-minded, should be our pre-eminent guide in all earthly affairs, and that it should not only be read by, but
actually taught to the growing generation in search of high moral ethics."
Again I ask; squeamishness about sex from Christian west?? Not by a long shot. So much for that sentence. Remember and
remember well, old man, this is NOT tu-quoque where I am trying to prove two wrongs make a right. I have merely shown you
that the nonsense you perpetrate by saying “Squeamishness about sex and violence is a product of Christian West”. So lets us
act our age here ok and not our shoe size, please.
Read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_in_the_Bible
Baloch:
To day Muslims are exposed to western education to learn the Science and technologies of the West. But with this they are
also exposed to western sensibility and artificially sanitized ideas about sex and violence.
This shameless old man wants to know how Muslims are “exposed to western sensibility and artificially sanitized ideas about
sex and violence.”
Refer my article below. This is the response to the email sent to Allah SWT by another inane writer, abulkasem.
I can give you all the stats you want to your punch-line to a joke type sentence so that it shuts your mouth for good, well at
least until when you end up in your shallow grave, after which you will have to open it for your pathetic defense. That won’t be
too long seeing your borrowed time that you are living on right now.
"An Email to Abul Kasem - From a Slave of Allah" - Response to Abul Kasem's article "An Email to Allah"
Truly baloch you have a wasted life, if you didn’t know this at 65 years. I hope by now, you wont say that by reading this post
you added to your knowledge as you didn’t have any in the first place to add on to for the past 65 years. This is the first taste
of knowledge.
Baloch:
Allah does not mince words when talking to Mohammad. In Quran and Hadith you will find words like “Dakhlah” which is the
exact equivalent of “fuck” . The English Translators are embarrassed and turn it into “consummate the marriage”.
Let us look at this word that you purport to be lewd in the Quran. Sometimes I am compelled to think, even if the Holy Book did
mean “fuck” for “dakhlah”, how useful would it be when your little head needs a ton of Viagra to make the big head stop
thinking, baloch.
Several verses have used the word “dakhlah” in context. The following verses are pertinent:
Al Baqara 2:58,
Ale Imran 3:97,
An Nisaa 4:13, 4: 23, 4:14, 4:57
I will pick only a few to explain. I don’t feel you’re worth the waste of my time on this lewdness which your senile mind is trying to
perpetrate. Maybe you’re looking for kicks from literature when physicality has left you high and dry, you naughty old man. I will
use Yusuf Ali, Pickthall and M H Shakir. All of them a consistent with the meaning of this word.
2:58
And remember We said: "Enter ( ٱدۡخُلُواْ) this town and eat of the plenty therein as ye wish; but enter the gate with humility, in
posture and in words, and We shall forgive you your faults and increase (the portion of) those who do good."
A verb: an action word: “Udkhuluu” from the root word “dakhlah” meaning “enter”
3:97
In it are signs manifest; (for example), the Station of Abraham; whoever enters (دَخَلَهُ) it attains security; pilgrimage thereto is a
duty men owe to Allah―those who can afford the journey; but if any deny faith; Allah stands not in need of any of His
creatures.
A verb in future continuous tense “dakhalahu” meaning “enters”
Now replace these underlined words with baloch’s favourite dreamland word “fuck”. Think about it. Is it not utter nonsense?
Why because this what this old man keeps dreaming of day in day out. He can’t do it, at least he can dream it.
This is the word clarified literally.
Now let us look at it contextually.
4:23
Prohibited to you (for marriage) are:― your mothers, daughters, sisters, father's sisters, mother's sisters; brother's daughters,
sister's daughters, foster-mothers (who gave you suck) foster-sisters; your wives' mothers; your step-daughters under your
guardianship, born of your wives to whom ye have gone in
( دَخَلۡتُم ),―no prohibition if ye have not gone in,― (those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins; and
two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time, except for what is past; for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
Dakhaltum descriptive meaning those you have “gone into”. Can I sense a smile on baloch’s aged face? You dirty old man.
'Dakhaltum' is the most of soothing word that Quran could use to describe 'consummation'. Quran just gave a sign by saying
'gone into' or 'enter into' in verse 4:23. Is this not the same way a father was to explain this sensitive topic and law to his
children. There is no mention of fuck or vagina in this particular verse. These vestigial body parts especially for baloch exist
only in his mind and this is how he has clearly interpreted this verse and so has Ibn Warraq. Allah just gave the inkling for
intellectual people in using the word dakhla which I think actually means 'to enter'. This is not derogative at ll. In fact, if
anything the Quran has adopted very sober stance on the special relationship of marriage the rights of the spouses in this
sacred bond. Of course for baloch, this means “fuck”. Can anyone here notice the dirt in the mind of this lewd old man staring
at death straight in the face?
If the above holds true, then the word 'dakhlah' is not derogative in Arabic sense. If it is in English then it is not our problem
however it is the dilemma of English language. This is an inability on th part of the English language that it has not yet evolved
to appropriately translate the word into its actual contextual meaning. This copy/paste fool has not read this article of
researched well at all before pasting it nor has the original writer ibn warraq done anything to understand this verse in all its
clarity and contextual sense. Its is not their fault, it is the incapability of a disbelieving mind to think clearly compounded by the
inadequacy of the translating language, in this case English. But when an old mind is already corrupted even if English had the
true interpretative contextual word, who is there who can teach an old dog new tricks?
The Arabic word for fu** is 'nikah-noun' 'nikh-verb' and Arabic word for fu**ing is 'sakheef'.
Fu** in Arabic - Source
Fu**ing in Arabic – Source
I plead for pardon from the referee, moderators and my respected sisters on this website as regards this issue. I am
forced by this lewd man to cut him down in this old age using such words.
But rest assured, the moment you figure out how this man thinks and that his main argument is useless and baseless, that will
render his whole life a pathetic sojourn into nothingness and that it didn’t require the pangs of death and the enticement of
shaytan at the time to divert his faith, he is a murtad by choice before death and facing it right in the face. La’anatullah alal
qaumil murtadeen.
Baloch:
One should note that most translations, even those by Muslims themselves such as A Yusuf Ali, and the British Muslim
Marmaduke Pickthall, translate the Arabic (plural) word Abkarun as virgins, as do well-known lexicons such the one by John
Penrice. I emphasise this fact since many pudic and embarrassed Muslims claim there has been a mistranslation, that "virgins"
should be replaced by "angels".
I do not see the point of any lewdness that the issue of “virgins” being mentioned. I think you have been trying to paint this
statement in the pathetic colours of your own life that has been spent in acquiring nothing and ending up with the curses of
your own mother who dies in the right way, while with the words of God on her mouth, for which you hold her criminal. You are
a pathetic foolish incongruent fool on whose old age I would feel ashamed. So what is the virgins were mentioned? Does it
mean one can blow the issue out and start looking at dreams of things which they cant achieve anymore such as yourself, you
erectile dysfunctional old man. It would be a shame for a man at your age to indulge in such lewd pathetic interpretation of
verses, which you end up extrapolating for your own shameless ends.
Baloch:
In sura 55 verses 72-74, Dawood translates the Arabic word " hur " as "virgins", and the context makes clear that virgin is the
appropriate translation: "Dark-eyed virgins sheltered in their tents (which of your Lord's blessings would you deny?) whom
neither man nor jinnee will have touched before." The word hur occurs four times in the Koran and is usually translated as a
"maiden with dark eyes".
Let us stick to the accepted translations and the one you called celebrated is somewhat short and dysfunctional just like yours.
You might as well have used the Ali Sina translation of the Holy Quran and then get orgasmic all over the words after all that is
all that you are now capable of, at this time when you’re staring a death right in the face. Now read and read well.
55:70-74
In them will be fair (companions), good, beautiful― (70) Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? (71) Companions
restrained (as to their glances), in (goodly) pavilions (72) Then which of the favour of your Lord will ye deny? (73) Whom no
man or Jinn before them has touched― (74)
There are several verses that corroborate the verse above. 37:48-49, 44:54, 52:20, 56:22 all describe the Hurs. The hur is
described generally a beautiful virtuous woman created perfect by the Creator. This perfection is beyond comparison with the
mortal being hence the immaculate and respectable quality of virginity and virtue. Virginity is a virtue in this context of the
Quran and is a characteristic that is desirable in your own sister, unmarried, untouched by any man or animal, baloch. You do
have sisters and daughters don’t you. So wouldn’t you want them to have qualities of a Hur and that she be a mate, married to
a virtuous man? These are qualities described by the Lord that are desirable for believing women on earth and these are the
virtuous women who are in heaven who are created perfect by the Creator as virtuous COMPANIONS and not as sex objects
the way your lewd mind expresses them. That’s why I now repeat that it’s a shame on your old age if this what your whole life
has taught you that finally after spending so much time on earth, all you can show for the experience is your stupidity and lewd
thinking that would make your won mother turn in her grave and put to shame your won sisters and daughters.
Baloch:
Two points need to be noted. First, there is no mention anywhere in the Koran of the actual number of virgins available in
paradise, and second, the dark-eyed damsels are available for all Muslims, not just martyrs.
It is in the Islamic Traditions that we find the 72 virgins in heaven specified: in a Hadith (Islamic Tradition) collected by Al-
Tirmidhi (died 892 CE [common era*]) in the Book of Sunan (volume IV, chapters on The Features of Paradise as described by
the Messenger of Allah [Prophet Muhammad], chapter 21, About the Smallest Reward for the People of Paradise, (Hadith
2687).
The same hadith is also quoted by Ibn Kathir (died 1373 CE ) in his Koranic commentary (Tafsir) of Surah Al-Rahman (55),
verse 72: "The Prophet Muhammad was heard saying: 'The smallest reward for the people of paradise is an abode where
there are 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as
the distance from Al-Jabiyyah [a Damascus suburb] to Sana'a [Yemen]'." Modern apologists of Islam try to downplay the
evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says, even orthodox
Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into
paradise".
The sensual pleasures are graphically elaborated by Al-Suyuti (died 1505 ), Koranic commentator and polymath. He wrote:
"Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the pe*nis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal;
the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in
this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth,
and all will have appetizing vaginas."
My apologies once again to the referee/moderators and my sisters. Please do note how lewd this old man is at his ripe
death facing age that he has to quote such unfounded quotations with no basis whatsoever.
Baloch, this is your male friends ibn warraq’s creation and interpretation which you have put on suyuti. Can you give us actual
references; page number etc? You are true waste of a human life. It’s a shame that old men who are elders and considered
equal to prophets among their clansmen, today you come up and put to shame all what the elders stand for. I don’t think I need
to explain further on this issue of hurries as I have already explained their countenance with virtuosity and not as sexual
objects. It is you lewd mind that makes the interpretation of the verse depicting the manner which suits your foul ends. I am
sure you would expect the same virtuosity from your daughter or sister. Or you may not have either, one probably you never
were entitled for the blessing of a sister and then maybe you never had the capability of producing a daughter no wonder your
wet dreams at this age. Be as it may, even if that was suyuti’s words, what right do you have to blanket-cover all the Muslims
under a single interpretation that may have either been flawed or doctored to suit foul ends. After all you and your
dysfunctional male friend ibn warraq have not given a single reference with titles and page numbers to set your ball rolling. You
are bigots and pathetic at it anyway.
Baloch:
One of the reasons Nietzsche hated Christianity was that it "made something unclean out of sexuality", whereas Islam, many
would argue, was sex-positive. One cannot imagine any of the Church fathers writing ecstatically of heavenly sex as Al-Suyuti
did, with the possible exception of St Augustine before his conversion. But surely to call Islam sex-positive is to insult all Muslim
women, for sex is seen entirely from the male point of view; women's sexuality is admitted but seen as something to be feared,
repressed, and a work of the devil.
And that , my friends!, is the point that Dr. Mohja Kahf is trying to make in her article.
Maybe you should refer to Islamic laws as regards marriage the mutual and individual rights of a husband and wife in marriage
towards each other. You will then realse3 that ther lewdness yuou purport and so staunchly put forth is ill founded and that
your won female family members would be ashamed of an old man such as yourself pasting such articles that show how lewd
this old man can get when he is supposed to be counting his final days and trying to earn the little virtue he can in the little time
left in this world. Your one foot is in the grave the other barely on earth and you are talking of erections and regenerative
vaginas? You are shame on your age mates. You are a childish old man hit with senility.
I challenge you bigot to come forth and spend your final days debating on whether your mother was foolish to die the way she
did. May Allah grant her soul eternal peace, but I know she is turning in her grave after bearing a bigot such as yourself.
Remember what you told Peacebwu:
Baloch:
First, it is common decency to quote the source if you copy-paste something. So that one can judge for oneself where the
idiocy originates.
This was your statement you moronic hypocrite. Practice your own dictum and tell us where your male friend wrote his article
and where you copy/pasted this from…. ohh no need, we already got it and we already know where you asininity originates
from, you lewd old man.
I await you.
Baloch writes:
Zuher,
You remind me of a boxer who after receiving a stunning blow goes berserk throwing futile punches. Overall you have nothing
to offer except personal insults and meaningless non-sequitars. No wonder Ali sina knocked you out cold.
I also find it amusing that as a follower of a pedophile and lecherous prophet you have the temerity to call me lewd when all I
did was to draw attention to an authentic Muslim website dealing with the subject of female sexuality in heaven in rather
unconventional style. You also belittle me because of my age. But let me assure you I have never run after a six year old girl
even when I was six let alone at sixty. If you want to contemplate a quintessential “Dirty Old Man”, think of Mohammad.
You belittle Ibn Warraq. But he is more dependable as an Islamic scholar learned In Arabic than most partisan Muslims who
only make fools of themselves trying to extract modern science from the verses of Quran a la Zakir Naik. In all his books he is
objective, fair and absolutely scholarly in the academic way.
It is obvious to me that Islam is a fraud started by Mohammad and whereas all that is good in Quran is plagiarized from earlier
sources, Mohammad’s original contribution is the commoditization of sex and sanctification of violence.
That the promise of sex in the heaven is the driving force behind the Muslim fanatics who blow themselves up to the shout of
‘Allahu Akbar” was driven home when it was found that the lower part of their bodies were wrapped in newspapers and towels
to preserve the genitals. I know this from my friend who is a police officer in Karachi. This has also been observed in Iraq.
While most of what you quote from Bible may be true it does not belie my point that Christian west was squeamish about sex. In
Victorian England they used to cover the legs of the chairs and tables. This is just a value free observation.
The main point being discussed here, if I may clarify it for you, is that Mohammad, through Allah in the Quran, bribes the
Muslim men with sexual rights over women in this world and the next. This sexual gestalt informs the sexual attitude of Muslim
man and it is the main cause of the wretched condition of women in Muslim society. That is what the enlightened Muslim woman
like Dr. Mohja Kahf thinks and trying to set it right. And that is what I pointed out.
Now there remains the passage by Al-Suyuti. Yes, the translation is by Ibn Warraq. It is taken from his book “Why I am not a
Muslim” I do not see it on the web. May be it is there. If it matters that much to you, I could find the exact book of Suyuti where
this occurs. I am sure it is there. But how will it change your attitude if I can prove its existence?
Through ideaologue’s willingness to suppress what he suspects to be true has flowed much evil.
Khuda hafiz.
Suhail writes:
Readers Discretion Required: Foul Language Inside.
My dearest apologies to sisters/brothers/moderators on using such a language. However, we were compelled and we have to
defend now.
---
Dear Uncle Baloch,
Assalamu Alaikum. May (I seriously doubt) peace and blessings of Allah be upon you.
The only motive I am calling you uncle is that you are more than twice the age of mine, brother zuher and most of the
members on this forum. Ordinarily, life offers surprises; however, it seems it is not the first time you befall being the victim of
much younger youth in critically criticizing your lewd thoughts. More often than not, grown-ups have to lower down the level of
their understanding in order to educate young; but in your case it appears vice versa. If you are levelheaded enough then you
will deduce the actual gist of what I am trying to elucidate. Over here, my reply, shall gravely probe the way of your thoughts
and I shall also award you an opportunity to come back with a rebuttal. Toting up to that, my humble request to you is to please
rope in some concrete arguments and try your level best to rebuff the evidence put forth by brother zuher and this time by me.
Baloch:
Zuher,
You remind me of a boxer who after receiving a stunning blow goes berserk throwing futile punches. Overall you have nothing
to offer except personal insults and meaningless non-sequitars. No wonder Ali sina knocked you out cold.
"Drowning man clutches a straw", you have proven zilch but yourself a dirty old man. Sincerely, is this what you call a rebuttal?
You are throwing arrows in the air; consequently, deeming that brother zuher would be your target. Get out of your negligence
and think sanely. Such statements of yours are only concealing the humiliation and disgrace of your filthy heart and not
actually imposing anything on us to retort.
On the contrary, you remind me of a boxer who is, on the other hand, not aware of any rules of the fight and at the
commencement of it, ended up in committing serious fouls. Moreover, during his frenzy mood he punched (your first post) his
opponent only once. Keeping such a scenario in consideration, this is out of rules and regulations of a fight; therefore, sadly
there is no score for you. However, in the second fight (brother zuher's post) you reminded of rules and regulations and
knocked out without even a sole punch from you.
Wonderful! Ali Sina knocked out brother zuher. Read the version on Answering FaithFreedom.org.
DEBATE: Zuher VS Ali Sina
Your man of dreams 'Ali Sina' tampered this precise debate on his website. If you lay similar allegation on us; then please be
my guest as this is not going to win you any 'converts' anyways. However, we are, in spite of everything, waiting eagerly if your
reason of wet-dreams (Ali Sina) is man enough to engage once more with brother zuher on our turf. Brother zuher is readily
available once a day and twice on Sundays to tackle your ‘over-shadower’ (Ali Sina). Please bring to our knowledge what Ali
Sina has to cite in his response to brother zuher’s challenge. Or, are you going to come back with lame excuse that now Ali
Sina does not debate with “Anonymous” Muslims? Can you please elucidate us that why “ANONYMOUS” Ali Sina himself does
not intend to debate with “ANONYMOUS” Muslims?
Baloch:
I also find it amusing that as a follower of a pedophile and lecherous prophet you have the temerity to call me lewd when all I
did was to draw attention to an authentic Muslim website dealing with the subject of female sexuality in heaven in rather
unconventional style. You also belittle me because of my age. But let me assure you I have never run after a six year old girl
even when I was six let alone at sixty. If you want to contemplate a quintessential "Dirty Old Man", think of Mohammad.
Superb! A term 'pedophile'; populace like you frame standards of your own to conceal the disgusting society of west, whereas
the only reason they came up with such a term is only to put a leash on their 'freedom of sex', which is only and only their own
creation. They frame their own standards and judge others by their own creations. World was going along fine; however, some
day ONLY one man came up with the idea of 'pedophilia' and fixed all the derogative senses to it and started judging others by
his self-created wet-dream.
It seems like you have a dilemma with a person who is legally married to a woman. As far as Muslims are concerned, we are in
encouragement of marriage. As it is far superior than having illicit sex with neighbor's wife, lady secretary, own daughters and
mothers, mistresses, with boss' wife, with prostitutes, with the girl next door, with the postman's wife, with man-friend, with dog
and pig, with an inanimate object like the hole down the sink and so on. Hey uncle, I see you smiling again on the latter part of
my example? These are some of the soiled paradigms of your 'freedom of sex'. Getting married is much more far superior than
involving your young youth in the lustful exemplars that I have furnished above. However, choice is yours? And we are already
aware where you are going to lay your hands on.
I am in no where in agreement with the constructed concept of pedophilia concocted by Westerners in order for them to justify
their own ruling of 'free sex' that ended up actually getting stuck in their own throats and transformed into a huge dilemma of
their own disgusting society. Afterwards, where they had found fathers running after their own female children; similarly, they
had located scores of people who started running after juvenile youth. Subsequently, when they perceived the ugly face of
their own ruling, they plant a benchmark age of consensus. How ironic it is that the same absurd law defines that one is a child
and too young to buy and drink alcohol, but old enough to join armed forces and die in a combat for his and/or her country. I
wonder why USA has different puberty laws in different states varying between 18 and 21. Why would I agree to their standards
and not to what my religion says? According to Islam, a child after reaching to his/her puberty never to be labeled as a 'child'
anymore but to consider as a man/woman and fit for marriage. Why God/nature constructed such a young woman to bear the
seed of human being? Islam entertains and urges early marriages in order to rebuff the chances of mind deviation among
young men and women that results in a gutter western society we have these days. 'Pedophilia" is your own debris and only
and only applies to you where the only reason you people had originated such a term is to cover the viciousness of outcome of
'freedom of sex'.
However, besides all these facts I am open to discuss any time. I can take you on any time on this precise topic. I challenge
you, old man.
Baloch:
You belittle Ibn Warraq. But he is more dependable as an Islamic scholar learned In Arabic than most partisan Muslims who
only make fools of themselves trying to extract modern science from the verses of Quran a la Zakir Naik. In all his books he is
objective, fair and absolutely scholarly in the academic way.
Uncle Baloch! I thought for a moment that you are adequately mature and are capable of performing little gymnastics on trivial
meat that is located over your elderly bent shoulders and is making my tongue disgusting by labeling it as your brain. Thank
you for proving me wrong, once again. You brought your evidence by quoting Ibn Warraq. I have some questions for you:
1) Why do you deem that Muslims are going to believe Ibn Warraq?
2) Why you only choose Ibn Warraq?
3) Why didn't you quote us other Islamic Scholars that are in harmony with the exegesis done by brother zuher?
4) Is it going to be logical for us to choose Ibn Warraq only, over scores of other Islamic Scholars who are in tandem in
exegesis done by brother zuher?
5) Why do you desire that Muslims should rebuff their own Islamic Scholars over yours?
6) Why do you deem that it must be very grueling for Muslims to reject Ibn Warraq as authentic evidence from you?
Waiting anxiously for your replies.
Baloch:
It is obvious to me that Islam is a fraud started by Mohammad and whereas all that is good in Quran is plagiarized from earlier
sources, Mohammad's original contribution is the commoditization of sex and sanctification of violence.
Wonderful! When you miserably failed to locate anything else to hit back brother Zuher, you started firing other topics. Do no
throw arrows in the air, uncle. No Muslim is going to be your target. If you do not afford your evidence and keep your rants on,
then it is only framing you dim-witted in the end. Reverse your gears and read the reply of brother Zuher again, and read it
well, look for evidences and you will definitely find some. This is what I am talking about. I am quite aware from where you have
learnt such a game of firing up new topics; every one knows Ali Sina and his childish games as they are quite evident in his
debate with brother Zuher (A-FFI.org version) and with every one else.
Baloch:
That the promise of sex in the heaven is the driving force behind the Muslim fanatics who blow themselves up to the shout of
'Allahu Akbar" was driven home when it was found that the lower part of their bodies were wrapped in newspapers and towels
to preserve the genitals. I know this from my friend who is a police officer in Karachi. This has also been observed in Iraq.
Hello! Where is your proof, uncle?
Baloch:
The main point being discussed here, if I may clarify it for you, is that Mohammad, through Allah in the Quran, bribes the
Muslim men with sexual rights over women in this world and the next. This sexual gestalt informs the sexual attitude of Muslim
man and it is the main cause of the wretched condition of women in Muslim society. That is what the enlightened Muslim woman
like Dr. Mohja Kahf thinks and trying to set it right. And that is what I pointed out.
At the outset, you have to straighten up your own western women who are wretched up in a great deal. Do not tell me the
driving force behind such a demeanor as everyone is aware. Status of women is so drenched up in western society that most
of them are merely used as sex objects. And who are drowning them in such a gutter; is again your western men.
Islam elevates women; there is a hadith ordaining sons and daughters to show more compassion towards mothers as
compared to fathers. Compassion should be three times higher than that of the latter. Pregnant woman is again elevated in
Islam as there is a great deal of rewards for her in here and hereafter for a reason the pain in which she bears a child. Women
are not required to work in Islam; it is the utmost duty of a man either husband, brother or a father to look after their respective
women. If they are not performing their ordained duties willfully then they are accountable on the Day of Judgment. If women,
somehow, willing to work then she is allowed in Islam; however, she is not liable to spend her money on household or on any
one else. She has a right to keep her money with herself only; whether, in a safe, under her pillow or anywhere else. Men are
not allowed to take her money. In Islam women have their own duties and men have their own. There are equal rewards for
everyone if they obediently perform their own duties. However, such traits are not going to be fruitful for you, as populace
likewise you already transformed so dungy in their own intellects that they never label women as pure as they should be,
besides deeming about their sexual parts. Your post was evident enough. Show me a single religion on the face of the Earth
that gives more right to women than Islam. Do not quote me followers; rather quote me scriptures. Followers are not true
picture of their religion or faith. My evidence: take a good look at yourself.
As regards to your false allegation that Allah has ordained Muslims in Quran and from the blessed mouth of Prophet
Muhammad (Peace be upon him) to have sexual rights over women in this world and next; is just only a by-product of your
soiled wet-dreams and nothing else. If some one is doing so, then he is not following the teachings of Quran. You are following
the traits of so-called followers; if I were to follow the same trend then it will not impede me in any aspect labeling your roots as
debauched as they could be, for a definite reason that they have transformed you into such a filthy old man. If you are sensible
enough then try replacing the word 'roots' with your parents and you will definitely perceive the gist I am trying to impose upon
you. If you are grimy and dungy in your own self then it does not mean your parents are the same from where you have taken
your first schooling. It is very grueling for me to label your mother as debauched as she has already met her Lord with His
name on her mouth. May Allah bless her soul? Therefore, if some one is not following the teachings of his religion then it is the
dilemma with him and it never depicts that the religion is erroneous. I am aware that I haven't really answered your question;
please read more below:
Baloch:
Now there remains the passage by Al-Suyuti. Yes, the translation is by Ibn Warraq. It is taken from his book "Why I am not a
Muslim" I do not see it on the web. May be it is there. If it matters that much to you, I could find the exact book of Suyuti where
this occurs. I am sure it is there. But how will it change your attitude if I can prove its existence?
Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! "Falsehood is by its nature bound to perish". (Quran 21:18).
Jazak Allah brother zuher. Another infidel bowed down.
Uncle Baloch! Get back to your senses and answer my questions:
1) Why do you deem that it is very arduous for us to rebuff Al-Suyuti? Did he authored Quran? Is he a Prophet?
2) Why didn't you quote us consensus of scores of Islamic Scholars besides quoting ONLY ONE non-Muslim Islamic Scholar?
3) Why did you afford us with the quotations of Al-Suyuti; whereas the translation was done by a non-Muslim? Can't you quote
a translator who is a Muslim?
We are ready to change our attitude; are you ready to alter your trait? Please read below what I am trying to elucidate;
You said, "In Quran and Hadith you will find words like "Dakhlah" which is the exact equivalent of "fuck". Are these your words,
uncle? Can you show me the proof? Show me your evidence, old man? You are laying false allegations on Quran without
engendering proofs. Where does it say that the word "Dakhlah" is the exact equivalent of "fuck"? Show me evidence from
Quran.
Brother zuher has already afforded you with his evidences in an attire of couple of verses from Holy Quran where the word
"Dakhlah" has been used as "to enter" or "gone into". He provided few verses; However, I shall offer you more 2:114, 2:58, 3:
97, 4:13, 4:14, 4:57, 4:122, 4:175, 5:22, 5:24, 7:46, 9:99, 15:46, 17:7, 24:28, 39:73, 40:8, 45:30, 47:6, 48:17, 50:34, 58:22,
64:9, 65:11. Show me a single place in all of these verses where this precise Arabic word "Dakhlah" has been used as the way
your filthy and dungy mind label it as "fuck". Who told you that "Dakhlah" means "fuck"?
Populace likewise Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina have blinded your intellects in such a way that you are not able to look at the beauty
of Quran. "Dakhlah" is the most suitable word and the most beautiful word that has been incorporated by Allah in His word.
There is no other word available that can be used instead of it. Consequently, it dearly shows that how filthy you are in your
own intellect that there is another English word 'consummation' available that describe 'fuck" in a very soothing manner.
However, you have chosen the latter and it is greatly portraying how your intellect is rotten. You had a choice and you could
easily pick 'consummation' as a replacement of "fuck"; but no, you didn't do it? Brother zuher had rightly revealed your
disgusting thoughts to the world.
Can you please tell the world that why did you choose "fuck" as a literal meaning of Arabic word "Dakhlah" besides picking a
replacement word which is "consummation" where it was always at hand?
Get the book of Al-Suyuti and show us the reference? Your man-friend and your reason of wet-dreams "Ibn Warraq" didn't
provide any reference as well in his book. If some how you get the reference then please also let me know that:
Why do you think it is very grueling for Muslims to reject Al-Suyuti as an authentic Islamic Scholar?
Ball is in your court now. Please do not get me wrong on usage of English word ‘Ball’. You know what I mean.
Kindest regards.
Baloch writes:
Suhail:
Readers Discretion Required: Foul Language Inside.
My dearest apologies to sisters/brothers/moderators on using such a language. However, we were compelled and we have to
defend now.
If you can only produce decent argument and express them in plain and simple English you would not have to indulge in this
kind of grandstanding. (Fonts smaller than this would be unreadable.)
Suhail:
The only motive I am calling you uncle is that you are more than twice the age of mine, brother zuher and most of the members
on this forum. Ordinarily, life offers surprises; however, it seems it is not the first time you befall being the victim of much
younger youth in critically criticizing your lewd thoughts. More often than not, grown-ups have to lower down the level of their
understanding in order to educate young; but in your case it appears vice versa. If you are levelheaded enough then you will
deduce the actual gist of what I am trying to elucidate. Over here, my reply, shall gravely probe the way of your thoughts and I
shall also award you an opportunity to come back with a rebuttal. Toting up to that, my humble request to you is to please rope
in some concrete arguments and try your level best to rebuff the evidence put forth by brother zuher and this time by me.
You are just wasting lines uttering irrelevant inanities. Age, old or young, ipso facto, has nothing to do with person’s maturity.
Jesus gives such insightful sermons at twenty five whereas Mohammad is lusting after six year old girl at sixty.
Suhail:
baloch-
I also find it amusing that as a follower of a pedophile and lecherous prophet you have the temerity to call me lewd when all I
did was to draw attention to an authentic Muslim website dealing with the subject of female sexuality in heaven in rather
unconventional style. You also belittle me because of my age. But let me assure you I have never run after a six year old girl
even when I was six let alone at sixty. If you want to contemplate a quintessential "Dirty Old Man", think of Mohammad.
Suhail-
Superb! A term 'pedophile'; populace like you frame standards of your own to conceal the disgusting society of west, whereas
the only reason they came up with such a term is only to put a leash on their 'freedom of sex', which is only and only their own
creation. They frame their own standards and judge others by their own creations. World was going along fine; however, some
day ONLY one man came up with the idea of 'pedophilia' and fixed all the derogative senses to it and started judging others by
his self-created wet-dream.
OK. You don’t like the word ‘pedophile’ How about ‘degenerate lecher’ ? suits better, too.
Suhail:
It seems like you have a dilemma with a person who is legally married to a woman. As far as Muslims are concerned, we are in
encouragement of marriage. As it is far superior than having illicit sex with neighbor's wife, lady secretary, own daughters and
mothers, mistresses, with boss' wife, with prostitutes, with the girl next door, with the postman's wife, with man-friend, with dog
and pig, with an inanimate object like the hole down the sink and so on. Hey uncle, I see you smiling again on the latter part of
my example? These are some of the soiled paradigms of your 'freedom of sex'. Getting married is much more far superior than
involving your young youth in the lustful exemplars that I have furnished above. However, choice is yours? And we are already
aware where you are going to lay your hands on.
Grandstanding again. I have no dilemma. Dilemma is for people who want to choose. I have only contempt for a sixty year old
lout who imposes himself on a six year old girl, legal marriage or not. Morally repugnant behavior does not get sanitized by
making it legal.
Rest of the ranting needs no response.
Suhail:
I am in no where in agreement with the constructed concept of pedophilia concocted by Westerners in order for them to justify
their own ruling of 'free sex' that ended up actually getting stuck in their own throats and transformed into a huge dilemma of
their own disgusting society. Afterwards, where they had found fathers running after their own female children; similarly, they
had located scores of people who started running after juvenile youth. Subsequently, when they perceived the ugly face of
their own ruling, they plant a benchmark age of consensus. How ironic it is that the same absurd law defines that one is a child
and too young to buy and drink alcohol, but old enough to join armed forces and die in a combat for his and/or her country. I
wonder why USA has different puberty laws in different states varying between 18 and 21. Why would I agree to their standards
and not to what my religion says? According to Islam, a child after reaching to his/her puberty never to be labeled as a 'child'
anymore but to consider as a man/woman and fit for marriage. Why God/nature constructed such a young woman to bear the
seed of human being? Islam entertains and urges early marriages in order to rebuff the chances of mind deviation among
young men and women that results in a gutter western society we have these days. 'Pedophilia" is your own debris and only
and only applies to you where the only reason you people had originated such a term is to cover the viciousness of outcome of
'freedom of sex'.
However, besides all these facts I am open to discuss any time. I can take you on any time on this precise topic. I challenge
you, old man.
stay with the topic of discussion.I have nothing to do with this. I couldn’t care less.
Suhail:
You belittle Ibn Warraq. But he is more dependable as an Islamic scholar learned In Arabic than most partisan Muslims who
only make fools of themselves trying to extract modern science from the verses of Quran a la Zakir Naik. In all his books he is
objective, fair and absolutely scholarly in the academic way.
Uncle Baloch! I thought for a moment that you are adequately mature and are capable of performing little gymnastics on trivial
meat that is located over your elderly bent shoulders and is making my tongue disgusting by labeling it as your brain. Thank
you for proving me wrong, once again. You brought your evidence by quoting Ibn Warraq. I have some questions for you:
Why are you discussing my anatomy here?
I haven’t quoted Ibn Warraq at all.
I have quoted Al-Suyuti.
It was Zuher who mentioned Ibn Warraq first.
Let me answer your question.
1) Why do you deem that Muslims are going to believe Ibn Warraq?
People are free to believe what they want.
2) Why you only choose Ibn Warraq?
What makes you say that. I used his translation of Al-Suyuti. That’s all.
3) Why didn't you quote us other Islamic Scholars that are in harmony with the exegesis done by brother zuher?
I sure will do so. I haven’t indulged in any exegesis.
4) Is it going to be logical for us to choose Ibn Warraq only, over scores of other Islamic Scholars who are in tandem in
exegesis done by brother zuher?
No. You choose what you like.
5) Why do you desire that Muslims should rebuff their own Islamic Scholars over yours?
Don’t put words in my mouth. I have no such desire.
6) Why do you deem that it must be very grueling for Muslims to reject Ibn Warraq as authentic evidence from you?
My God ! Stop babbling. You are stuck in a groove.
Suhail:
baloch-
It is obvious to me that Islam is a fraud started by Mohammad and whereas all that is good in Quran is plagiarized from earlier
sources, Mohammad's original contribution is the commoditization of sex and sanctification of violence.
suhail-
Wonderful! When you miserably failed to locate anything else to hit back brother zuher, you started firing other topics. Do no
throw arrows in the air, uncle. No Muslim is going to be your target. If you do not afford your evidence and keep your rants on,
then it is only framing you dim-witted in the end. Reverse your gears and read the reply of brother zuher again, and read it
well, look for evidences and you will definitely find some. This is what I am talking about. I am quite aware from where you have
learnt such a game of firing up new topics; every one knows Ali Sina and his childish games as they are quite evident in his
debate with brother Zuher (A-FFI.org version) and with every one else
For once you are right. That is another topic. But it would not have happened if Zuher himself had kept to the topic under
consideration.
Suhail:
baloch-
That the promise of sex in the heaven is the driving force behind the Muslim fanatics who blow themselves up to the shout of
'Allahu Akbar" was driven home when it was found that the lower part of their bodies were wrapped in newspapers and towels
to preserve the genitals. I know this from my friend who is a police officer in Karachi. This has also been observed in Iraq.
suhail-
Hello! Where is your proof, uncle?
Proof of what ? You don’t believe that suicide bombers are blowing themselves up ? That they do it to get to heaven so that
Allah can give them plenty of virgins and eternal sex ? Have you ever met any of these poster boys of Islam ? I have. Some of
them used to call me ‘uncle’.
Suhail:
The main point being discussed here, if I may clarify it for you, is that Mohammad, through Allah in the Quran, bribes the
Muslim men with sexual rights over women in this world and the next. This sexual gestalt informs the sexual attitude of Muslim
man and it is the main cause of the wretched condition of women in Muslim society. That is what the enlightened Muslim woman
like Dr. Mohja Kahf thinks and trying to set it right. And that is what I pointed out.
At the outset, you have to straighten up your own western women who are wretched up in a great deal. Do not tell me the
driving force behind such a demeanor as everyone is aware. Status of women is so drenched up in western society that most
of them are merely used as sex objects. And who are drowning them in such a gutter; is again your western men.
Western women can take care of themselves. It is not my problem. No need to make it yours.
Suhail:
Islam elevates women; there is a hadith ordaining sons and daughters to show more compassion towards mothers as
compared to fathers. Compassion should be three times higher than that of the latter. Pregnant woman is again elevated in
Islam as there is a great deal of rewards for her in here and hereafter for a reason the pain in which she bears a child. Women
are not required to work in Islam; it is the utmost duty of a man either husband, brother or a father to look after their respective
women. If they are not performing their ordained duties willfully then they are accountable on the Day of Judgment. If women,
somehow, willing to work then she is allowed in Islam; however, she is not liable to spend her money on household or on any
one else. She has a right to keep her money with herself only; whether, in a safe, under her pillow or anywhere else. Men are
not allowed to take her money. In Islam women have their own duties and men have their own. There are equal rewards for
everyone if they obediently perform their own duties. However, such traits are not going to be fruitful for you, as populace
likewise you already transformed so dungy in their own intellects that they never label women as pure as they should be,
besides deeming about their sexual parts. Your post was evident enough. Show me a single religion on the face of the
Earth that gives more right to women than Islam. Do not quote me followers; rather quote me scriptures.
Followers are not true picture of their religion or faith. My evidence: take a good look at yourself.
I respond to the highlighted part.
Islam does nothing of that sort. Show me a single Islamic society, country, region or nation, past or present, that has given
human rights to women let alone elevate them.
Followers ARE the true picture of their religion and faith. To say otherwise would be a lie. I would also say that the founder is
also the true picture of the faith. His life is the basis of Sharia.
You shouldn't aske ME for scriptural reference. You should know your subject. However I will oblige you. I give them to you in a
different link under the title "For Suhail". Look them up here.
http://www.answering-faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=370
Suhail:
As regards to your false allegation that Allah has ordained Muslims in Quran and from the blessed mouth of Prophet
Muhammad (Peace be upon him) to have sexual rights over women in this world and next; is just only a by-product of your
soiled wet-dreams and nothing else. If some one is doing so, then he is not following the teachings of Quran. You are following
the traits of so-called followers; if I were to follow the same trend then it will not impede me in any aspect labeling your roots as
debauched as they could be, for a definite reason that they have transformed you into such a filthy old man. If you are sensible
enough then try replacing the word 'roots' with your parents and you will definitely perceive the gist I am trying to impose upon
you. If you are grimy and dungy in your own self then it does not mean your parents are the same from where you have taken
your first schooling. It is very grueling for me to label your mother as debauched as she has already met her Lord with His
name on her mouth. May Allah bless her soul? Therefore, if some one is not following the teachings of his religion then it is the
dilemma with him and it never depicts that the religion is erroneous. I am aware that I haven't really answered your question;
please read more below:
Never mind all that. Don't demean yourself so low just to insult me.
Suhail:
baloch-
Now there remains the passage by Al-Suyuti. Yes, the translation is by Ibn Warraq. It is taken from his book "Why I am not a
Muslim" I do not see it on the web. May be it is there. If it matters that much to you, I could find the exact book of Suyuti where
this occurs. I am sure it is there. But how will it change your attitude if I can prove its existence?
suhail-
Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! "Falsehood is by its nature bound to perish". (Quran 21:18).
Jazak Allah brother zuher. Another infidel bowed down.
Uncle Baloch! Get back to your senses and answer my questions:
OK. OK. calm down. Don't blow yourself up please. I am going to answer your question right away.
1) Why do you deem that it is very arduous for us to rebuff Al-Suyuti? Did he authored Quran? Is he a Prophet?
I don’t deem that at all.
No.
I don't know.I never met him.
2) Why didn't you quote us consensus of scores of Islamic Scholars besides quoting ONLY ONE non-Muslim Islamic Scholar?
I am satisfied with the authenticity of what I quote. You can refute it.
3) Why did you afford us with the quotations of Al-Suyuti; whereas the translation was done by a non-Muslim? Can't you quote
a translator who is a Muslim?
I could and I would if I found one. Why don’t you find one.
Suhail:
We are ready to change our attitude; are you ready to alter your trait? Please read below what I am trying to elucidate;
You said, "In Quran and Hadith you will find words like "Dakhlah" which is the exact equivalent of "fuck". Are these your words,
uncle? Can you show me the proof? Show me your evidence, old man? You are laying false allegations on Quran without
engendering proofs. Where does it say that the word "Dakhlah" is the exact equivalent of "fuck"? Show me evidence from
Quran.
Brother zuher has already afforded you with his evidences in an attire of couple of verses from Holy Quran where the word
"Dakhlah" has been used as "to enter" or "gone into". He provided few verses; However, I shall offer you more 2:114, 2:58, 3:
97, 4:13, 4:14, 4:57, 4:122, 4:175, 5:22, 5:24, 7:46, 9:99, 15:46, 17:7, 24:28, 39:73, 40:8, 45:30, 47:6, 48:17, 50:34, 58:22,
64:9, 65:11. Show me a single place in all of these verses where this precise Arabic word "Dakhlah" has been used as the way
your filthy and dungy mind label it as "fuck". Who told you that "Dakhlah" means "fuck"?
Populace likewise Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina have blinded your intellects in such a way that you are not able to look at the beauty
of Quran. "Dakhlah" is the most suitable word and the most beautiful word that has been incorporated by Allah in His word.
There is no other word available that can be used instead of it. Consequently, it dearly shows that how filthy you are in your
own intellect that there is another English word 'consummation' available that describe 'fu**" in a very soothing manner.
However, you have chosen the latter and it is greatly portraying how your intellect is rotten. You had a choice and you could
easily pick 'consummation' as a replacement of "fuck"; but no, you didn't do it? Brother zuher had rightly revealed your
disgusting thoughts to the world.
Can you please tell the world that why did you choose "fuck" as a literal meaning of Arabic word "Dakhlah" besides picking a
replacement word which is "consummation" where it was always at hand?
OK. You asked for it. Pay attention.
Have a look at following hadith.
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.
In Arabic it reads like this.
An Ayeshath Radhiyallahu Anha : AnnaNnabiyya Sallallahu Alaihi Vasallama Thazawwajaha vahiya binthu sitha sineen, va
alaihi vahiya binthu this’in.
The word used here to describe the act of sex is " udkhilath"
The root of the verb “udkhilath” is “dakhala” which means to “enter, insert, thrust, admit, drive in, let in"
This is the common Arabic meaning though there are other definitions, none of which can be made to fit with the context of the
hadith above.
Now we consider "fuck".
the ancient meaning of English word fuck has the meaning “pierce “ “go through”
This word occurs in the most European languages with variant spelling but the same meaning.
I am sure Bukhari could have used a different word for “making love” in his Hadith. He choose to use “dakhala “stressing the
crass and crude physicality of the physical act.
And that is why I said “fuck” is most appropriate transaltion of "dakhala".
To render “dakhala” as “ consumating the marriage” is to cheat Bukhari and engage in mendecious tempering with the original.
Suhail:
Get the book of Al-Suyuti and show us the reference? Your man-friend and your reason of wet-dreams "Ibn Warraq" didn't
provide any reference as well in his book. If some how you get the reference then please also let me know that:
Haven't I done enough already. For a change make some effort yourself.
Anyway, I will see what I can do.
In the meantime you and Zuher take it easy and make the best of what your right hands possess.
Suhail:
Why do you think it is very grueling for Muslims to reject Al-Suyuti as an authentic Islamic Scholar?
Al-Suyuti has always been an authentic Muslims scholar. Any Muslim who says otherwise does not know what he is talking
about.
Khuda Hafiz.
Suhail writes:
Dear Uncle Baloch,
I am deliberately filching out your replies to my posts and straightaway coming to Hadith that you have quoted as your beefy
evidence.
Baloch:
OK. You asked for it. Pay attention.
I am always attentive.
Baloch:
Have a look at following hadith.
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.
In Arabic it reads like this.
An Ayeshath Radhiyallahu Anha : AnnaNnabiyya Sallallahu Alaihi Vasallama Thazawwajaha vahiya binthu sitha sineen, va
alaihi vahiya binthu this’in.
I am surprised! I was expecting something from Quran. However, you have quoted hadith. You have wasted your life or you
would be quoting Quran to us rather than quoting hadith; for a reason, that Muslims always have the liberty to reject any hadith
that goes against the teachings of Quran. Well, I still have an option left to reject this hadith if it is going against the preaching
of Quran. Again, you lost.
Baloch:
The word used here to describe the act of sex is " udkhilath"
The root of the verb “udkhilath” is “dakhala” which means to “enter, insert, thrust, admit, drive in, let in"
This is the common Arabic meaning though there are other definitions, none of which can be made to fit with the context of the
hadith above.
Alright! The same Arabic word ‘Dakhlah’ is used in Quranic verse 4:23.
born of your wives to whom ye have gone in,- no prohibition if ye have not gone in;
warabaibukumu allatee fee hujoorikum min nisaikumu allatee dakhaltum bihinna fain lam takoonoo dakhaltum bihinna fala
junaha
This particular Arabic word ‘Dakhlah’ has been incorporated in this precise Quranic verse 4:23 as a metaphor to an ‘act of sex’.
The literal meaning of the English word ‘fuck’ in Arabic was already provided to you by brother Zuher; as ‘Nikah-noun’, ‘Nikh-
verb’ and ‘fucking’ as ‘sakheef’. None of these words are incorporated in this Quranic verse and not even in Hadith as well. And
even the English translation of Hadith used ‘consummation’ and not ‘fuck'.
Arabic word ‘Dakhalah’ has been used as a figurative word to describe consummation of marriage. The same metaphor is used
in Hadith as well. The language of Quran to describe consummation as ‘Dakhalah’ ‘to enter’; is the same language in which a
father speaks to his children. The same word has been used in scores of other Quranic verses several times and you are not
talking about them. It is evident for intellectual populace that such a word ‘Dakhalah’ has been used as a metaphor by looking
at scores of other Quranic verses that I had provided you in my rebuttal.
Baloch:
Now we consider "fuck".
the ancient meaning of English word fu*k has the meaning “pierce “ “go through”
This word occurs in the most European languages with variant spelling but the same meaning.
Keeping your elucidation in consideration; then it means Quran should have used ‘Nikah-noun’ or ‘nikh-verb’ as the correct
and literal translation of English word ‘fu**’, instead of using ‘Dakhalah’ as a metaphor. Please explain!
Baloch:
I am sure Bukhari could have used a different word for “making love” in his Hadith. He choose to use “dakhala “stressing the
crass and crude physicality of the physical act.
Bukhari was a sensible and not senseless person; as he has incorporated the same Arabic word that was used in Quran as a
metaphor.
Baloch:
And that is why I said “fuck” is most appropriate transaltion of "dakhala".
I debunked your proof as erroneous. If you do not deem such is true then I give you another chance to refute me.
Baloch:
To render “dakhala” as “ consumating the marriage” is to cheat Bukhari and engage in mendecious tempering with the original.
Do I care? Who is Bukhari? A fallible human only. Original, what original? Uncle! Please talk only about Quran where I cannot
turn my back away.
Kindest regards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to the section of Zuher
Back to the section of Suhail Khalid
Send Email to Zuher
Send Email to Suhail Khalid