Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) orders a large scale beatdown of women

Status
Not open for further replies.
IMG_1959.jpg


In this hadith, Muhammad orders the large-scale beating of women because they became “bold towards their husbands.”

Muhammad was urged on by his Companion Umar, a noted misogynist about whom Muhammad says, “If there were to be a Prophet after me, it would be Umar bin al-Khattab.” (Tirmidhi 3686)

But after 70 (!) beaten women complain to Muhammad’s wives in one night, Muhammad backs down and tells the wife-beaters:

You will not find that those (men whose wives complained) are the best of you.

Well, that will teach those men! Maybe, Muhammad, you shouldn’t have ordered the beatings in the first place. (Scholars reconcile Muhammad’s (gentle) admonishment of the men by saying that the women must have been beaten “excessively.”)

Islam—where women are beaten (lightlyTM) for becoming "bold towards their husbands.”
 

Do-I-Look-Somali

Make me some Cambulo tonight.
:chrisfreshhah: Another unreliable Hadith that holds no weight. I keep telling you every sahih Hadith has some unreliable Hadith, and ibn majah was known to have a lot, and most scholars used to criticize it for that.
https://journals.openedition.org/remmm/7154?lang=en

There is nothing in the Qur’aan that suggests that a man is allowed to beat the crap out of his wife.

1 – The Qur’aan enjoins good treatment of one's wife: she is to be honoured and treated kindly, even when one no longer feels love in one's heart towards her. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“and live with them honourably. If you dislike them, it may be that you dislike a thing and Allaah brings through it a great deal of good”

[al-Nisa’ 4:19]

2 – The Qur’aan explains that women have rights over their husbands, just as their husbands have rights over them. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And they (women) have rights (over their husbands as regards living expenses) similar (to those of their husbands) over them (as regards obedience and respect) to what is reasonable, but men have a degree (of responsibility) over them. And Allaah is All-Mighty, All-Wise”

[al-Baqarah 2:228]

This verse indicates that the man has additional rights, commensurate with his role as protector and maintainer and his responsibility of spending (on his wife) etc.

3 – The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) enjoined kind treatment and honouring of one’s wife, and he described the best of people as those who are best to their wives. He said: “The best of you are those who are the best to their wives, and I am the best of you to my wives.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 3895; Ibn Maajah, 1977; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.

4 – The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) spoke beautiful word concerning kind treatment of one’s wife, stating that when the husband feeds his wife and puts a morsel of food in her mouth, he earns the reward of doing an act of charity. He said, “You never spend anything but you will be rewarded for it, even the morsel of food that you lift to your wife’s mouth.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6352; Muslim, 1628.
 

Do-I-Look-Somali

Make me some Cambulo tonight.
What about Verse 4:34?
But if Islam condemns all forms of violence against women, what about Verse 4:34 of the Qur’an? One translation of this verse reads:

Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allah would have them guard.

But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.

This verse is specifically addressing the legal issue of nushuz, which is contentiously translated as a wife’s disobedience, flagrant defiance, or misbehaviour.

This is important because, as a general principle, a wife is entitled to financial support (nafaqa) from her husband as per Islamic jurisprudence guidelines. The only time she forfeits this right is if she is guilty of nushuz.

The contention about Verse 4:34 is particular to its English translation. There are no accurate translations of this verse, which compounds the issue for English-speakers. There are three particular words – qawwamuna, nushuzahunna, and wadribuhunna – that appear in this verse and are often mistranslated, mainly due to a lack of equivalent words in English.

Particularly problematic is how the word wadribuhunna is translated into English. A clear disagreement exists among English-language Qur’an commentators on how best to translate this word. All translations give an explicit negative connotation, and – when read out of context – further exacerbates any misunderstanding.

No classical and contemporary Muslim scholar has ever argued that wadribuhunna actually means “beat” your wives, despite how English translations render the meaning. Scholars have made every attempt to stipulate strict conditions that govern wadribuhunna, which is a last resort in a seriously dysfunctional marriage that is due to the nushuz of the wife.

So, any violence and coercion against women that is used to control or subjugate is considered to be oppression and is unacceptable in Islam – even if it is sanctioned by cultural practices.
 
@Do-I-Look-Somali Lmao all you did is post a link to some webpage of people discussing if Sunan Ibn Majah is authentic. The answer is yes, it's so authentic, that it's one of the six major Sunni Hadith collections. Sunan Ibn Majah 1985 is classed Sahih and it talks about Muhammad ordering the physical abuse of 70 women for being "bold".

Then you proceeded to copy and paste a bunch of Qur'an verses that doesn't change the fact that Muhammad ordered the beatdown of 70 women.
 

Reign

Pro Women's Rights|Centrist
VIP
Honestly you’re a kafir, why does Islam bother you so much? Believe what you want to believe, stop defaming our faith and keep it moving.
 
You exposed him well. :drakelaugh:

Yeah, because copying and pasting whole webpages is "exposing".


Nowhere in his plagiarized response does he address Sunan Ibn Majah 1985 where Muhammad, with the encouragement of Umar, gives permission to men to beat down a large sum of defenseless women.

He instead tried to attack the entirety of the books validity while at the same time citing "Sunan Ibn Majah 1977". What a failure
 
Honestly you’re a kafir, why does Islam bother you so much? Believe what you want to believe, stop defaming our faith and keep it moving.

Who said Islam bothers me? I'm just sharing my favorite, authentic, Sahih classed Hadith.

This Hadith is one of my favorites because it tells us that we're allowed to beat up our wives if they act bold against us
 

Reign

Pro Women's Rights|Centrist
VIP
Who said Islam bothers me? I'm just sharing my favorite, authentic, Sahih classed Hadith.

This Hadith is one of my favorites because it tells us that we're allowed to beat up our wives if they act bold against us
You’re a troll and a kaffir, keep our prophet out of your mouth nacaladyahow.
 

Do-I-Look-Somali

Make me some Cambulo tonight.
@Do-I-Look-Somali Lmao all you did is post a link to some webpage of people discussing if Sunan Ibn Majah is authentic. The answer is yes, it's so authentic, that it's one of the six major Sunni Hadith collections. Sunan Ibn Majah 1985 is classed Sahih and it talks about Muhammad ordering the physical abuse of 70 women for being "bold".

Then you proceeded to copy and paste a bunch of Qur'an verses that doesn't change the fact that Muhammad ordered the beatdown of 70 women.

Again you twist my words. I clearly said in my last comment that many scholars have criticized the amount of UNRELIABLE HADITH that is in ibn majah book. Plus you didn't read that link if all you came out with it was that. Stop being disingenuous. It just keeps showing you lack knowledge. Plus you totally ignored the rest of the post. You athiests have sure become shallow.
 
Again you twist my words. I clearly said in my last comment that many scholars have criticized the amount of UNRELIABLE HADITH that is in ibn majah book. Plus you didn't read that link if all you came out with it was that. Stop being disingenuous. It just keeps showing you lack knowledge. Plus you totally ignored the rest of the post. You athiests have sure become shallow.

lmao what kind of vague response is this "scholar says it has unrealizable Hadith DURR DURR DURR"

And scholars also say this is one of the six major Hadith collections moron.

a scholar named Al-Abani says Sunan Ibn Majah 1985 is a RELIABLE HADITH and classed it SAHIH.

Linking forums and copying and pasting doesn't change the fact that Muhammad sat back and watched women get brutally beaten with his buddy Umar as the RELIABLE and SAHIH Sunan Ibn Majah 1985 says.
 

Do-I-Look-Somali

Make me some Cambulo tonight.
lmao what kind of vague response is this "scholar says it has unrealizable Hadith DURR DURR DURR"

And scholars also say this is one of the six major Hadith collections moron.

a scholar named Al-Abani says Sunan Ibn Majah 1985 is a RELIABLE HADITH and classed it SAHIH.

Linking forums and copying and pasting doesn't change the fact that Muhammad sat back and watched women get brutally beaten with his buddy Umar as the RELIABLE and SAHIH Sunan Ibn Majah 1985 says.
:nahgirl::ulyin::drakelaugh: Weren't you the one who said Al- abani was not an authentic scholar. C'mon now bro. This is the type of disingenuous nature I be talking about. If you actually read that link I gave you, you would see many scholars who have criticized the amount of unreliable Hadith in that book. It's only considered sahih, because of the laws of married it applies in accordance with the Quran, but you completely ignored that part of my last comment, because you're only here to spread false narratives, but Alhamdulilah we can see through your bs.
 

Do-I-Look-Somali

Make me some Cambulo tonight.
@Do-I-Look-Somali And who said I'm an atheist? I could be a Muslim, Deist, Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, Jewish or follow a religion indigenous to Somalia.
Bro you worship cows, and dead humans. Or do you worship Rah like the kemets who think they're from East Africa. Get the hell out of here. Go drink cow piss like the Hindus. Alhamdulilah for Islam. We Somalis used to be cow, and sun worshipping folk along with the Egyptians. How can you be a somalilander, and speak like that? My cousins would kill you if you step foot in that area.
 
:nahgirl::ulyin::drakelaugh: Weren't you the one who said Al- abani was not an authentic scholar. C'mon now bro. This is the type of disingenuous nature I be talking about. If you actually read that link I gave you, you would see many scholars who have criticized the amount of unreliable Hadith in that book. It's only considered sahih, because of the laws of married it applies in accordance with the Quran, but you completely ignored that part of my last comment, because you're only here to spread false narratives, but Alhamdulilah we can see through your bs.

When did I say Al-Abani wasn't an "authentic scholar"? You're a filthy liar. The only thing I said about him is that he's a prominent Islamic scholar who trumps your deen in every way possible, and that he agrees Sunan Ibn Majah 1985 is SAHIH. That means he read the Hadith which said Muhammad and Umar had 70 women beat up, went through his methodology and then classified it as SAHIH.

You're still unable to prove Sunan Ibn Majah 1985 is unreliable, your link doesn't even mention it once. You keep trying to divert the topic to the Qur'an or to a webpage questioning the validity of the book when you yourself quoted the book, specifically "Sunan Ibn Majah 1977" but you never directly addressed 1985.

Chop chop, go find another biased Islamic webpage you can copy and paste since you yourself don't know anything about your own religion and can't respond using your own words like I am.

:drakelaugh:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Trending

Top