From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>

you guy really sick yourself[edit]

first of all please get your facts straight hazarat muammad(s.a.a.w) only had nikkah which is a marriage contract and ruksiti (wedding)happened when she was 15. second of all their are over 1.9 billion muslims do u really want to piss themoff as much as you have pissed me off........thirdly how would you like it if i said something about ur holy spirit or hannukah or something like that......i suggest you guys deleat that shit u wrote and also bin ladden is a phsyco who is not a muslim just to clear that out.......getting back to the 9 year old thing. the prophet married most of the woman because they were widdows and they needed support aur they had no shelter, and this was before the quranic revelation of limited wives was revealed. after the revelation he did not marry again...and if you have a problem against this stuff u should remmember that that was the 6th century and these kind of marriges are still happning with hindu's in india and pakistan.........another thing if you write something insulting about hazarat muhhamaad(s.a.a.w) i will seriously track you down and beat the fuck out of you and i would also like it if you would deleat all the stuff you have already posted that is insulting. the Proophet Muhammad said to respect other peoples beliefs so they would respect yours i suggest u start lisning to that — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

eh? ТyLonely. Ever so lonely. 17:52, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, y'all heard the BoN, guess we have no choice but to 86 this article. SJ Debaser 18:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
People threatening to track others down is exactly why we need to mock you. Understand that I'm not scared of you. Scarlet A.pngmoral 18:02, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
If you can direct us to some sources about the marriage between Mohammed and Aisha that contradict our description, please do so. Just so long as they're written by someone more level-headed than yourself and with a better grasp of English. Balaam (talk) 18:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Also, you just posted a direct threat under your IP address. Now we only have to find the authorities under which jurisdiction to notify...--ZooGuard (talk) 18:06, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Not saying anything explicitly, but let's say that it's not a jurisdiction that would particularly care. Scarlet A.pnggnostic 18:10, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
". second of all their are over 1.9 billion muslims do u really want to piss themoff as much as you have pissed me off.". i think he confused christianity with islam. Second... go ahead, insult a religious concept or a religious holiday, im sure all the atheists here will be so hurt. --il'Dictator Mikal 18:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
You might want to take up your weird death threats with the Wikipedia article as well.--BobSpring is sprung! 18:11, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
I haven't read our article here, but marrying a 9 year old (if she was that young) was not out of line with the culture of the day, in almost any religion of the day. There is nothing to suggest that he had sex with her till she was a mature women (which by the day's standards, again across teh board, not just in the middle east) was generally her first period. We don't bitch about kings marrying 5 year old cousins, so it is a rather "straw man argument" that is used around the web. hopefully not here. That said, dear BON, what the fuck???Pink mowse.pngGodot What do cats dream about? 18:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
No, you guy sick yourself. AceModerator 18:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
This guy are sick. Balaam (talk) 18:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
My understanding is that the consensus is that the marriage was consummated not long afterwards.--BobSpring is sprung! 18:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
I'd be curious your sources, not that I doubt you. My study of Islam is purely academic, and that was all pre 9-11. (yes, it does matter, schools including colleges changed how they taught Islam after 9-11). I just put it into context with how we viewed women throughout the world (and today in many non-industrialized parts of the world) not into context of any writers of Islam. But I do hate that the anti-muslims use it as an "attack" as if it were somehow horrible, when it's pretty common world wide at the time.Pink mowse.pngGodot What do cats dream about? 18:25, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
The WP article on her has something on it.--BobSpring is sprung! 18:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
That's all interesting... I studied under K. Armstrong and remain dubious towards just about anything she says on Islam. Her scholarship is, well, shoddy. But what surprises me is that all of these academics, including the muslims, are not citing to anything in the Qu'ran, but to the "generally accepted views". -- That's neither here nor there, by the way. just a background curiosity. back to BON attacks. Pink mowse.pngGodot What do cats dream about? 18:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Something called WikiIslam seems to have a lot on the subject. But I'm not sure how reliable they are.--BobSpring is sprung! 18:57, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, that's a fun screed. every single Muslim writer they cite seems to say the exact same words or phrase. I'd be curious where the original source is that they are all clearly quoting from. Now I'm more curious. Do i care enough to care? thansk for the links. WikiIslam is anti-islam, right?Pink mowse.pngGodot What do cats dream about? 19:16, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
We has article. ТyComplaints 19:18, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Do y'all really have to mock this person's poor English? That's just mean. Oxyaena Harass 23:38, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Idk about you but my patience with someone stops the moment they threaten to assault me for having a different opinion. Fuck him and his lack of English.— Unsigned, by: Evilatheistheathen / talk / contribs

Aisha again[edit]

You people attacking the marriage to Aisha really show how retarded you are and irrational you truly are! The marriage was completely normal for that time, and the Jewish Talmud for example (as you guys never attack the Jewish religion whatsoever, despite their "Torah" containing slavery, genocide, and the utter racism of the Talmud and their "sages" such as the revered Jewish rabbi Simeon Ben Yohai known for his "lovely" quote "The best of gentiles should all be killed" that even is admitted by the Jewish Encyclopedia itself) allows marriage at the age of 3 in the Jewish Talmud. Soncino English translation (Jewish publication company in England) of the Babylonian Talmud Tractate Sanhedrin 55b- ... "R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his."

As for the marriage with Aisha scholarly sources completely refute you idiots on it; and showing that Islam actually raised the age of marriage in that time period. And also you guys sound particularly ridiculous when its easily verifiable as well that marriage in the United States itself was still allowed as young as the age of 7 in the US state of Delaware as late as 1895 CE. "In the United States, by the 1880s, most states set the age of consent at 10–12, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only 7. A New York Times article states that it was still aged 7 in Delaware in 1895."— Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

Well, if children could get married in Delware at 7 years old in 1895, then we should clearly delete the facts about Muhammad in the article. Obvious isn't it?--Bob"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." 15:34, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
There is little clear "fact" about these details of the life of Muhammad. Over the centuries, debates raged that relied on this or that story to make their point. What seems to be likely or at least possible is that the betrothal was before puberty, at least that was considered an important point, to supposedly establish the virginity of Ayesha for those who wished to assert some superiority of her over the other wives of the Prophet (who were not virgins at marriage, generally at least), again for those who wanted to deny the legitimacy of Fatima's son 'Ali as the rightful successor. Betrothal before puberty was apparently not uncommon. It allowed the betrothed to be alone together, if I'm correct. In Islam, a marriage isn't final until it is consummated, it can be very easily terminated before that. It's likely that the marriage was consummated at puberty, beyond the onset of menstruation. There is no sign that this was considered offensive at the time, by anyone, nor for a long time afterwards. For a quick look at some aspects of this issue,
  • Wikipedia:Marriageable age: Traditionally, across the world, the age of consent for a sexual union was a matter for the family to decide, or a tribal custom. In most cases, this coincided with signs of puberty, menstruation for a woman and pubic hair for a man.[1]
  • Wikipedia:Menstruation: The first experience of a menstrual period during puberty is called menarche. The average age of menarche is 13, but menarche can typically occur between ages 8 and 18.
The article states as fact what is largely speculation, and then adds to that modern interpretations of child abuse. Ayesha showed no signs of having been abused, she lived a long life, widely respected, and, contrary to what's stated in some places, her history shows that women could be leaders. What happened was that she lost a battle, and that was later interpreted to mean that a woman being a leader was a bad idea. (There is no basis in Qur'an and hadith for the claim.) If a man lost a battle, would that mean that men can't be leaders?
I'm taking out the worst references, I don't have time to really review this article. --Abd (talk) 23:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Consistency is always good, regardless. At the beginning of the article it says "possibly as young as nine". Farther down, however, it says he asked for her hand when she was six, and that what happened when she was nine was not that he married her but that he "consummated the marriage".
The beginning of the article should therefore perhaps say "possibly as young as six". -- (talk) 19:33, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
The implication is entirely contrary to all sources. Possibly as young as nine is the limit from sources. "Betrothed" in usage then did not allow consummation. It was a kind of reservation, a promise. It could be easily canceled. After consummation, not. Was she a "wife," then, as early as six? No, she was a "betrothed." This stuff is asserted, though, to imply things. It appears from how the sources treat the whole thing that it was not remarkable for the time and culture. --Abd (talk) 20:17, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Language of the Qur'an[edit]

The article had

Apparently the Angel Gabriel dictated the Qur'an to him in classical Arabic.

This is true (i.e., the Qur'an is "classical Arabic," but the implication is not true.

"Classical Arabic" is defined as the language of the Qur'an; the language was ordinary for the prophet, a living language. Since the Qur'an actually talks about its own language, as being the language of an Arab, I edited this on October 25 to add the snarky:

(What do you expect? Greek? Latin?)

David Gerard removes edits simply because I made them (he's been doing it for months). So he removed this one November 9, and as usual, with no explanation.

If RatWiki articles are misleading, it's not my problem. Because a few people here have been kind to me, I have some level of obligation to help out, though that may be a foolish idea. I'm reverting, and, from the past, he is likely to revert again, but the snark here -- i.e., the idea that there is something strange about the Qur'an being in Arabic -- is misleading. The reference to Arabic could be taken out, or could made more interesting. Whatever. If someone independently wants the old language, that's ordinary process. --Abd (talk) 22:48, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Your addition adds little and isn't witty or necessary. I reverted it. Acei9 22:55, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Ace, for your explanation. I'm sure your judgment was unbiased and sober. Wait. Not sober. Never mind. --Abd (talk) 23:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Value of witness[edit]

The article features:

The Prophet said "Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?" The women said, "Yes." He said, "This is because of the deficiency of a woman's mind."
—The Hadith, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 826

I argue that the deficiency refers to the stupidity/subservience of the women who actually say "yes" to the premise. If you actually agrees to that first sentence, the value of your witness deserves go down. ThiehAsk me for relationship advice 14:03, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Before you make up anything[edit]

Make sure you translate the versus of the Qur'an Correct...In chapter 4:15 and is the correct tranlsation

4:15: If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (Reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way.

4:16 ALLAH (swt) says: If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, Leave them alone; for Allah is Oft-returning, Most Merciful.

So please, if you don't know arabic that much, let someone at least who knows good arabic to translate. Otherwise do not make up anything from your mind — Unsigned, by: No need / talk / contribs

Possible misinterpretation[edit]

I looked up the quote "I have been made victorious with terror" (added in this edit) and, according to a couple of Islamic sources, this has been taken out of context, is an error in translation and also doesn't justify accusations that Muhammad was a terrorist. I can't read Arabic and the sources may be unreliable so feel free to tell me if you disagree. CowHouse (talk) 06:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Personally I have no idea. But I am reminded of christian reactions to what the bible says about slavery. At one time people read it to literally to what it says but now (most) Christians will jump through hoops in an effort to maintain it says something different.
So I agree your links say something different. But it would be interesting to get a quote from Islamic State or some follower of Wahhabism.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 17:15, 23 January 2018 (UTC)


This article should probably be rewritten to be less snarky and more accurate, and are those "depictions" really necessary? Oxyaena Harass 23:32, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

@DuceMoosolini I`m summoning you to do the job for us. Oxyaena Harass 23:32, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Browsing this talk page's archives, wow, y'all were really shitty back in the day. Oxyaena Harass 23:44, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I’ll get on it. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 03:09, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
While I agree that the casual Islamophobia had to go, I feel like the article's been too sanitised now and reads off like a typical Wikipedia entry. 2402:4000:2381:8E49:78FC:6A5E:4AA3:4F98 (talk) 12:01, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Well, I'm basically finished with the article for now. If anyone wants to snark it up, by all means go ahead. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 18:38, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Yes, that would be good, given that our job here is to be snarky at woo and miracle-worker types... (talk) 07:24, 31 December 2020 (UTC)


@DuceMoosolini There's an inscription from Muhammad's lifetime or shortly after it by a Christian monk from Syria bemoaning "Muhammad's Arabs," which is more than we can say about Jesus. Oxyaena Harass 22:02, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Another thing is that the Arabs were obviously unified and then proceeded to go on a huge world conquest within decades of Muhammad's supposed death, we may as well call the unifier of the Arabs the historical Muhammad. Oxyaena Harass 22:03, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, Muhammad was definitely based on a real person, but most of the materials I've looked at doubt whether the legend of Muhammad hasn't been so distorted by time and edits that Muhammad the prophet has become indistinguishable from Muhammad the historical figure. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 00:58, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Still more than we can say for Jesus, I ultimately think that the Hadiths are more reliable than the Gospels, being that they aren't complete works of fiction as the Gospels are. Granted that's a low bar when saying "x is more reliable than the gospels" but the events they describe match up more with what we know than the Gospels do. Oxyaena Harass 01:22, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Yes, definitely. The Hadiths are way more useful as historical reference material than the Gospels. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 01:33, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Also, you're right. This article fucking sucks. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 01:34, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
I mean it was written by amateur centrists back in the early days of the wiki, combine the poor quality with the casual Islamophobia (and the shitty behavior in the talk page) and you have a hilariously bad article. Oxyaena Harass 01:49, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
As for the Hadiths just take the respective author's biases into accounts, ie if it's Sunni vs Shia etc. (Shia accounts tend to be, well, less favorable to the caliphates than Sunni ones are, for obvious reasons of course.) Oxyaena Harass 01:53, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
hey oxyaena you know in the middle east people who are in the lgbtq community like you and me face oppression and some are even killed so why are you defending a group of people that would fucking kill us. — Unsigned, by: / talk
The Middle-East isn't unique in that regard. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 03:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Farewell Sermon[edit]

I removed the part about Muhammad forbidding racism as this most likely didn't happen. More well respected hadith collectors such as Sahih Muslim didn't record him saying this. This came from a guy called Ahmad Ibn Handal who had a tendancy to make up hadiths.Evilatheistheathen (talk) 12:16, 29 August 2020 (UTC)