My guess is that we had SAM on her back foot here and that the other thread was closed because I quoted her She is now saying that she was not stating her own opinion, despite which she never qualified anything she said. I believe she is dishonest.
So where female Muslims go in the afterlife?
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
My guess is that we had SAM on her back foot here and that the other thread was closed because I quoted her She is now saying that she was not stating her own opinion, despite which she never qualified anything she said. I believe she is dishonest.
...sigh
I have had confirmation in the form of a nastily worded pm from Tiassa. He regards it as off thread to remind SAM of a view she put forward here. I have asked him to go public and repeat what he said to me.
Now the interesting bit is that I had no pm from Tiassa until I asked what had happened to the thread that had disappeared. Had I not done so the incident would have quietly faded away.
The truth shall make you slaves.
Sorry, but it does, unless you specify to the contrary.
By the way I wasn't talking about houris, but that particular word that only mentioned in the Quran once. And I take The Straight Dope explanation, thank you very much.
At least they are clear on the subject...
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Sam ?
Let me put it this way. What you are is the sum of your genes and environment. Given a certain genetic makeup and put in a certain environment, one can predict your behaviour within a certain range. In fact, if I were to reach a point of knowledge where I knew all about your genes and all about your environment and the interaction between the two, I could probably tell you how you are going to behave in a certain situation. So, does this mean you are or you are not thinking for yourself?
Also Sam, it occured to me that you said there is no 7 levels of heaven, but then you pretty much said you don't know shit about the Muslim heaven. So there might as well be 7 levels, since quite a few Muslim scholars and authorities said so, who actually spent time pondering about such things.
Also you apply logic, scepticism and common sense to the sayings of the prophet (and I congratulate you for that) but you take the Quran for granted without applying the same logic, scepticism and common sense. After all, which is more likely, the prophet said a few things and people around him wrote that later down, or that god revealed a bunch of things to him? I think the former...
Also you apply logic, scepticism and common sense to the sayings of the prophet (and I congratulate you for that) but you take the Quran for granted without applying the same logic, scepticism and common sense. After all, which is more likely, the prophet said a few things and people around him wrote that later down, or that god revealed a bunch of things to him? I think the former...
I apologise for saying there are no seven levels of heaven. Let me clarify. There are no seven levels of heaven mentioned in the Quran.
As for the Hadith, if you bother to read the rules of using Hadith in Muslims, they go something like this:
1. when the earlier hadiths were written down, the system of isnad or chain of narration or citation were in the process of development
2. when later hadiths were written down the system of isnad was clearly defined.
3. the chain of narration shows the connection from the present narrator to the one who heard it from the Prophet as can be established at the time the hadith is written down.
4. adding 1, 2, 3, there are some early authentic hadiths with a poor chain of narration and later unverifiable hadiths with a well established chain of narration
5. the hadiths do not supplant the Quran and in case of any doubt, the Quran takes precedence.
6. You are free to use these rules as followed by those who study Islam (or not). Your argument will be given weight accordingly.
What word is that?
And may I have a link to the straight dope article?
"yes thats exactly what it means" what?
Are you thinking for yourself if your behaviour is predictable or aren't you?
Last edited:
Syzygys,
Here is a common misconception that is the result of Israeli propagated myths. The concept of 72 virgins for martyrdom is a recent one, invented by egregiously anti-Islamic Israelis. The idea of 72 virgins in the Qur’an, regardless of martyrdom, does not exist. Interestingly enough, the number 72 is never used once in the Qur’an. Thus, this incredulous myth is discredited satisfactorily.
Al Araf is a temporary setting where certain individuals must visit and await their final judgement. The type of people who will be of the Al Araf setting in the afterlife are those who died too young to be responsible or held accountable for their actions, those whose sins and good deeds negated one another, and those who never had Allah’s message reach them during their lifetime (such as, they were born before the concept of Allah was known to people, lived in a remote and distant land where Islam’s revelation was not yet made present, etc).
Not really. Allah is not the author of the hadiths, so what is said in them cannot be attributed accurately to God. That is a dangerous logical fallacy, one which you’ve unfortunately used many times in your arguments within this thread. “Atheist” is simply a more descriptive word for “non-believers”; every non-believer’s fate is a similar doom.
Somebody definitely needs to call you out on your sources. Where is this excerpt from? I’ve read hundreds of hadiths over the years, but I’ve certainly never come across this one. There’s no information as to who compiled it, either. Seems to me like the quote above is merely some unknown author’s sentiments. Such sources are of abysmal value to me. You’re claiming Allah displays inaccurate mathematics because some human pulled these nice round numbers out their rear end? Seriously now. Consider the unbelievably descriptive quantitative values as well for the quote above - how can word of mouth stories spanning centuries boil down to such numerical accuracy? To claim the exact dimensional proportions, age, and quantity of the houris, virgins, and non-virgins is ridiculous, not to mention an evident forgery.
The Quran mentions a creature called houris that are created from light. They are not "virgins" and they are not creatures for sexual pleasure. What we do know from the Quran is that they are pure servants, and that they are for men and women. The exact purpose of houris is not mentioned or defined, so any assumption on their purpose is just that, an assumption. Some people have twisted it as far as they could to make it seem as though these houris are for sex and are "renewable virgins", but without any credibility. Any and all hadiths which support the idea of houris for sex are weak - as in, the chain of narrators isn’t strong or it has missing links.
Besides, the meaning of the word “houris” is highly controversial and debateable. Currently, I’m reading some literature that shows the word “houris” to actually mean “white grapes”, which makes sense considering the word “houris” is often compared to crystals and pearls, and how the verses “houri” are used in usually involve fruits. This is still a highly controversial viewpoint, mind you, but it is certainly interesting and noteworthy. If you ask me, a houri is a servant for both men and women. There is nothing sexually related concerning them in the afterlife within the Qur’an’s text, and it’s important to note that the houris have no specifically stated gender.
Note: When it comes to the houri controversy or the supposedly disproportional afterlife awards amongst the two genders in Islam, I highly suggest disregarding the opinions of writers (dead or alive), and take the hadiths with a grain of salt. If you're genuinely interested in the topic of the Islamic afterlife, and would truly like to learn about its details, then read the Qur'an alone first. Build a general knowledge and understanding using Islam's highest and most irrefutable source, and then read other text and literature with great precaution. With the utmost confidence, I can say that, taking into account the Qur'an and weaknesses of certain hadiths, the Islamic perception of heaven is certainly not a sex-crazed, male-oriented dominion. That I can assure you.
I hope that answered a few questions. I'll try and post more information later, hopefully in better detail. For now, this will suffice.
Kadark
Here is a common misconception that is the result of Israeli propagated myths. The concept of 72 virgins for martyrdom is a recent one, invented by egregiously anti-Islamic Israelis. The idea of 72 virgins in the Qur’an, regardless of martyrdom, does not exist. Interestingly enough, the number 72 is never used once in the Qur’an. Thus, this incredulous myth is discredited satisfactorily.
Al Araf is a temporary setting where certain individuals must visit and await their final judgement. The type of people who will be of the Al Araf setting in the afterlife are those who died too young to be responsible or held accountable for their actions, those whose sins and good deeds negated one another, and those who never had Allah’s message reach them during their lifetime (such as, they were born before the concept of Allah was known to people, lived in a remote and distant land where Islam’s revelation was not yet made present, etc).
Not really. Allah is not the author of the hadiths, so what is said in them cannot be attributed accurately to God. That is a dangerous logical fallacy, one which you’ve unfortunately used many times in your arguments within this thread. “Atheist” is simply a more descriptive word for “non-believers”; every non-believer’s fate is a similar doom.
Somebody definitely needs to call you out on your sources. Where is this excerpt from? I’ve read hundreds of hadiths over the years, but I’ve certainly never come across this one. There’s no information as to who compiled it, either. Seems to me like the quote above is merely some unknown author’s sentiments. Such sources are of abysmal value to me. You’re claiming Allah displays inaccurate mathematics because some human pulled these nice round numbers out their rear end? Seriously now. Consider the unbelievably descriptive quantitative values as well for the quote above - how can word of mouth stories spanning centuries boil down to such numerical accuracy? To claim the exact dimensional proportions, age, and quantity of the houris, virgins, and non-virgins is ridiculous, not to mention an evident forgery.
The Quran mentions a creature called houris that are created from light. They are not "virgins" and they are not creatures for sexual pleasure. What we do know from the Quran is that they are pure servants, and that they are for men and women. The exact purpose of houris is not mentioned or defined, so any assumption on their purpose is just that, an assumption. Some people have twisted it as far as they could to make it seem as though these houris are for sex and are "renewable virgins", but without any credibility. Any and all hadiths which support the idea of houris for sex are weak - as in, the chain of narrators isn’t strong or it has missing links.
Besides, the meaning of the word “houris” is highly controversial and debateable. Currently, I’m reading some literature that shows the word “houris” to actually mean “white grapes”, which makes sense considering the word “houris” is often compared to crystals and pearls, and how the verses “houri” are used in usually involve fruits. This is still a highly controversial viewpoint, mind you, but it is certainly interesting and noteworthy. If you ask me, a houri is a servant for both men and women. There is nothing sexually related concerning them in the afterlife within the Qur’an’s text, and it’s important to note that the houris have no specifically stated gender.
Note: When it comes to the houri controversy or the supposedly disproportional afterlife awards amongst the two genders in Islam, I highly suggest disregarding the opinions of writers (dead or alive), and take the hadiths with a grain of salt. If you're genuinely interested in the topic of the Islamic afterlife, and would truly like to learn about its details, then read the Qur'an alone first. Build a general knowledge and understanding using Islam's highest and most irrefutable source, and then read other text and literature with great precaution. With the utmost confidence, I can say that, taking into account the Qur'an and weaknesses of certain hadiths, the Islamic perception of heaven is certainly not a sex-crazed, male-oriented dominion. That I can assure you.
I hope that answered a few questions. I'll try and post more information later, hopefully in better detail. For now, this will suffice.
Kadark
The relevant part was quoted in post#21. The word was:
"we find that the Arabic word at issue is WakawaAAiba, which appears nowhere else in the Koran. The French, less prudish in these matters, usually render it as something like des belles aux seins arrondis, "beautiful women with round breasts,"
The hadiths do supply it in the meaning that they add to it. (like in the description of heaven) Now you accept it or not, that is another question...
Link to the straight dope?
I know wakaba, which means to do something assiduously, what does wakawa mean?
Last edited:
Hey, thanks Kadark for your effort to clear things up...
Let's not blame everything on the Jews. It came from a hadith:
"Hadith number 2,562 in the collection known as the Sunan al-Tirmidhi says, "The least [reward] for the people of Heaven is 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome of pearls, aquamarine and ruby." "
I guess we are out of lack. But I am correct that Allah hates hypocrate believers more than atheist, right?
It was referenced in post #2, and that website was a direct copy from the People's Almanach. Now where they got their info, I don't know. I assume another hadith...
Also how about the word WakawaAAiba instead of huris?
Let's not blame everything on the Jews. It came from a hadith:
"Hadith number 2,562 in the collection known as the Sunan al-Tirmidhi says, "The least [reward] for the people of Heaven is 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome of pearls, aquamarine and ruby." "
I guess we are out of lack. But I am correct that Allah hates hypocrate believers more than atheist, right?
It was referenced in post #2, and that website was a direct copy from the People's Almanach. Now where they got their info, I don't know. I assume another hadith...
Also how about the word WakawaAAiba instead of huris?
I found it. The word is kawa 'ib. And the origin of the buxom beauties ascribed to the meaning of this word are from the tafsir of Fakhruddin al Razi (1149-1209).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fakhr_al-Din_al-Razi
I think you are being far too restrained. He strikes me as a bad -tempered kid who throws tantrums and smashes up the toys in his nursery.
The questrion is , what sort of mentality affirms the existence of such a being?
The great Islamic scholar, Ibn Kathir6, comments on 78:33:
(And vineyards, and Kawa`ib Atrab,) meaning, wide-eyed maidens with fully developed breasts. Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid and others have said, (Kawa`ib) "This means round breasts. They meant by this that the breasts of these girls will be fully rounded and not sagging, because they will be virgins, equal in age. This means that they will only have one age.'' The explanation of this has already been mentioned in Surat Al-Waqi`ah…
From the website:
http://www.answering-islam.de/Main/Silas/mo_sex.htm
If you are implying that kawa 'ib means something else, then what does it mean?
I started to like this heaven more and more:
"One of Muhammad’s more interesting sexual statements dealt with the amount of times a man can have sex in one day in Paradise.
A man will have intercourse in Paradise with his wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn and his wives from among the people of this world, if they enter Paradise with him. A man will be given the strength of a hundred men to eat, drink, feel desire and have sexual intercourse. It was narrated from Anas that the Prophet said: "The believer in Paradise will be given such and such strength for sexual intercourse." He was asked, "O Messenger of Allaah, will he really be able to do that?" He said, "He will be given the strength of one hundred (men)." (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, no. 2459. He said, (it is) saheeh ghareeb). Sunan al-Tirmidhi #2459"
"One of Muhammad’s more interesting sexual statements dealt with the amount of times a man can have sex in one day in Paradise.
A man will have intercourse in Paradise with his wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn and his wives from among the people of this world, if they enter Paradise with him. A man will be given the strength of a hundred men to eat, drink, feel desire and have sexual intercourse. It was narrated from Anas that the Prophet said: "The believer in Paradise will be given such and such strength for sexual intercourse." He was asked, "O Messenger of Allaah, will he really be able to do that?" He said, "He will be given the strength of one hundred (men)." (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, no. 2459. He said, (it is) saheeh ghareeb). Sunan al-Tirmidhi #2459"
And as I said the origin of the meaning buxom beauties etc, is the tafsir kabir of al Razi. Perhaps he felt there should be sexualised invitations to heaven. As far as I can see, the Quran itself does not define sex or breasts or make allusions to intercourse as an addendum to heaven. Also, there are no references to kawa'ib except for that singular reference and no other meanings that have survived. Perhaps one would need to reference classical Arabic texts, if any of them survive becoming collateral damages.
Since even I, as someone who frequently reads the Quran and issues related to its meanings, have yet to come across the allusion to breasts, I'm guessing its yet another thing that has become popularised as part of the new movement to ridicule Islam. While searching on google, I was surprised at the number of non-Muslim sites that are attracted to that verse. Perhaps it would not be too far fetched to expect, in the near future, a film educating us on the big breasted women in Muslim paradise.
Saheeh Ghareeb. A singular reference, based on one narration. How unsurprising.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
"So, does this mean you are or you are not thinking for yourself?"
> It means you are not thinking for yourself. How else can it be predicted ?
Problem is that this not thinking for yourself is defined as thinking for yourself..