DoctorKenney;990975 wrote: Yes walaal, he's a corrupt person and what he's saying is attempting to discredit Aisha. Anyways, here's a Sahih Hadith which proves him wrong: Notice the underlined part. Before the age of weaning ie. Before the age of 2 years old . The argument has now devolved to us running in circles, and it's reached a point where AllYourBase is throwing accusations against Islam and we're supposed to sit here, defending it from his misconceptions. Allyoubase is more than welcome to do his own research, in a different forum, which addresses these sort of topics. There are a million Islamic forums on the net, and he can pick whichever one he chooses next time he wants to bring forth an accusation against Islam. Dude, stop running. Lets talk facts: 1- The prophet ordered this practice in this Sahih Hadith: ' A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, I see on the face of Abu Hudhaifa (signs of disgust) on entering of Salim (who is an ally) into (our house), whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She said: How can I suckle him as he is a grown-up man? Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) smiled and said: I already know that he is a young man. 'Amr has made this addition in his narration that he participated in the Battle of Badr and in the narration of Ibn 'Umar (the words are): Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) laughed. Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3424 Zainab daughter of Abu Salama reported: I heard Umm Salama, the wife of Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon himy, saying to 'A'isha: By Allah, I do not like to be seen by a young boy who has passed the period of fosterage, whereupon she ('A'isha) said: Why is it so? Sahla daughter of Suhail came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Allah's Messenger, I swear by Allah that I see in the face of Abu Hudhaifa (the signs of disgust) on account of entering of Salim (in the house), whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She (Sahla bint Suhail) said: He has a beard. But he (again) said: Suckle him, and it would remove what is there (expression of disgust) on the face of Abu Hudhaifa. She said: (I did that) and, by Allah, I did not see (any sign of disgust) on the face of Abu Hadhaifa. Book 008, Number 3428 So basically the prophet ordered this poor lady to suckle a man with a beard! Do you refute any of that DrKenny? 2- Aisha who was the wife of the prophet of Islam (arguably his favourite after Khadija), adopted this bizarre ritual, and would order her sisters to suckle any stranger man she wanted to have access to her quarters. A'isha umm al-muminin took that as a precedent for whatever men she wanted to be able to come to see her. She ordered her sister, Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr as-Siddiq and the daughters of her brother to give milk to whichever men she wanted to be able to come in to see her. The rest of the wives of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, refused to let anyone come in to them by such nursing. They said, 'No! By Allah! We think that what the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered Sahla bint Suhayl to do was only an indulgence concerning the nursing of Salim alone. No! By Allah! No one will come in upon us by such nursing!' Muwatta' Malik Book 30, Number 30.2.12 Do you doubt this ones authenticity? Checkmate sxb.

magicbird;990968 wrote: Straw man argument. "Mothers shall suckle their children for two whole years; [that is] for those who wish to complete the [full period of] suckling [2:233]." Then everybody knows that as Muslims we're taught to lower our gaze and not be alone with the other gender, and you would want us to believe that Aisha ra said that. Handikaab caadhi baa tahay. Ma fahmin sabata qof somali ah oo u diinta dadka naguumeyste u qaadan karo. I'd understand if you were one of those b**tards the Italians left. Waa ku sidee sxb, if you think she did not, dee Mr. Google weydii. magicbird;990969 wrote: Dr Kenney, aboowe don't be listening to this fool, the story of Salem is a legend that was made up to discredit Aisha ra by the enemies of Islam. So anything any corrupt person says, verify it. What if it was authentic? Honestly, what if it was? What would you say then? Let me step this up. In fact, it was not only Aisha. The Prophet of Islam is the first person to mention this loophole, ka warran! Please note that the hadith below is Sahih, and if you are in doubt do google it. Narrated A'isha 'Sahlah bint Suhail came to the Prophet (saw) and said 'O Messenger of Allah (swt), I see signs of displeasure on the face of Abo Hudhaifah when Salim enters upon me', The Prophet (saw) said: "Breastfeed him!", She said: "How can I breastfeed him when he is a grown man!?" The messenger of Allah (swt) smiled and said 'I know that he is a grown man!'. So she did that, then she came to the Prophet (saw) and said "I have never seen any signs of displeasure on the face of Abo Hudhayfah after that. And he was present at the battle of Badar. Hadith is sahih, (authentic) edit: Let me add that as I was looking though the authenticity of this loophole/ritual, and guess what, DoctorKenny's hero, one of the Sheikhs that he personally named above as a 'non obscure', 'good', 'halaal' Sheikhs: Ibn Taymiyyah also is a proponent of this loophole i.e. the suckling of a grown man. Now please remember how he belittled their 'secular' knowledge and said: They are experts on Fiqh and Aqeedah only, but when it comes to secular knowledge then they are not authorities at all So he denounced their authority except for Fiqh and religious ruling in which they are 'experts'. Watch him backpedal their religious authority too now http://www.islamqa.com/ar/ref/85115

She exploited the religion to get men who are not related to her to access her quarters. That sounds immoral to me brother

DoctorKenney;990962 wrote: And Aisha came up with this ruling because she genuinely believed it was a valid ruling ....stop trying to make it seem as if she instituted this ruling out of her personal interests, as you have no evidence of this. What more evidence do you need? She went against the 'ijmaac' of her fellow prophet wives and other so called Sahaba to do something that is viewed (even by yourself!!!) to be bizarre and strange and immoral by anyones standard. And that is the wife of your prophet!

No I did not. You were flaming an other poster here for bringing the ideas of what you called obscure Sheikhs, and started to name your non obscure ones. So I just came along and brought forth the opinions of your own heroes in matters of interest to this discussion of science. I have proved that some of the highest Wahabi scholars that you yourself have named are indeed so simple and dare I say gullible (and ****** in fact) to utter statements such as: - The Earth is stationary and the Sun orbits the Earth. - Hurricanes that we have perfect scientific explanation for today are merely 'messages' from a vengeful 'God'. - The suckling of grown *** men by muslim women somehow makes them Mahram for them! All in an attempt to show you your wrong ways but you refuse to listen. I am attempting to show you that these simpletons are in fact fraud, they do not possess the most basic of human intellect and would actually be laughed at by primary 1 pupils. Yet you are still firm that they make for worthy religious and moral guides. I have even went out of my way to show you how the point that you yourself found bizarre and morally and religiously unaccepted was actually performed by the wife of your prophet. Just so you can see how human those who lived back then are, human in their needs and human in their methods of achieving those needs. She did not mind making up this ritual and give a religious aura just so she can do what she wanted. Now why would the other names that you have mentioned be different when someone so close to your prophet, someone who narrated half of your 'deen' and was one of the major retellers of the prophets adventures was acting with such disregard to the morals you hold so close? It is all fraud my friend, and I really think you are lost, I am just trying to bring you back to the 'fitra' of humans. You should use your mind, your powers of reason, of intellect more often. Join me, brother!!!

DoctorKenney;990935 wrote: Yes, Allyourbase, there are such things as "non obscure rulings" and "obscure rulings". The only thing we can do is take the rulings of religious scholars on scientific matters with a grain of salt. They are experts on Fiqh and Aqeedah only, but when it comes to secular knowledge then they are not authorities at all. And if they overstep their authority and make statements without knowledge about science, then it doesn't and shouldn't reflect badly on their rulings on Islam. And that ruling regarding breastfeeding someone in the aim of making them your Mahram, that's a bizarre understanding and is totally incorrect , and it is refuted by the Sahabi Ibn Umar: Al-Muwatta Malik (Volume 2, Hadith 603) Ibn Umar said: “There is no breastfeeding except for the one who is breastfed in infancy; there is no breastfeeding for one who is grown up.” If Uthaymeen or Ibn Baaz take their own understanding of something, and get it completely wrong. Then that's on them. They made a mistake, and I don't care to justify their mistake or appease it. They are not astronomers, and they are experts on Fiqh, that's it. And sometimes these men repent from their mistakes a few years later, and denounce their earlier statements, such as in the example of Ibn Baaz. It doesn't really prove anything. These men were correct at times and incorrect at times. If they were correct, then alhamdulilah. If they're incorrect, then that's on them, and may Allah forgive them for their errors. Not to dwell on this point but hold on a second.. Are you telling me that your 'mother', Um Al Mu'miniin Aisha the wife of your Prophet is performing an act that is bizarre? That she is indeed incorrect? I say this because Aisha, wife of the Prophet of Islam did indeed practice this 'bizarre' ritual, whereby if she wanted a man who is a stranger to her to come to her quarters and become 'Mahram' she would order her sisters and their daughters to allow those men to suckle on them. This is from Malik's Muwata': فأخذت بذلك عائشة أم المؤمنين فيمن كانت تحب أن يدخل عليها من الرجال فكانت تأمر أختها أم كلثوم بنت أبي بكر الصديق وبنات أخيها أن يرضعن من أحبت أن يدخل عليها من الرجال وأبى سائر أزواج النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أن يدخل عليهن بتلك الرضاعة Its really bizarre and evidently so by the refusal of the prophet's other wives to practice this.

DoctorKenney;990905 wrote: There are rulings when it comes to following men based on their religious knowledge. And rulings when it comes to following them based on their secular knowledge. I won't go to Ibn Baaz when I have a question about chemistry or physics, and I actually never even mentioned Ibn Baaz in my post. And regarding his claim that the Earth is stationary and is orbited by the Sun, he was heard and his followers were heard denying he ever believed that, or that his words were taken out of context, or whatever. Men are allowed to make mistakes, and repent from those mistakes, and its obvious that he never believed in this when he died. And the whole "suckling" argument was refuted by Al Munajjid when he proved (through Surah 2:233) that this ruling only applies during the first 2 years of your life. After that, its not possible to breastfeed a grown adult. Right now we're talking about rulings, and Wizard claiming that seeking scientific knowledge is forbidden in Islam, which I stated is false. And in Islam, individual Sheikhs are never taken as an authority (on religious rulings). What's taken as an authority is the CONSENSUS. ie. What they all agree on, and then cross-reference on whether their beliefs are in accordance to the evidences. Each individual person is prone to making mistakes, which is why we look towards what they collectively believe, and hope that their collective beliefs are correct. You are missing the larger point. Your whole argument was pertaining to the act of Fatwa Shopping from obscure Sheikhs, and then you went on name your non obscure (Thiqaat) Sheikhs implying that they actually are in any way better than the many random Sheikhs with bizarre Fatwas we always see. So I just went ahead to show you they were in fact even more absurd in some of their claims, to which my point still stands. When I am pointing these guys you think of as religious or perhaps moral guides and stating their strange and sometimes laughable claims and ideas what I am trying to show you is how simple they actually are as men. If you can not trust a man to be aware of simple facts that surround him, I am talking very basic laws of the universe, of science, to make mistakes (hey, we all make them) on such a basic level of thought, how would they in any way be worthy of the high status you bestow upon them? Forget about Bin Baz and just look at your named Sheikhs. One of them is actually against the basic idea of the Earth orbiting the sun, an other is dwelling on the very important matter of the suckling of a grown man (the Sheikh I mentioned in that part of my post was not bin baz in fact, it was one of the super Sheikhs mr. Al Albany) one of your named heroes. We have the childish Al Munjid who believes that there is a god somewhere who was so angry at all of those sinners that he sent them cadaab biblical style in the case of hurricane Sandy. Dont you see how terrible of a statement this is? DoctorKenney;990906 wrote: Again, AllYourBase is doing something which I already criticized in the previous page. That you can't find some obscure ruling by an Individual Sheikh and then claim that it is the view of all Muslims . These men are not infallible and even men such as Umar bin Khattab made mistakes and were prone to making errors. What's infallible is the religion of Allah. But men and women are definitely prone to making errors. This is something we all agree on. So the strange statements by someone here and there shouldn't be taken as proof of anything. And their opinions only matter when it comes to religious rulings, and nothing else. So there are non obscure ruling and obscure ones now? Dude, you said the same thing and went on and named your untouchable thiqaat culimaa and I just presented their thoughts to you. You can not call that Fatwa shopping from obscure Sheikhs, these guys form the corner stone of the Wahabi Islam and are held very high as evident here by yourself.

I choose not to believe in these guys, and not to believe in their ignorance and hate. I am tired of listening to weird Arabic garbage from my people day in day out, and whenever I voice my objections I am labeled anti Islam and anti dhaqan, which in itself is a laughable claim. I do not mind the form of islam practiced by our parents and grandparents even if I do not believe in it, but it was a spiritual path that allowed people to practice and act how they wanted without fear of persecution by thought or dress police. The only reason we are seeing this alien, ugly form of religion imposed on us today is because we are poor, needy and weak. They use their deep pockets to bring us closer to their sick ideology. And that, I REFUSE.

And just so you put a face to the names, here are some of the 'Shiekhs' that Kenny mentioned in his post, and I am using my own discretion in adding Aal Sheekh, Saudi Arabia's Mufti as well: When young, educated men like our friends Khayr and Kenny follow these guys whom are ignorant of basic ideas that govern our universe, things you learn in primary 1, and take them as spiritual guides, what hope do we have as peoples? If that is not a form of Arab imperialism, I do not know what is.

DoctorKenney;990788 wrote: First of all, don't "brother" me. Second of all, anyone on the internet can go "fatwa shopping" and find strange statements from obscure Sheikhs, and then claim that this is representative of the countless thousands of Sheikhs worldwide. If you believe that this is representative of their collective beliefs, then give me evidence stating so. I can find Sheikhs claiming that Homosexuality is permitted in Islam. Doesn't mean it's true. It's such a basic and weak argument, that it doesn't require any thinking. The vast majority of scholars, men such as Ibn Taymiyyah , Qayyim , Abdul Wahhab , and even contemporary Sheikhs like Albaani and Al Uthaymeen and Al Munajjid state otherwise. But according to you, you want to overlook the vast examples stating otherwise and focus on a select few which confirm your bias. Pathetic. Okay everyone, lets collectively have a good look at Kenny's heros, and specifically those he personally mentioned in the post quoted above. I want to do this just so you see the quality of those that the guy looks up to and their level of intellect. Now please ask yourself what sort of a person would result from the uninhibited consumption of what the 'Shiekhs' above have devoted their sorry lives to, especially in relation to the sciences which is what this thread is all about. Lets begin: Al Uthaymeen: ولكن الشأن كل الشأن فيما يذكر من أن الأرض تدور وأن الشمس ثابتة وأن اختلاف الليل والنهار يكون بسبب دوران الأرض حول الشمس فإن هذا القول باطل يبطله ظاهر القرآن فإن ظاهر القرآن والسنة يدل على أن الذي يدور حول الأرض أو يدور على الأرض هي الشمس Who basically states that 'It is apparent from the Islamic evidences that they confirm that it is the sun which revolves around the earth, and by its revolving the alternation of night and day takes place on the surface of the earth.' He calaims that the Earth is stationary and it is in fact the Sun that rotates around the earth thus causing the alternation of night and day. Please note that we are not talking about a man who lived 500 years ago, he died very recently in 2001! If you would like to read his text in full please check his official website: http://www.ibnothaimeen.com/all/noor/article_6463.shtml Moving on to Ibn Baz: "In his 1966 article, ibn Baz did claim that the sun orbited the earth, and that "the earth is fixed and stable, spread out by God for mankind and made a bed and cradle for them, fixed down by mountains lest it shake".[30] As a result of the publication of his first article, ibn Baz was ridiculed by Egyptian journalists as an example of Saudi primitiveness ... In 1982 Ibn Baz published a book, Al-adilla al-naqliyya wa al-ḥissiyya ʿala imkān al-ṣuʾūd ila al-kawākib wa ʾala jarayān al-shams wa al-qamar wa sukūn al-arḍ ("Treatise on the textual and rational proofs of the rotation of the sun and the motionlessness of the earth and the possibility of ascension to other planets"). In it, he republished the 1966 article, together with a second article on the same subject written later in 1966, and repeated his belief that the sun orbited the earth." He was uttering such lunacy as recently as 1966! How about Ibn Baz? Well, he is one of the greatest supporters of the suckling of grown men. Which is a very strange theory/loophole in Islam. He basically believes that if there is a man and a woman whom are not related who want to be able to shake hands (what?!) and interact like you would with your mother or sister (i.e. see hair, touch..etc) then it is permissible to get that strange man to suckle on the woman's tit, an act that will magically make him permissible to her (i know!). You can hear him yourself here: How about Al Munjid? Well this religious thug believes that hurricane Sandy Is Allah's Punishment for Afghanistan and Iraq. So basically Allah condemning faasiq and faajir westerners by sending these 'signals' to the muslim nations to start believing. Watch him here: http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/3631.htm Such is the level of intellect of those whom our lost brothers Khayr and Kenny follow, its so sad I will pray for you labadiinaba

Khayr;990595 wrote: We don't condone white privilege and racial colonization. Everytime a Muslim country makes a development, they are sanctioned to death. Case in point is Iran for trying to produce Nuclear energy and they were given tougher sanctions by means of limiting their trade partners. Yes, it is a white man's narrative, of which you House Negreos stand by and critique the muslim world with and yes, the Kafir is Najis. Kufr is impurity of the heart as well as a sickness of the heart. Negroe, please stop the bs! Oh, so now Iran is a Muslim country?! I thought they were Shia dirty Kafir according to all of you Wahabis.

DoctorKenney;990301 wrote: I whole-heartedly believe that burahadeer and Allyourbase are nothing more than trolls, who litter this forum with their useless drivel. So you're telling me if Somalis adopt the Arabic script, this makes them "slaves to their Arab Masters" but if we adopt the Latin script, somehow we're not slaves to our European masters? You do realize that the Latin script is foreign to us Somalis as well right? So what's with the double standard? We can't use Arabic letters because....? Almost every Somali on this forum can read Arabic, I've been to Somalia and when I visited the duksi's, all of the little children could read Arabic. And the Somalis I visited had a harder time reading the Latin script than the Arabic script. You can visit the smallest village in Somalia, and virtually everyone can read Arabic. Allyourbase was caught in a bald-faced lie , he's speaking about things he knows nothing about. But you want to reject the Arabic script because it's foreign to us, and adopt the Latin script because it's not foreign to us? You seem to be HIGH on XASHIISH sxb, I say this because you did not read the post quoted in my original post in which a compatriot of yours was assuming folk whom are for the Latin script because: "might aswell come out and say the truth, 'I'm a filthy adoon that doesn't wash his ***, hates Islam and everything to do with it, and I love being a slave to my cadaan masters'." To which I replied, it must hold then, that those who for the changing of the alphabet to an Arabic one must make you slave to your Arab masters. Kapish? And as said above by Safferz, you can not project the prevalence of Arabic as seen among members here onto Somali speaking lands, pure lunacy sxb. Also let me tell you one thing you seem to be missing, is the fact that we are not 'adopting' no Latin script, this is not the 60s , sorry to break this to ya, but we already have a script, and its been working fine the last 40 odd years, why you would like to adopt the Arabic one i do not know. It is not a language of science, or business, it is not an international language as such and the only reason you are promoting it is to get some divine brownie points and be more like the Arabs you love so much. I hate to break it to you but Somalis are not Arabs. The use of Latin is unfortunate and I would have loved to see an authentic Somali script, I would sign up for that, however using Latin scripts has its merits too, what with English being the worlds accepted language. Alpha Blondy;990329 wrote: Somalis folks need to have a true expression of Islam. the only way this could be found is through the use of Somali in prayer and rituals. why do we need an intermediary (Arabic language) to pray to Allah? Why is it read and only accepted in Arabic? If all languages are understood by Allah then all languages should be used in the prayer ritual, maha? the believer should have direct access and there should be faith for all with easy access! This is so sad, what more is the fact that 90% of Somalis who pray are just reciting verses without knowing what they really mean. It is such a surreal experience attending prayers in a Somali Masjid, you see everyone reciting random verses of the Quran without much knowledge of what they are saying, repeatedly, day in day out. A situation which could have been avoided altogether with the permission to pray the Salat in your own language. DoctorKenney;990341 wrote: Fourth of all, you're claiming that Islam is "committing cultural genocide in Somalia". What is this "Islam"? Since when does Islam require that everyone behaves like an Arab ? Everyone is different, people have their own cultures and languages, and Islam has nothing to do with that. You can be a Somali Muslim, or a Malaysian Muslim, or a Turkish Muslim. Since when does Islam hinder any of this? Since when does any Muslim have such a poisonous outlook over his own religion? I dont know much about you or brother Guleed Ali for instance, but I can comfortably deduce that one of you at the very least is a fan of Arab skirts (aka dishdasha) and that little white hat they love to wear, maybe you like that too. I know one of you at the very least is rocking a massive f-off beard (waa sunnah). I know for SURE you do not condone the listening to of Somali music (waa xaaraan init? ), or attend non strictly islamic Somali wedding/parties (waa dambi dee), no cinema (waa lagugu cadaabi), no opera/theatre (waa fusuq). No appreciation for art, he probably would destroy the Somali cave painting if he could as they depict living creatures (waa xaaraan). I can go on and on and on. What does it all leavel? Someone indistinguishable from Arab bedowins from Hijaz. No sense of culture, no breathing space for the Arts, thats messed up sxb.

magicbird;990248 wrote: Latin script is only easier to read if your a Somali in the diaspora. When I went back to Somalia, I've found that a lot of people find it hard to read the latin script. Arabic is universal for all Somalis, whether your 4 or 90, you'll be reading the Quran. Anyways, the oldest Somali to be written are in Arabic, by Yusuf Kawnayn if I'm not mistaken. And the few that disagree, the obvious insincere ones, might aswell come out and say the truth, 'I'm a filthy adoon that doesn't wash his ***, hates Islam and everything to do with it, and I love being a slave to my cadaan masters'. Dude, wtf. For one, the vast majority of Somalis don't read Arabic, if you are on some next level delusional high then thats something else. Some can read the alphabet somewhat but to say the Arabic script is universal is just plain dumb. Especially if we take into account the demographics of Somali society with youth making up the majority, youth that for the most part have had a lot more exposure to the Latin script than Arabic. As to your point of us being 'a slave to the cadaan masters' merely by expression an agreement with the Latin choice then I suspect your motives are purely your love for being a slave to your Arab masters. Ha!

Dhan walba oo aan ka eego, waxaan uhaystaa inaad fikrad foolxun meesha kusoo biirisay sxb. Try and write that with arabic script..

Apophis;990145 wrote: Like all ideas, it can be corrupted. It's not immune. Absolutely! It is however not clocked in a divine aura rendering it untouchable. It is like many human concepts susceptible to corruption but also to fine-tuning and corrections. How do you correct someone's religious belief in women's subservient societal status to men? Or case in point, the medical benefits of camel's urine? To them these ideas are divine and no amount of common sense would get through it. Its sad wallahi (opps! )

Did you drink a camel's urine? How do you know it works?

Secularism as an ideology is all about freedom of expression and belief. Concepts that may be outwith the bounds of logic for those still pondering the medical effects of camel's urine!

So should the state inforce the growing of beards too?

Her dad comes across as the sweetest father ever..

Sometimes when I think the logic of these stories I can not help but smile. Erm.. I speak to ants you see!

I take it you dont do sarcasm.

Guje;988127 wrote: " Islamic tradition tells us that al-Aqsa mosque is near Mecca on the Arabian Peninsula. This was unequivocally stated in "Kitab al-Maghazi," a book by the Muslim historian and geographer al-Waqidi. According to al-Waqidi, there were two "masjeds" (places of prayer) in al-Gi'irranah, a village between Mecca and Ta'if - one was "the closer mosque" (al-masjid al-adna) and the other was "the further mosque" (al-masjid al-aqsa,) and Muhammad would pray there when he went out of town." oops! some folks have been fighting over the wrong mosque all these years.

And what is worse, he was found innocent by the UAE courts!!!! http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/01/10/us-emirates-torture-trial-idUSTRE60911O20100110

I just happen to take my time good sir

Its all about identity sxb, you are happy to follow hairy desert dwellers where I embrace Soomali dhaqan, look, ethos. Bila dhaqan waaxid