A continued
look at the Muslim Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah).
A book which is a compilation of allegedly authentic sayings (Sahih hadiths)
of Mohammed. Sayings which are deemed
Allah-inspired. Sayings which are devoutly
observed by the vast majority of Muslims.
There are
some sayings that mention “curse”,
Abu
Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be
upon him) said: When a woman spends the night away from the bed of her husband,
the angels curse her until morning. This hadith has been narrated through the
same chain of transmitters (with a slight variation):" He said: Until she
comes back."
And some sayings that mention ‘stoning a fornicator’,
Abu
Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be
upon him) as saying: The child is to be attributed to one on whose bed he is
born, and for a fornicator there is stoning.
But there is
one saying that I would like to address
in particular. One that is far more
fascinating. One that actually mentions “sin”,
'A'isha
(Allah be pleased with her) reported: I felt jealous of the women who offered
themselves to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Then when
Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, revealed this:" You may defer any one of
them you wish, and take to yourself any you wish; and if you desire any you
have set aside (no sin is chargeable to you)" (xxxiii. 51), I ('A'isha.)
said: It seems to me that your Lord hastens to satisfy your desire.
So, here
we have A’isha (one of Mohammed’s wives) showing her virtuous jealousy. Of A’isha being offended when Mohammed
revealed to her… his new-found permission to ‘have and to hold’ whichever wife
he wanted- whenever he darn-well pleased.
And of A’isha whining in response, ‘Oh, that’s so conveeenient for you,
Mo’honey!’. When previously his wives
were all expected to wait for their turn.
Yet
A’isha was consoled that she remained his favorite wife. Grateful that he wasn’t depriving her as much as the other wives. And grateful that another wife (‘fat and
frigid’) had deferred her turn to her.
However,
this new-found permission was quite in violation of what Mohammed likely knew
of Jewish law. What he likely knew of this ancient law from the
Jewish Torah. Which were Old Testament books which
Mohammed endorsed in the Qur’an. And quite possibly knew from the New
Testament- which he largely held in contempt.
Jewish
law found in the Torah just following the Ten Commandments. And law just preceding a large list of
capital offenses. Law commanding (Exodus
21:10) that the “conjugal rights of a wife must not be diminished”. Yet
allegedly this law was now abrogated and no longer a “sin”… for Mohammed!
Which
brings us back to A’ishas question, ‘Was this law abrogated’? And was it ‘especially abrogated for Mohammed?’
Well… maybe in Muslim scriptures.
Yet we
don’t see any exemptions being made in
the Judeo-Christian scriptures. Not for
any laws. Not for any prophets, priests
or kings.
To the contrary, we see
numerous examples of the grief that violation of this law causes.
A primary
example can be seen in the ‘Father of the Faith’/Abraham. Whose wife-induced polygamy caused tremendous
strife. Polygamy which caused a “wild
donkey of a man” (Ishmael) to be born. A
man who “will live to the east of all his brothers” (Isaac/Israel). A man whose “hand will be against everyone” (Genesis 16:12).
So why would this ‘father of a different
faith’/Mohammed think that he was being granted an exemption for his polygamy?
Something that the Jewish faith considered as “treacherous”, as
“unfaithfulness”, as “sin”?
Well, it
is claimed that
Mohammed was granted this exemption in order to build ‘international relations’. Yet as you can see at that link- many of
those relations were clearly not of
international nature. Not all that
productive. And not all that
reproductive either.
But turned
out to be predictably destructive relationships. Relationships that were condemned in the
Torah and condemned by Jesus as well (Matthew 19:5).
Condemned
when Jesus re-affirmed the principle
that “a man shall be joined to his wife”.
And re-affirmed the precept
that the “TWO shall become one flesh”.
Not of THREE or FOUR (or even more for an allegedly exempt Mohammed) becoming one flesh… but only “TWO” (Genesis 2:24).
A principle that Mohammed certainly appreciated. But a precept
that Mohammed most certainly didn’t.
A precept that a very “desirous” Mohammed
shirked. And oddly, a godly precept from a type of monotheism
that Mohammed condemned as “Shirk”.
A type of monotheism that said, “Let US make
humankind in OUR image, after OUR likeness” (Genesis 1:26). A plural monotheism that even the Jewish Torah
reluctantly recognized. And a
trinitarian monotheism that Mohammed held in capital contempt.
Yet why
was this monogamous marriage precept godly?
Well, because it was derived from a godly precedent. A precedent revealed
of the very nature of God. Of His own monogamous
nature. And His own monogamous marriage. The
very nature of His glorious monogamous marriage existing in Heaven.
A monogamous marriage that He will share with His
faithful. If they are faithful to Him alone.
A sharing
for a bride who simply refuses to be deprived. A sharing for a bride who simply refuses to wait for her turn. A sharing for a truly thirsty bride. A sharing
that is FREE!
Come!
And the Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let the one who
hears say: "Come!" And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one
who wants it take the water of life free of charge.
(Rev 22:17 NET)
No comments:
Post a Comment