Ghilah vs. David Wood
David Wood wrote in, Muhammad’s Reason for Not Forbidding Ghilah, “The following Hadith gives us a glimpse of Muhammad’s method of forbidding and accepting various practices: Sunan an-Nasa’i 3328–It was narrated from Aishah that Judamah bint Wahb told her that the Messenger of Allah said: ‘I was thinking of forbidding Ghilah until I remembered that it is done by the Persians and Romans’–(one of the narrators) Ishaq said: ‘(They) do that–and it does not harm their children.’
And they Say They Studied Islam!
What amazes me first and foremost, is that this type of Evangelical Christian who takes it upon themselves to criticize Islam, claim that they have studied Islam for such and such years, but they were not convinced it is a true religion. Well, it is clear they are not convinced, or they pretend to be unconvinced, but did they really study Islam?
First, on his blog, David Wood posts a picture of a Muslim carrying a poster that reads, ‘Islam Will Dominate the World’. David Wood said something about violence in his comment on the poster. Since David Wood seems to take offense at this statement and what he thinks it implies, then, I guess this mean that Christianity does NOT seek to dominate the world? This is very good news for Muslims of the world, especially at a time when one of these two situations has occurred: (a) Muslim navies are cruising all the water-bodies of the world that border Christian countries and are currently occupying a few Christian countries; or, (b) Christian navies are cruising all the water-bodies of the world that border Muslim countries and are currently occupying a few Muslim countries.
If one’s choice is (a) then nothing we may say can change one’s view of the world. It needs a pure and live heart to see correctly, and only Allah can grant such a heart. If one’s answer is (b) then one would be as amazed as I am at this strange attitude displayed by bashers of Islam. To truly describe it, we quote an old Arab saying that reads, “
Second, David Wood quotes An-Nasaii’s version of a hadeeth also collected by Muslim, without mentioning Muslim’s narration or the fact that he collected it. Muslim’s narrations are at a higher grade than An-Nasaii’s narrations. But, who am I to tell these experts on Islam, who studied Islam for years, about what hadeeth collection is higher in grade, especially evangelicals who use Ibn Ishaq’s Seerah as a hadeeth collection, even though
Third, David Wood wrote, “The following Hadith gives us a glimpse of Muhammad’s method of forbidding and accepting various practices.”
–Here are a few comments on this segment of Wood’s argument
Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be on him, said, “Laqad hamamtu an anha ani-l-Ghilah”, which could translate into, “I thought of forbidding Al-Ghilah.” Thus, he, peace be on him, did not forbid ghilah forever. Hammun, the root-word of hamamtu, pertains to a thought crossing one’s mind without acting on the thought. Surprisingly, David Wood used the words thought process in his article while describing what was indeed a thought process. There is nothing wrong with Prophet Muhammad’s method here or anywhere else. What’s wrong is to intentionally deviate and corrupt this hadeeth from its true meaning relying on the old/new Christian method of rejecting anything and everything the Prophet Muhammad said or did.
David Wood is apparently confused, torn between what is an aspect of life and what is an aspect of religion in Islam. He decided on his own that the topic of this hadeeth was about how Prophet Muhammad, peace be on him, received revelation. Islam is again being explained by Christian enthusiasts regardless of what knowledgeable Muslims may say about their own religion.
The hadeeth about ghilah is about a matter of life that the Prophet discussed, and he often benefited from the experience of other nations in this regard. There is nothing in the hadeeth to suggest that the Prophet, peace be on him, was discussing how he received revelation or how to add to the revelation. This is a fantasy invented by those who have no clue what context is about in such texts. The hadeeth about ghilah was not about adding or not adding ghilah to divine inspiration. It was about an entirely different aspect of Islamic Law.
There are hadeeths that demonstrate how and when the Prophet, peace be on him, received revelation, such as this hadeeth, “Allah, the Exalted, revealed to me that, ‘Be humble, and, none of you should oppress others’” (Al-Albani. Sahih Al-Jami`). The hadeeth about ghilah is not of this type.
The hadeeth about
What is the Type of Hadeeth about Ghilah?
Imam Muslim reported that a man came to the Messenger of Allah, peace be on him, saying that he was practicing Al-`Azl, i.e., he did not ejaculate inside his wife’s womb, or he refrained from having sexual intercourse with his wife altogether. When the Prophet asked him why he did that, the man said that he was worried about their nursing baby, i.e., if his wife becomes pregnant while still nursing. The Prophet, salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam (blessing and mercy be on him), said, “If that[Ghilah] would have carried harm, it would have harmed the Persians and the Romans.”
The Arabs used to say that having sexual intercourse with nursing mother causes adverse health effects to nursing baby and reduces the quality of the mother’s milk. The Arabs observed through their own experience that babies of ghilah, as explained here, grow up to be weaker than others while riding horses, for example. This was the reason behind the man mentioned in the previous hadeeth practicing Al-`Azl. However, the Prophet, peace be on him, stated that since this practice was used by Romans and Persians, it would be alright for Muslims to practice it since it did not have substantial health risks on Roman and Persian babies of ghilah, or the risk was negligible. He did not completely deny that there are risks. Rather, in another authentic hadeeth found in Sahih Ibn Majah, he stated that because of ghilah, a child may fall off of his horse when he becomes a man. This may have been the reason why he initially disliked ghilah, as a hadeeth found in Sahih Ibn Majah indicates.
Had the Prophet,
Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim said that the Prophet, salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam, stated that ghilah may cause the nursing baby to grow to be a man who falls off his horse, saying that even though this may cause some harm, it does not kill the baby at infancy or cause it to perish. Ibn Al-Qayyim added that the Prophet “Thought of forbidding [Ghilah] as a preventive measure to avoid the harm that may touch the nursing baby. But he realized that preventing this probable harm carries less weight than the ill effect of men stopping having sexual intercourse with their wives while their wives are still nursing. This is especially the case with regards to young men and those who have a strong sexual drive which cannot be satisfied except if they have sexual intercourse with their wives. He, salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam, saw that the two nations, Persia and Rome, which were among the most numerous and strongest nations then, practice [Ghilah] and do not avoid it, yet, they maintain their vigor and strength. So, he decided not to forbid it [forever].” (Ibn Al-Qayyim. Mufta`h Dar As-Sa`adah)
Imam Al-Khattabi added, “The Prophet, salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam, meant that if the nursing mother had sexual intercourse and became pregnant, her milk may spoil [or become less nutritious] which may make the nursing baby weak. … When the baby grows up to be a man and rides a horse, the weakness of Ghilah may cause him to fall off of the horse.” Therefore, the hadeeth about ghilah was about a health issue, discussing the harm and or benefits of forbidding ghilah. The Prophet, peace be on him, did not say to his Companions that he was thinking about adding ghilah to divine revelation, or that this is how he received divine inspiration from Allah. David Wood invented this notion on his own.
Ghilah vs. Current Medical Authorities
(http://www.drgreene.com/21_362.html)
The Prophet of Allah, salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam, gave his companions a sufficient answer about ghilah centuries before humankind ever heard of this topic.
Note that the segment of the article quoted here states the following:
- “Globally, a new pregnancy is one of the most common reasons for weaning.”
As the hadeeth above states, a man practiced Al-`Azl to avoid the effects of ghilah on his suckling child if his wife became pregnant while nursing.
- “…the milk tastes different or is less plentiful. Sometimes the mother will decide to stop from fatigue, from nipple pain, or from fears about the effect of nursing on the new baby.”
This part of the quoted article demonstrates some of the adverse effects of ghilah.
- “If you maintain adequate fluid intake and adequate nutrition, there will be plenty left over for your breast milk to be a rich source of nutrition. … your one-year-old should be getting so many other rich sources of nutrition at this age … continued nursing can be a great experience, provided that Mom pays attention to her own body’s needs…”
This and similar advice were not adequately available to women before recent times, let alone finding rich sources of nutrition, adequate fluid intake, etc. In older times,
- “[Ghilah] is the norm in many, many cultures today and in most cultures throughout history” including the Persians and the Romans as the Prophet remarked.
The Prophet of Allah, salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam, allowed ghilah for Muslims since its adverse effect is negligible compared to the effect it would have on young men, who have to wait for years to have sexual intercourse with their nursing wives. Also, nations that practiced ghilah still produced men who were healthy and strong.
David Wood Teasing us about the Thought Process of Prophet Muhammad!
David Wood cannot even say the word ‘prophet’ when he mentions the Prophet’s name, even if to follow it by saying that this is what Muslims believe. In contrast, Muslims say ‘Alaihi As-Salam’, that is, mercy and blessings be on him, whenever they mention Prophets Jesus or Moses. We thank Allah that He guided us to the best ways and the means of ascension to Him.
Fourth, David Wood added, “Muhammad says that he was thinking of forbidding the practice. But then he remembered that the Persians and Romans do it, so he didn’t forbid the practice.” As stated here, there is nothing in this hadeeth to indicate that the Prophet Muhammad, peace be on him, was receiving divine revelation or that he was discussing this issue as more than a health issue that was of concern to his generation. This was not part of the revelation
The hadeeth about dharar is used even today in various ways, such as forbidding smoking and using drugs. These two practices, in particular, cause grave harm and various illnesses to one’s own self and to others. There are no explicit Islamic texts that specifically outlaw using drugs or smoking.
Outlawing smoking, for instance, is not part of the divine revelation. Rather, it is part of the Islamic method of avoiding dharar, a law that is tremendously helpful in that when we realize that smoking causes harm to one’s own health and to second and third-hand smokers, we use the method of dharar to outlaw it. This is what the Prophet, salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam, was discussing in the hadeeth about ghilah.
The Prophet, peace be on him, weighed the effect of ghilah and thought about outlawing it as part of Sadd Adh-Dharee`ah, which seeks to close the doors to harm, preventing dharar, before it occurs. This and similar aspects fall under a category of Islamic legislation the judgment about which is left for Muslims to decide if they may cause harm severe enough to warrant their being designated as outlawed or not.
This flexibility granted to Muslims was practiced by the Prophet himself in the hadeeth about ghilah to teach Muslims that not everything in their life has a definite divine rule that regulates it. Some things are left to their human judgment either totally or partially, such as what Allah stated in this Ayah, {O you who believe! Kill not the game while you are in a state of Ihrâm [for Hajj or ‘Umrah (pilgrimage)], and whosoever of you kills it intentionally, the penalty is an offering, brought to the Ka‘bah, of an eatable animal (sheep, goat, cow) equivalent to the one he killed, as adjudged by two just men among you.} (5:95) This flexibility is only part of what makes Islam the dynamic religion it is. Millions of western Christians freely chose Islam as their religion, partly because it is the religion that provides them with the perfect balance between life and religion.
Islam: It is Dynamic and Unique
Contrary to what hostile evangelicals and other enemies of Islam may think, not all aspects discussed by Islam’s Prophet were part of the divine revelation. David Wood and other evangelicals like him are just like someone going to the forest by night to cut wood, in complete darkness. They severely lack knowledge in Islam. Yet, they often invent topics and issues that Muslims do not propagate as part of Islam, then criticize Islam based on what they have invented. This is a typical case where Wood claims that a hadeeth about a matter of life is an example of how Prophet Muhammad received revelation.
What is sad, though, is that this type of Christian only fishes for mistakes. They do not make the least effort to seek the truth. Otherwise, what Muslim scholar and what book written by Muslims suggested that the hadeeth of ghilah is an example of how the Prophet of Islam received divine revelation?
This is not the only time that Prophet Muhammad, peace be on him, treated issues of life or health as a man who was aware of the practices of people around him, or even as a man who made mistakes in his human judgment. Here are a few examples:
1- Anas Ibn Malik reported that Allah’s Messenger, peace be on him, passed by some people who were grafting date trees and said to them, “If you were not to do it, it might be good for you.” They abandoned this practice (even though he did not tell them to abandon it; he only offered his opinion) and there was a decline in the yield. The Prophet,
2- Muhammad, the Prophet of Allah, salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam, thought about surrendering a share of Madinah’s produce to a major Arab tribe in return for their refraining from joining a coalition of major pagan Arab tribes that surrounded Madinah during the battle of Al-Khandaq (the Trench). When he consulted with two of his major Companions, they asked him if he was willing to do that to save them, or if it was a divine revelation. When he said that it was his own opinion, they said that they would not give that tribe what they demanded (Al-Haithami. Majma` Az-Zawa-id. Al-Haithami stated that the chain of narration for this hadeeth is trustworthy, except for one of the narrators whose trustworthiness was of a lesser grade, but still acceptable).
3-
Fifth, David’s statement next is completely false, “Apparently, if he hadn’t remembered that the Persians and Romans practice Ghilah, he would have condemned it, and Muslims today would say that Allah forbids Ghilah.”
Prophet Muhammad did not forever forbid this practice to begin with. Also, he was discussing this practice as it pertains to health, not as part of Islamic divine legislation. The words of the hadeeth said so, “…it does not harm their children.”
Prophet Muhammad did not refrain from forbidding ghilah merely because he remembered what the Romans and Persians did as contrasted to, he forgot. He did not forbid it because he knew that ghilah does not seem to cause severe harm to nursing mother or her suckling baby. This is why the Prophet, peace be on him, said in another narration collected in, Ghayat Al-Maram, “Thumma ra-aitu…” In yet another narration collected by Imam Muslim, he said, “Fa-nadhartu fee…”
‘Thumma ra-aitu’ used in the narration collected in, Ghayat Al-Maram, translates into ‘…then I saw (or realized)’. “`Hatta dhakartu” found in the narration quoted by Wood does not only mean remembered. Dhikr, the root-word of, dhakartu, pertains to remembrance, knowledge, realization, frequent recitation, observance, etc. The narration found in, Sahih Muslim, that reads, ‘Fa-nadhartu fee’, literally translates into, ‘I looked into…’
Therefore, the correct meaning here is that the Prophet, peace be on him, thought about forbidding ghilah forever if it wasn’t for the fact that he knew (observed; witnessed; realized; noticed; saw) that the Romans and Persians practiced ghilah and it did not cause substantial harm to their infants. As usual, David Wood, who does not speak Arabi, relies on an English translation that cannot possibly list all various meanings for, dhakartu, or elaborate at length about its full context in the hadeeth under discussion. Wood tries to build a case for Christianity by relying on a shallow explanation of an Arabi hadeeth insufficiently translated into English.
Muslims Obey Their Prophet
Certainly, Muslims do accept the Prophet’s religious commandments and do obey them. How can David Wood possibly criticize this aspect when it is an essential part of faith? We, the Muslims, thank Allah that we are not like those who claim to believe, yet, break every law Allah sent to every prophet, eat what was clearly prohibited for them in their own holy books, then claim that these commandments came for the Jews
Sixth, David Wood said, “Isn’t it obvious that this had nothing to do with any divine insight on Muhammad’s part, and that what he rejected and accepted was simply a matter of his all-too-human thought processes?”
Here, David Wood admits to the obvious, that this incident had nothing to do with any divine insight on Muhammad’s part. This hadeeth was indeed about the Prophet’s human thought process. Prophet Muhammad, salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam, did not say that he was discussing this as a matter of revelation. He did not include it in the revelation. He never said to his Companions, “Should we add this aspect to divine revelation, then claim it came from Allah?”
This particular issue has nothing to do with other Islamic legislations where the Prophet commanded Muslims to do or not to do. David Wood refutes Prophet Muhammad’s divine inspiration with regards to the entire religion of Islam based on what Prophet Muhammad did not include in the divine inspiration to begin with. Ghilah was not discussed as part of divine inspiration, but as a health issue as the hadeeth clearly testifies. In contrast, here is a part of divine inspiration and why it is a part of divine inspiration, “It was revealed to me that you will be tested in the grave” (Bukhari, and, Muslim). The topic here is: being tested in the grave. Why it is a revelation: because the Prophet, peace be on him, said so!
Seventh, “If so, why are Muslims so obsessed with following Muhammad’s regulations (especially when they include pagan practices, such as bowing to the Ka’ba, etc.)?”
Muslims are not obsessed with anything. They do what the Quran and even the Bible say to do: obey the Prophets. Allah said in the Quran, {He who obeys the Messenger, has indeed obeyed Allâh} (4:80). Both the Old Testament and the New Testament agree, “Believe in the Lord your God, so shall ye be established; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper” (2 Chronicles 20:20); “And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that Prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people” (Acts 3:22). David Wood knows well who that Prophet is!
Otherwise, why were the prophets sent, to be disobeyed? Muslims can never follow the Christian method of believing in the prophets by disobeying them. If Muslims follow this wicked path, they will never prosper. However, I do not really find it strange that David Wood would criticize Muslims for obeying their Prophet. He belongs to a flock that would eat what Jesus never ate and never allowed anyone to eat. This is how they show their obedience and loyalty to their claimed lord, by disobeying him and contradicting his practices. Then they have the courage to criticize Muslims for obeying their Prophet. This makes no sense?
Jalal Abualrub
September, 2018