Ads by Muslim Ad Network


No announcement yet.


No announcement yet.

Female genital mutilation,Haram---Female circumcision,Halal

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Remember
    Female Genital Mutilation comprises all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs whether for cultural, religious or other non-therapeutic reasons.
    are you still sticking with that akhi?
    .لا نريد زعيما يخاف البيت الإبيض
    نريد زعيما يخاف الواحد الأحد
    دولة الإسلامية باقية


    • #32
      Originally posted by abdulhakeem
      To Mutilate in the Name of Jehovah or Allah
      Originally posted by abdulhakeem

      Legitimization of Male and Female Circumcision



      1. Male circumcision

      According to classical Muslim jurists, male circumcision involves the cutting of the foreskin, preferably the whole foreskin. If the man has two penises, some say that both should be circumcised, others say that only the one passing urine should be circumcised. If the child was born circumcised, some are of the opinion he should be left as such, while for others, the knife should be passed over the emplacement of the foreskin to fulfil the Commandment. If the circumcision is incomplete, it should be completed 81.

      2. Female circumcision

      Al-Sukkari, a modern author, describes female circumcision as follows: "For a start, God should be called upon by saying the opening statement: in the name of God, most gracious, most merciful, followed by praise to God and prayer to the Prophet, the author of this supreme makrumah". Female circumcision must be carried out by one male or female surgeon of Muslim faith and devout appearance, knowledgeable of the teaching of Mohammed. The best medical means must be used to reduce pain. Female circumcision must be done by day to allow the physician to perform in full day light, but also in full secrecy; only her mother or her tutor must be present, or the one who feels the most compassion for the girl 82. He does not clarify what female circumcision consists of. For Gad-al-Haq, female circumcision consists of "cutting the skin which is located above the urinary orifice without exaggeration and without rooting it out" 83. Al-Sha'rawi stipulates that if the girl does not have any flesh protruding, circumcision should not be done 84.

      What is described above as in compliance with sunnah remains theoretical. In fact, it is rather ****oridectomy (performed in Egypt) or infibulation (performed in Sudan and Somalia). In Sudan, a study has brought to light that 64% of female circumcisions are done by the traditional matrons, 35% by midwives and 0.7% by physicians 85.

      3. Circumcision of the hermaphrodite

      Classical authors' opinions have differed regarding hermaphrodites, persons with both male and female genitalia. Some say that both must be circumcised, while others say that only the organ passing urine should be cut because it implies rights of inheritance 86. Finally, for others, one must delay circumcision until it is possible to tell which one of the two is predominant. Cautiously, Al-Sukkari, a modern author, chooses the first opinion, meaning circumcision of both sexes, to minimize the chances of mistake 87.

      4. Age for male and female circumcision

      Jurists are not unanimous regarding the age at which circumcision should be carried out. Different opinions are presented: any time; at puberty; before 10 years of age (the age when one has often to hit the child to force him to pray); at about 7 years for the boy; on the seventh day (some take the day of birth into consideration, others not); especially not on the seventh day or before (because it is a Jewish custom and one does not want to be put in the same category with them). Al-Mawardi suggests that circumcision be done at 7 years of age at the latest, but preferably at 7 days or at 40 days, except in case of inconvenience. That is Al-Sukkari's opinion for the boys. For the girls, he suggests the age of 7 to 10 years, to help them cope with the procedure 88.

      According to testimony gathered by Wedad Zenie-Ziegler, female circumcision in Egypt is done in principle one week after birth, but it can be done at 2 months, sometimes at 7 months or even 7 years89. Nawal El-Saadawi says that in Egypt it takes place at the age of 7 or 8, before the girl starts menstruating 90. Jurists have asked themselves if persons who died without circumcision should be circumcised. The majority of legists reject such an idea because it affects the deceased's physical integrity (hurmah) and exhibits his private part ('awrah); moreover, it is useless, the goal of circumcision being to fulfil an act of worship and to be clean for prayer, which is of no use to the deceased. For others, circumcision of the deceased is necessary; his foreskin is placed in the shroud. They call on a narration by Mohammed, according to which one must do to the dead what is done to those getting married. Al-Sukkari, a modern author, leans toward the first opinion 91.

      URGENT!!! your help is badly needed - fundraising for marriage


      • #33
        Originally posted by abdulhakeem
        To Mutilate in the Name of Jehovah or Allah
        Originally posted by abdulhakeem

        Legitimization of Male and Female Circumcision



        The Koran says: "Noone questions Him about anything He does, but men are questioned" (21:23). God does not have to justify his norms even if Muslim jurists are of the opinion that divine norms are intended to bring good to Man. The criteria of goodness elude Man most of the time.

        However, there is a tendency among the Muslims as well as the Jews today, to try to justify religious norms a posteriori, conferring beneficial results upon them, real or fictitious. It is a recourse to reason to justify religion. Cases in point are circumcision and dietary taboos. It proves that the idea of God hurting human beings simply in order to brand them like cattle is not accepted anymore.

        The supporters of male and female circumcision, after proving the existence of a related religious norm, will buckle down to demonstrate the advantages of circumcision as well as the disadvantages of non-circumcision, in order to comfort the believer, while answering back to those opposed to it. As for the opponents of female circumcision, they, unless they are unbelievers, rejecting any religious justification, also fight on two fronts: after denying the existence of a religious norm prescribing female circumcision (the only one they are interested in), they try to prove its harmful characteristics in order to ban it.

        And if reason does not succeed in proving that religion is correct? Then, let it be challenged, as will be seen further on.


        1. Advantages of male circumcision

        Muslim authors skim over male circumcision. They only see advantages and, most of all, the subject does not trigger any debate in the West. According to Al-Hadidi (an opponent of female circumcision), male non-circumcision can cause penile infections arising from urine droplets. It can develop into cancer, requiring the penis to be amputated entirely 92. Circumcision is even believed to prevent cancer in the circumcised man's partner, as mentioned by Doctor Al-Fangari, who goes on to state that it helps to extend the length of copulation, thanks to the liberation of the glans 93. Their Jewish counterparts make the same type of arguments. It is enough to have the Christians, to whom Saint-Paul suggests circumcision in their heart rather than in their flesh, turn green with envy 94! If only Saint Paul could have heard our Jewish and Muslim medical experts before rejecting the obligation to circumcise!

        Imam Shaltut does not find any basis for male and female circumcision, be it in the Koran or in the Sunnah from Mohammed. Therefore it must be judged according to the general Islamic consensus which forbids hurting anyone, unless advantages outnumber disadvantages. For the boys, he states that circumcision is beneficial because it cuts off the foreskin which harbours filth and promotes cancer and other diseases. As such, it is a protective and preventive measure. Thus its mandatory quality in Muslim law 95.

        Logically, if male circumcision were beneficial, it should be generalized. Male circumcision cannot however be justified solely on the basis of its usefulness in certain pathological conditions. A foot may be amputated under medical imperative if it is gangrenous and amputation will then certainly be beneficial. Nevertheless, nobody would call for generalized foot amputation among the followers of any given religion 96. The argument is compelling, unless it can be shown that the relevant religious adepts have penises noticeably different from those of their fellow humans.

        Let us point out here that circumcision has its enthusiasts among Christians who believe the Bible to be a scientific book. This is especially the case in the U.S.A. where obstetricians "sever at birth the foreskins of future Methodists, Adventists, Catholics, Sectarians of Love, if not good brave Atheists". To them, uncircumcised males "can only be country people and half-witted" 97. In that country, the number of new-born who are circumcised is estimated at 50%. But in 1975, the American health commission stated that circumcision was not a good hygienic measure. Since then, circumcision has been reduced considerably 98. The pro-circumcision people then launched a campaign to persuade the commission to reverse its decision, claiming that circumcision prevents infantile urinary tract infections and even AIDS transmission, a claim denied by Swedish experts 99.

        2. Disadvantages of male circumcision 100.

        He names the five "reasonable" reasons produced by the Western partisans of circumcision, reasons which support those given by the Muslims:
        1. Circumcision testifies to the legitimate concern of lifting the sexuality of the individual to perfection;
        2. Circumcision is a good hygienic precaution;
        3. Circumcision prevents masturbation;
        4. Circumcision prevents cancer;
        5. Circumcision allows better control at the "plateau" stage.

        After taking apart those reasons one by one 101, he points out that the foreskin of the infant acts as a sheath preventing the glans from soaking permanently in urine and protecting it from irritations and inflammations due to contact with clothing, soaked swaddling clothes and diapers. He insists that circumcision at birth is "practically always responsible for inflamed stricture of the urinary meatus". The protective function of the foreskin for the glans and the penis retains its usefulness during erotic activities, thus the importance of the foreskin at the affective level during childhood, youth and adulthood 102.

        He concludes that "there is no [medical] reason to systematically deprive all new-born, little boys or men of an integral part of the normal human anatomy". Even for foreskins with problems, he advises against circumcision and prefers those simple, surgical procedures which retain the foreskin. He recommends that plastic surgeons apply themselves to mastering the technique of possible preputial reconstruction for circumcised patients suffering from "balanic peeling", one of the consequences of circumcision 103.

        As for surgeons requested to perform circumcision, he asks them to refuse to comply. If it is an adult who makes the request, the surgeon has the right to raise the matter of conscience, as some do, based on liberalism, to avoid carrying out abortions. If it is a normal child brought in by his parents, "the surgeon is entitled to call upon the impossibility of committing an assault and battery on a minor and advise them to wait until their offspring reaches his majority" 104.

        It might be necessary to add to the doctors' advice, the psychologists' answer to these questions: what is the influence of circumcision on the victims of paranoia105? on the conscious or unconscious male rage and violence in the American culture? on the conflicts between Muslims themselves or between Jews and Muslims? It would be also useful to know what is the relation between circumcision and situational homosexuality (by opposition to constitutional homosexuality).


        1. Advantages of female circumcision in compliance with the sunnah

        Circumcision not carried out according to the sunnah is forbidden by all Muslim religious circles. For some, "the practice of female circumcision as it is carried out on their daughters by some women from backward countries, is an offence punishable by law"106. Nobody comes to its defense even if it is the most practiced form of circumcision in Muslim countries. This condemnation is based mostly on the exciser's narration, mentioned earlier. What is strange in this case is that those very religious circles do not try to use this narration in a positive way to fight the practice. As an example, it is estimated that 89.2% of the women in North Sudan are circumcised: 82.3% by infibulation; only 19.2% of Christian women are circumcised that way. More Christians (57.7%) than Muslims (20.8%) appear to favour abolition of this practice for their daughters 107.

        If these religious scholars, all male chauvinists, are opposed to female circumcision not in compliance with the sunnah, they nevertheless do approve of it when it is sunnah-conform. This type of female circumcision, by the way, is not described fully: for some, it is only removal of a minimal amount of ****oris skin in application of the exciser's narration; for others, it involves the whole ****oris and labia minora.

        The goal of defending female circumcision in compliance with the sunnah is expressed in no uncertain terms by Al-I'tissam, an Islamic magazine from Cairo. This magazine protests against the WHO, accusing the organization of "distorting the truth of Islam"; Al-I'tissam requests Al-Azhar and all religious scholars to "open their eyes and be on the alert for those ideas coming to us from outside, so we can fight them, prove their foolishness and save Islamic customs" 108. Here are the advantages of female circumcision according to its male supporters:

        A) It maintains cleanliness

        Doctor Hamid Al-Ghawabi states that bad smells in women, cleanliness notwithstanding, can only be eliminated by cutting off the ****oris and labia minora109. B) It prevents diseases

        The number of nymphomaniacs is less among circumcised women. The husband may catch this disease and even die of it 110. Female circumcision prevents vaginal cancer 111 and swelling of the ****oris which could drive the woman to masturbation or homosexual relations 112.

        C) It brings calm and gives radiance to the face

        Female circumcision shields the girl from nervousness at an early age and prevents her from getting a yellow face. This statement is based on a narration by Mohammed: "Circumcision is makrumah for women" and "give them a glowing face" 113. The exciser's narration is also quoted to say that circumcision makes a woman's face more beautiful and makes her more attractive for her husband 114. According to a supporter of female circumcision, the latter brings good health and feminine grace to the girl and protects her morality, chastity and honour, maintaining within reason, of course, the necessary sexual sensitivity 115.

        D) It keeps the couple together and prevents drug use

        Doctor Hamid Al-Ghawabi admits that female circumcision does reduce the sexual instinct in women, but he sees this as a positive effect. With age, the male sexual instinct lessens. His circumcised wife will then be at the same level as him. If she was not, her husband would be unable to satisfy her, which then would lead him to drug-use in order to succeed 116. E) It prevents her falling into what is forbidden

        This is the most frequently cited reason. Professor Al-'Adawi from Al-Azhar says that female circumcision is makrumah, that is helps (the woman) "to remain shy and virtuous. In the Orient, where the climate is hot, a girl gets easily aroused if she is not circumcised. It makes her shameless and prey to her sexual instincts, except those to whom God shows compassion" 117.

        Judge 'Arnus says that female circumcision diminishes sexual instinct which, if not kept in control, reduces the person to the condition of an animal, but if this sexual instinct does not exist, then circumcision reduces her to a lifeless state. He favours moderation and notes that intact men and women have, more often than not, a "one track mind" 118. Salim, Chairman of the Muslim Supreme Court (abolished in 1955), reiterates that female circumcision is a makrumah, a meritorious action, that the woman is under no obligation to submit to, but preferably she should. He adds that circumcision protects girls from infection, swelling of her external genitalia and from strong psychic reactions and sexual excitement which, if repressed, lead to neurosis or, if unleashed, lead to the path of vice. This happens especially during youth, when hormones of reproduction are at their peak. Salim goes on to describe this circumcision. The procedure consists of cutting off the bulging part of the ****oris which is out of the hood "so as not to become a cause of arousal while the girl is moving, rubbing against her clothing, riding animals, etc... Thus its name khafd: to lower the level" 119. Gad-al-Haq, Great Sheikh of Al-Azhar, adds that our times call for female circumcision "because of mixing of the sexes at public gatherings. If the girl is not circumcised, she subjects herself to multiple causes of excitation leading her to vice and perdition in a depraved society" 120. 2. Disastrous consequences of any kind of female circumcision

        Opponents of female circumcision reject it because of the seriousness of the complications which depend on the method adopted.

        A) Physical and mental damage

        Many complications may occur after female circumcision. Doctor Mahran classifies them as follows:
        • Immediate complications: post-operative shock, pain, haemorrhages, infections, urinary complications and accidental injuries to surrounding organs.
        • Later physical complications: painful scars, keloid formation, labial adherences, ****oridal cysts, vulva mutilation, kidney stones, sterility.
        • Psychosexual complications: in the woman: a sense of loss of her femininity, lack of libido, less frequent coitus, absence of orgasm, depression and psychosis, high rate of divorce; in the man: premature ejaculation, polygamy.
        • Obstetric complications 121.

        There is no surgical technique which will ever repair this mutilation, which will ever bring back the erogenous sensitivity of the amputated receptors. The erotic function in an excised woman is destroyed for ever. The surgeon can only correct the complications; if the mutilated woman's genitalia will never again give her pleasure, at least it should not cause her undue suffering 122.

        The Muslim enthusiasts of female circumcision do not deny those complications, but state that they arise out of the manner in which the surgery is performed, mostly because nobody pays attention to the conditions laid down by Muslim law. Al-Sukkari writes: if one goes to a barber for an appendectomy, must we conclude that this form of surgery has never been provided for in an Islamic book and thus should be banned because the way it is performed is wrong? He adds that female circumcision has been a practice for centuries and is a custom accepted by Muslim law. The so-called consequences never occurred in the past. And if we hear of them today, the responsibility lies with those who perform it 123.

        B) Drug use

        We saw earlier that the enthusiasts of female circumcision called sunnah plead in favour of it because it prevents the use of drugs. The opponents use the reverse argument 124. The link between female circumcision and the hashish plague in Egypt has been widely exposed by El-Masry. Female circumcision distorts sexual relations: "Very few healthy males can fully succeed in bringing a circumcised woman to orgasm. She has lost her capacity for pleasure. The man will soon have to admit that he alone cannot do it. There is only one solution: hashish". He quotes many references, including Police Chief Safwat for whom: "narcotics are widely used in Egypt, because they are linked in people's minds to sexual activities, themselves linked to excision, unknown in Europe". Doctor Hanna adds: "The man will resort to narcotics to satisfy his wife sexually. Excision is responsible for her lack of arousal and the husband has to take drugs to be able to hold his erection as long as necessary". He states that women are the ones to request that their husbands use drugs before sex: "They know from experience that it is their only chance of reaching orgasm, for hashish is the only cure for their mutilated ****oris" 125. The Cairo magazine Al-Tahrir draws the following conclusion in its issue of August 20, 1957: "If you want to fight against narcotics, ban excision" 126.

        The same link is observed between female circumcision and narcotics in Yemen where the plague of qat is widespread. An attempt to ban it in the British Colony of Aden, in April 1957, almost triggered a revolt. Yemenis saw in this measure "an infringement upon their basic rights". Women themselves showed their reprobation, claiming it was an attack on their conjugal lives. Since June 24, 1958, the use of qat has been legal in Aden 127.

        C) Familial problems

        The woman, having no sexual release, becomes rebellious and neurotic. Instead of protecting her morality, female circumcision leads her elsewhere looking for sexual satisfaction at any cost. Thus the obsessive belief in djinn (zar), which does not exist anywhere else but in Egypt "as if genies (djinns) could only live in Egypt" 128.

        D) Ineffectiveness in preventing diseases

        For Doctor Al-Hadidi, there is no medical value in female circumcision, contrary to male circumcision, since the woman does not have a foreskin retaining germs 129. Doctor Nawal El-Saadawi denies also that female circumcision will reduce the incidence of genital cancer 130.

        URGENT!!! your help is badly needed - fundraising for marriage


        • #34
          Originally posted by abdulhakeem
          To Mutilate in the Name of Jehovah or Allah
          Originally posted by abdulhakeem

          Legitimization of Male and Female Circumcision



          The arguments on costs and benefits of male and female circumcision might be of some value if one accepts an absolute parameter to begin with: respect for physical integrity. Any infringement upon the latter must be forbidden or permitted only on the basis of the costs and benefits of circumcision. At present, this seems to be the case neither among Muslims, nor among others, especially where male circumcision is concerned.

          As for female circumcision, as we said earlier, Muslim religious circles are opposed to it, if it is not conform to sunnah, mostly because of the exciser's narration. As far as sunnah itself is concerned, those circles refuse to condemn it on principle and the criteria mentioned above, even if differences of opinion can be noticed among them.

          1. To apply the norm for the norm's sake

          Hamrush, Chairman of the fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar, rejects the idea that female circumcision prevents diseases or keeps girls healthy since, contrary to boys, they do not have a foreskin to harbour filth. He also rejects the idea that it is a protection of the woman's honour and morality, keeping her from throwing caution to the winds. If it were the case, then one would assume that circumcision is an obligation, and not just a makrumah. However, the Sheikh holds the opinion that female circumcision should be performed to fulfil the teaching of Mohammed 131. 2. The norm has benefits unknown to reason

          Professor Al-Laban says that simple scientific observation must not be used to destroy the norms established by God (including male and female circumcision) and announced by Mohammed, but rather confirm them 132. If we do not understand the wisdom of those norms, the deficiency is to be found in our reasoning, not with God. The Islamic law is the final law and is to rule at all times. Our human brains cannot possibly find fault with it. Mohammed does not speak from the heat of passion 133. He explains how science confirms the religious norm. Sunnah circumcision lets the blood vessels heal (what other types of circumcision do not) and makes purification easy once the excrescence is cut off because it is this part which retains urine and menstrual fluid. This wisdom of the Islamic norm was subsequently acknowledged by science 134.

          In an Egyptian fatwa of June 23, 1951, it is said:

          Medical theories relative to diseases and to their cure are not constant; they are subjected to changes with time and research. Therefore, it is impossible to use them as grounds to criticize female circumcision. The Lawmaker, wise, expert and knowledgeable, uses his wisdom to rectify the human creation. Experience has taught us that, given time, the true meaning of the Lawmaker's wisdom, which was hidden, is unveiled to us 135. 3. Neither misdeed nor interdiction

          Al-Sukkari states that Mohammed never indicated any reservations regarding the harmfulness of female circumcision. How, in these conditions, could any ordinary man forbid it under this pretense? Can we imagine the Prophet keeping silent about something hurtful to the girl136? Man has no power to allow or to forbid, only God does, and his wishes are set out in the Koran or by His Prophet137. If in spite of that, some countries forbid female circumcision, it is a State decision and does not make any difference: the religious law allows it 138. 4. To maintain the custom in the absence of misdeeds

          Imam Shaltut, as mentioned above, does not see any reason for male or female circumcision, either in the Koran or in the Sunnah of Mohammed. To him, female circumcision has no medical value, the girl having no foreskin to hold filth. He packs into one sack those for and those against female circumcision: both groups go too far. He comes to the conclusion that female circumcision could be a makrumah for men who are not used to feeling the ****oris protruding; for the girl, it comes to the same as taking care of her beauty, dabbing perfume or removing axillary hair 139. Elsewhere, Imam Shaltut is in favour of keeping the tradition of female circumcision until proven harmful 140141.

          A less clear stand-point is taken by Al-Banna, Egyptian Deputy Minister for Religious Affairs. To him, female circumcision cannot be separated from the benefit criterion: God does not burden us, if there is no benefit. So, if there is any value to circumcision, one must abide by it. If not, one must give it up. Competent physicians must take a stand, having considered all girls from different climates, because the problem might not be the same in every country, or even with every girl. If a girl is in peculiar circumstances, she must be circumcised; if not, let Nature take its course, as God intended it. As long as no study has been done, Muslims are free to go either way 142.

          According to Professor Khallaf, physicians may not condemn female circumcision based on isolated cases alone, but compare excised and uncircumcised girls and then give their opinion. If they conclude that female circumcision is harmful and as such, they decide to forbid it, the prohibition will neither be contrary to a religious text, nor to the unanimous position of religious scholars 143.

          5. Permitted but soon to be forbidden because of adverse consequences

          Doctor 'Abd-al-Wahid presents a strange reasoning, to say the least. After stating that female circumcision is forbidden the same way as it is forbidden to chop off one's finger, he admits that the Lawmaker (God) gave permission for the sunnah, any excess being forbidden. However, he adds that this form of circumcision is allowed, but not mandatory and suggests that it be forbidden due to its medical and psychological consequences, which he recounts in detail 144.

          6. It must be forbidden

          The most daring and most coherent opinion coming from a religious leader against female circumcision is that of Sheikh Abu-Sabib, a Sudanese, whom we mentioned earlier. He spoke at the Seminar on Traditional Practices (Dakar, 1984). The narrations of Mohammed about female circumcision are not reliable. They and the Koran do not require anyone to suffer, when science proves the harm done by this mutilation 145. Only the two last-mentioned opinions urge the banning of female circumcision and opt in favour of physical integrity. Others take great care to saying nothing about prohibition, even if some leave the choice up to the believer. Let us study this prohibition at the State level.

          URGENT!!! your help is badly needed - fundraising for marriage


          • #35
            Originally posted by abdulhakeem
            To Mutilate in the Name of Jehovah or Allah
            Originally posted by abdulhakeem

            Legitimization of Male and Female Circumcision



            Female circumcision brings up many questions:
            • Do we have the right to judge the customs of other societies and if so, on which criteria?
            • Can we remain indifferent, in the name of "difference", to mutilations inflicted upon young children?
            • Must we make a distinction between the different kinds of circumcision?
            • Must we forbid circumcision immediately and completely or progressively?
            • May the practice be allowed in hospitals on a temporary basis?

            The Muslim circles in favour of female circumcision see an imperialistic action in the Western campaign against it. Al-Sukkari writes that, if some are trying to forbid it, "it is because the West has succeeded in imposing secular materialistic views on our sciences, our tradition, our artistic culture" 146. Imam Shaltut who accepts the idea of forbidding female circumcision if proven harmful, underlines the fact that it should not be prohibited under pressure from others - a polite nod toward the West - , but only if proven harmful 147.

            Jomo Kenyatta, late President of Kenya, used to say: "Excision and infibulation unite us tightly; they prove our fecundity" 148. To which Pierre Leulliette replies:

            Millions of children between the age of 2 and 14 are horribly tortured in an atmosphere of collective hysteria, in contempt of their genitalia, in scorn of their bodies, in defiance of their lives... That barbarian culture! Is it not the lowest manifestation of the unlimited, omnipresent phallocracy? Those mutilations! Aren't they first and foremost an example of man acting out his most secret hatred and deepest fear of woman 149?

            This problem is now on the agenda of international organizations. On July 10, 1958, the Economic and Social Committee of the United Nations invited the WHO "to undertake a study on the persistence of customs involving ritual practices on girls and on the measures in effect or planned to put an end to those practices" 150. The answer was clear: "[The World Health Assembly] believes that the ritual practices in question, resulting from social and cultural conceptions, are not within the WHO's jurisdiction" 151. And this, in spite of an overwhelming report prepared by the WHO's very own Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office 152.

            In a communication on excision dated September 23, 1980, UNICEF explained that its approach to eradicating a 2000 year old cultural and traditional practice "is based on the belief that the best way to handle the problem is to trigger awareness through education of the public, members of the medical profession and practitioners of traditional health care with the help of local collectivities and their leaders" 153.

            In 1984, the Inter-African Committee stipulated that "for understandable psychological reasons, it is the black women who should have the say in the matter". This committee asked for restraint, in order that the project might be successful, claiming that "the wave of uncontrollable and violent denunciations of those mutilations on the part of Western countries" was doing more harm than good 154. On the subject of legal prohibition, this same committee, in 1984, warned against "untimely haste which would result in rash legal measures that would never be enforced" 155. As for the health professionals, they were quite satisfied with themselves in condemning "the medicalisation and modernisation of the female circumcision procedure, as non-conform to medical ethics" and to advise that "no medical or paramedical personnel be allowed to practice it", for the same reason 156.

            This problem is puzzling for the Western countries. Dominique Vernier writes:

            As soon as the first preliminary investigations of cases on excision started [in France] (the Press mentions them as early as 1982-83), the Justice Department was put in an awkward position and has been ever since 157.

            This perplexity is due to the principles of the French penal code. Indeed, the parents have no intention to do violence to their children or to batter them, but rather intend to respect a custom, without the application of which their daughters, once adults, would not be able to integrate into their country of origin 158. On the other hand, in practice, it is easy for a couple who want their daughter excised to take her back to her country of origin, paralysing the law of the adopted country. Last, but not least, even if the countries of origin adopt some laws against those practices, those laws would not be able to defeat a massively accepted practice, which has become an integral part of that society 159.


            This debate about the right to be different was settled in favour of the girl's right to physical integrity (but not the boy's).

            The WHO gave up its above mentioned reservations of 1959. It became involved in 1977 in the creation of the first Workshop on female excision. In February 1979, its Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office organized in Khartoum the first International Seminar on Traditional Practices affecting Women's and Children's Health. This Seminar recommended that specific national policies be adopted in order to abolish female circumcision 160. In June 1982, the WHO made a formal declaration of its position on excision to the Committee of Human Rights of the United Nations. The WHO approved the recommendations made at the Seminar in Khartoum and added: "It has always been the WHO's opinion that female circumcision should never be performed by health professionals in any situation under any conditions, be it in hospitals or other specialized settings" 161. The most recent stand was taken in 1989: the Regional Committee of the WHO for Africa passed a resolution urging the participating governments:
            • to adopt appropriate policies and strategies in order to eradicate female circumcision;
            • to forbid medicalisation of female circumcision and to discourage health professionals from performing such surgery 162.

            A turnaround was also made by the Inter-African Committee. Whereas in 1984, it had warned against promulgating laws against female circumcision, it requested such laws in 1987, because "neither the efforts nor the research nor the campaigns ever had any real impact" 163. Three years later, it reinforced its position, requesting promulgation of specific laws "forbidding the practice of female genital mutilations and other sexual abuses and making provision for sentencing anyone guilty of such practices". This law should provide "an especially severe punishment for health professionals" 164.

            Some Western countries have timidly followed in the footsteps of the two above-mentioned organizations.

            For instance, in 1981, France adopted article 312, paragraph 3 of the Penal Code, stating:

            When acts of violence or privation have been habitually inflicted, the sentence to be imposed upon the guilty party shall be: life imprisonment if there is mutilation, amputation, deprivation of the use of a limb, blindness, loss of an eye and other permanent disabilities or death, even if the guilty party did not intend such a result.

            This article is invoked against female circumcision even though the word is not mentioned in the text. In Sweden, a 1982 law forbids any operation on an external organ aiming at mutilating it or altering it definitely, whether or not consent is given165. Great Britain did the same in 1985 166.

            In Switzerland, article 122 of the Penal Code stipulates:

            Anyone who has mutilated a person's body, one of the limbs or one of the important organs, or rendered the limb or the organ unfit to function, will be sentenced to a maximum of 10 years reclusion or to between 6 months and 5 years of imprisonment.

            Moreover, in 1983, the Central Committee for Medical Ethics of the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences took a very firm position against female circumcision and its practice by medical professionals 167 168.

            Last edited by abdulhakeem; 27-11-04, 09:05 PM.
            URGENT!!! your help is badly needed - fundraising for marriage


            • #36
              Originally posted by AbuMubarak
              are you still sticking with that akhi?
              No, Amnesty International is.

              I'd check with my primary care doctor before I would make a judgement about the benefits or risks of undergoing any medical procedure for my self or my family.
              Please Re-update your Signature


              • #37
                Originally posted by abdulhakeem
                To Mutilate in the Name of Jehovah or Allah
                Originally posted by abdulhakeem

                Legitimization of Male and Female Circumcision



                One might have logically expected that those Western organizations and laws would draw a distinction between the different forms of female circumcision, in as much as minimal female circumcision can be compared to male circumcision. But this is not the case as already seen. During the above mentioned Conference of European Studies on Female Genital Mutilation, the Netherlands tried to have such a distinction made, to no avail; the WHO vetoed it. Doctor Mehra, representing the WHO, explained to me that this organization fears it would be impossible to control the practice if one permitted one particular form 170.

                This firm attitude opposed to all forms of female circumcision is not shared by Muslim law. The latter makes a distinction between the permitted female circumcision called sunnah, while other forms, though widely practiced, are condemned by religious circles. This distinction seems also to apply in Muslim countries.

                In Sudan, a law of 1946 classified infibulation as an infraction punishable by a fine and imprisonment. It was abrogated under public pressure and replaced by an authorization for professional midwives to practice sunnah 171.

                On an undated flyer, written in Arabic, the Sudanese Association of Struggle against Traditional Practices states:
                • Female circumcision (khafd) is an attack on the physical integrity and an alteration of the human being created by God in the very best way and in the very best form.
                • Female circumcision is a savage butchery that divine religions do not allow.
                • Female circumcision is neither a duty nor a sunnah, but a practice of the pre-Islamic era (al-gahiliyyah: the era of ignorance) against which the Prophet warned us in his narration: "Cut lightly and do not overdo it as it is more pleasant for the woman and better for the husband".
                • Female circumcision does not protect chastity which is better guarded by education promoting good morality and healthy teaching of Islam.
                • Female circumcision preceded religions and is practiced by many peoples of different religions and beliefs of which only the Sudan, Egypt and Somalia are Muslim.
                • Therefore, stop circumcising girls.
                This organization, while rejecting female circumcision in general, seems, in the 3rd paragraph, to propose the sunnah, instead of the pharaonic circumcision now prevalent in Sudan. A document prepared by the National Committee of Social Assistance in collaboration with UNICEF-Khartoum is doing the same. This document explains that the light form of circumcision is named sunnah which means it is conform with the tradition of Mohammed: it is a way of legitimating it rather that eradicating it 172.

                A similar attitude is adopted in Egypt. This country has promoted a governmental decree (No. 74-1959) regarding female circumcision. The text is far from clear. It states:
                1. 1. It is forbidden for physicians to perform the surgical procedure of female circumcision. If one wishes it, then only partial circumcision may be carried, but not total circumcision.
                2. 2. Female circumcisions are forbidden in the clinics of the Ministry of Health.
                3. 3. Certified midwives have no right to perform any surgical procedure whatsoever including female circumcision 173.
                This text is taken from a recent collective report on the woman's life and her health. The authors state that this text is not good as it does not forbid female circumcision. A law should be promulgated to abolish once and for all any kind of female circumcision 174.

                Egyptian juridical works and anthologies of law pertaining to public health never mention this decree. One never finds any judgements on it. On the other hand, the Egyptian courts have convicted a barber for having practiced circumcision on a boy who consequently died. Contrary to the physician, the judgement states, the barber is not protected by law if the result of his action is death or disability. The judge refused to consider laudable or charitable intentions or the absence of criminal intent. In this case, the Court applied article 200 of the Penal Code which makes provision for 3 to 7 years of forced labour or imprisonment in cases of voluntary injury without intention to kill, but in fact causing death 175. In another judgement, the Court of Cassation stated that a midwife has no right to practice circumcision, the right to perform surgery being reserved to physicians only, in pursuance of the first article of law 415/1954. The Court added that any attack on physical integrity, except in cases of necessity authorized by law, is punishable, unless the acts are performed by a physician. The midwife had circumcised a boy and mistakenly amputated his glans, causing permanent disability that the Court estimated at 25%. The midwife was sentenced to 6 months forced labour, suspended on condition of good behaviour during 3 years 176.


                Everybody agrees that legal measures will never be enough to stop female circumcision. A conscious awareness must be raised among the victims themselves. First, one must try to understand the reasons for those practices. In the meantime, in order to avoid the worst, shouldn't they be permitted to be performed in hospitals, in a less severe form?

                1. Provision of medical care

                As we have noted above, the WHO, the Inter-African Committee, the Declaration of the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences and the London Declaration all dismiss this possibility as ethically wrong. They even ask for strict sanctions against members of the medical profession who perform female circumcision.

                This attitude may be open to criticism. A radical legal prohibition will only encourage female circumcision to go underground. It will then be performed by persons without proper knowledge of the possible complications, thus endangering the woman's health. The Senegalese representative raised the issue while the Convention on the Rights of the Child was being drawn up. Thus the actual phrasing of article 24, paragraph 3177.

                Dominique Vernier is of the opinion that the medicalisation of circumcision as is practised among the urban intellectual elite of some African countries and in some Italian hospitals, in spite of the physicians' hostility, should be accepted. She suggests that symbolic excision be substituted for de facto excision as it is done in Guinea, where the blacksmith's wife performs a light cut sufficient to draw a few drops of blood. This is a way to respect the ritual without mutilating the child 178.

                Medical care implies the risk of legalising and perpetuating female circumcision especially because of the economic repercussions. During the U.N. Seminar in Ouagadougou, some mentioned that the medical profession takes the place of the traditional matrons and excises in hospitals in order to make a financial profit and, by reducing health risks, they perpetuate the practice: a guarantee of making money. Their greed, having no limit, leads them to ignore the horror behind each sexual mutilation. Well aware of the trust and respect given to them by the masses, they abuse the naive parents and reassure them that the custom is well grounded. According to those at the Seminar, one must fight against such a tendency which is only going to add a new legitimacy to excision 179.

                2. Comprehension

                A. Gaudio and R. Pelletier see in female circumcision "an expression of male power" 180, "a demonic desire to control female sexuality, an endless tyranny of the dominating male behind the alibi of culture" 181.

                Nawal El-Saadawi, a victim of excision, explains why female circumcision still goes on in Arab society under the male iron will:

                The importance given to virginity and an intact hymen in these societies is the reason why female circumcision still remains a very widespread practice despite a growing tendency, especially in urban Egypt, to do away with it as something outdated and harmful. Behind circumcision lies the belief that, by removing parts of girls' external genitals organs, sexual desire is minimized. This permits a female who has reached the dangerous age of puberty and adolescence to protect her virginity, and therefore her honour, with greater ease. Chastity was imposed on male attendants in the female harem by castration which turned them into inoffensive eunuchs. Similarly female circumcision is meant to preserve the chastity of young girls by reducing their desire for sexual intercourse 182.

                She adds that female circumcision is a means of dominating women in a patriarchal society where a man can have more than one wife. The society uses various means to sexually bind her to one man and to control who is the father of her children 183 184.

                Economics can also explain why circumcision is still going on, to take an example mentioned above, when it is performed in hospitals. It is also evident among traditional circles where midwives are not about to give up so lucrative a practice 185. In some areas, the profession of exciser is inherited from mother to daughter and the economic survival of the family depends upon it. If the practice were to be eradicated, it would remove the family's only source of income. Accordingly, some have recommended retraining women who practise excision; as matrons, they can give up practicing excision and still earn a living 186. Economics plays a role in male circumcision as well. In Canada, where medical insurers in some Provinces refuse to reimburse the costs of circumcision, it appears to be becoming less common 187.

                Also, the dowry is higher if the girl is a virgin at the time of her marriage. Virginity is a money-making asset. That is why some nations are so keen on infibulation 188.

                3. Education

                Nawal El-Saadawi states that the girls with whom she talked were not aware of the prejudice caused by their circumcision. Some even thought it was good for health and hygiene, especially because, in their language, the word taharah means purification.

                Girls believed that the purpose of the surgery was just that: purification. People would not speak ill of them, they would behave and their husbands would not be disgusted. After healing had taken place, they had the inner satisfaction of being purified. Nawal El-Saadawi got the same type of response from her medical students who had never been taught, be it by teachers or by textbooks, the sexual function of the ****oris. No question was ever put in exams on the role of the ****oris. The ****oris was considered unimportant 189.

                According to the testimonies gathered by Wedad Zenie-Ziegler from Egyptian women, peasants practice female circumcision because "it has always been done": they do not know why 190. "The idea that it could be a mutilation is foreign to them" 191.

                Wedad Zenie-Ziegler adds that women will "make efforts to perpetuate this ritual as long as they do not understand the uselessness of the sacrifice and that it is part of an immense conspiracy aimed at subjecting them to male domination" 192.

                URGENT!!! your help is badly needed - fundraising for marriage


                • #38

                  Firstly, i would like to make it quite clear that neither I nor you have the ability to undermine Islam. Islam stands for itself and nothing any one of us can do can or would undermine it.

                  Secondly, I, personally have no objection to an adult volunteering to be curcunscised or anything else that an adult wants to do with their own body. I have known adults putting studs through their noses, even having themselves castrated. That is their choice.

                  My objection is inflicting this barbarac practice upon young children for anything other than essential medical reasons.

                  It is irreversable, medically unnecessary, and an interference in the sexual development and life of the child.

                  For boys there is a rare condition called phimosis which does require circumcision. The for****n of a boy shouldn't be movable until he is about 5 years, and this natural process shouldn't be confused with phimosis which effectivly prevents proper urination.

                  For girls the only indication would be a cancer. This is extremely rare.

                  the prophet neither encouraged nor forbade vaginal circumscision, as a matter of fact, he said it would be more pleasurable for the woman

                  I understand the words of the Prophet. I also understand that the prophet, in his wisdom, intended the Quran to be acceptable to all communities. Therefore there are references to many practices which are common in only a few communities. It is my understanding that this was not intended as a directive that these practices be applied to all Muslims, but rather that those communities which have a custom will do so within Islamic law.

                  The cli***us is a highly sensitive organ whose express purpose is to enhance pleasurable feelings during love making and to ease the pain of child birth.

                  It is not an unnecessary organ at all.

                  I appreciate the opinions of the time, but clearly the understanding was less than it is today.

                  In the case of males, the purpose of the for****n is to keep the end of the male organ covered and moist. Effectivly like a mucus membrane. This ensures maximum sensitivity.

                  I also appreciate that people who have been subjected to these procedures as young children claim to enjoy their sex lives. However the evidence from adult men who have been curcumscised, usually because of a paraphimosis, is an extreme loss of sensation.

                  The evidence for women is a little clearer since the so called circumscision is comparitively rare, and the physical feeling experienced by a woman who have not been subjected to it are noticable and reportable.

                  I would like to thank those who have cut and pasted published texts. I will read as much of each of these as I can.

                  However, I was especially keen to make my first point as soon as possible.
                  Please Re-update your Signature


                  • #39
                    this subject is.....
                    My toughest fight was with my first wife.

                    Muhammad Ali Clay


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by abdulhakeem
                      To Mutilate in the Name of Jehovah or Allah
                      Originally posted by abdulhakeem

                      Legitimization of Male and Female Circumcision



                      The Third International Symposium on Circumcision was held from May 22-25, 1994, at the University of Maryland, College Park, Washington DC. I was invited to the symposium to speak of the attitudes of Muslims regarding male and female circumcision <A href="">193. The following report on the symposium gives an idea about the problem of male circumcision in the United States.

                      I. ORGANIZERS AND PARTICIPANTS

                      The symposium was organized by NOCIRC 194, and was attended by a hundred or so people belonging to the three great monotheistic religions (Christians, Jews and Muslims), coming from the United States, Canada, Mexico, Australia, England, France, Switzerland, Somalia and Egypt.

                      About forty of the symposium attendees delivered speeches, which were followed by open debates. We also viewed two films, one on male circumcision in the United States, and the other on female circumcision in Somalia.

                      Every aspect of circumcision was considered: medical, psychological, economic, religious and legal. My own speech concerned circumcision within Islamic law. It was preceded and followed by speeches on circumcision within Christianity and Judaism.

                      An exposition of photographs and art work was arranged in a room where one could also purchase or receive gratis numerous materials and publications produced primarily by the conference attendees and other groups that attended the symposium.

                      The symposium concluded on May 25th with a banquet during which awards were presented to individuals who had contributed to the fight against male and female circumcision. On May 26th there was a demonstration in Washington DC against circumcision (see below).

                      II. REASONS OF THE SYMPOSIUM

                      As its title indicates, this symposium was the third of its kind. Although female circumcision was discussed, this symposium principally dealt with male circumcision, which demonstrates in itself that this form of circumcision is a real problem, especially in the United States. What is the nature of this problem?

                      Infant circumcision in the United States began not for medical or religious reasons, but for social reasons. It began in the 1870s as a Victorian attempt to prevent or cure masturbation, which at the time was believed to cause bedwetting, alcoholism, insanity, curvature of the spine and other physical and mental disorders. The practice spread from England concurrently to other English-speaking countries (Canada, Australia and the United States).

                      When the masturbation theory was dispelled and declared false in 1948 by the British National Health Service, the rate of circumcision was reduced to less than 0.5% in England. The rate of circumcision in Canada and in Australia also was lowered, but remains still around 20%.

                      In the United States, with the development of hospitalized births, male infant circumcision remains a common practice. The American medical community has tried to find "medical" justifications for the continuation of circumcision. Even today, the United States remains the only country on earth where the majority of male infants are circumcised for non-religious reasons. This rate is today 60% with differences from one region to another. Approximately 3'300 babies each day are submitted to circumcision in American hospitals. This represents more than 1'25 million children circumcised each year. Several babies die as a consequence of the operation, which is performed without anaesthesia, and which results in numerous medical complications. Circumcision is considered today as one of the reasons for the violence which rages in American society, where the crime rate is six times larger than that in Europe: That which society does to its children, its children do to society. In effect, circumcision injures the brain of the child. It also impairs the normal functioning of the adult sexuality. On average one forth of the skin of the baby's penis is amputated. This has forced many Americans to seek restoration of their foreskin (see below). Many authorities estimate that the violence done to the infant during circumcision plays a role in the fatal conflicts in the Middle East between Muslims and Jews, two groups that practice circumcision.

                      In the United States, the American Academy of Pediatrics has adopted a neutral position towards male circumcision, leaving the decision to parents. One cannot say, however, that they are properly informed of the implication of their decision. Circumcision takes place in hospitals in the first days of life. Doctors rarely give information on the benefits or risks of the surgery. They even exert psychological pressure by expressing disapproval when parents refuse to consent to the operation. The operation has become a sort of routine, notably in the lower and middle classes. It is performed in a barbarous (this word is not too strong) manner by doctors with clear financial motivations, at the request of ignorant parents, and in any case, it is forced upon infants who cannot express their wishes in the matter. Certainly, in rare instances, circumcision can be useful in the treatment of certain diseases like phimosis (but even in this case, there are medical means of treatment without resorting to circumcision). But the real practice of male circumcision in the United States, like everywhere else in the world, denotes a trivialization responsible for a contemptuous regard for the physical integrity of the child.


                      During the symposium, the participants tried to see how one could put an end to male circumcision. In order to do this, it is necessary to consider the roles of those responsible for the practice of circumcision.

                      1. The doctors

                      Doctors form an imposing body that is very difficult to confront. The participants of the symposium expressed little confidence in them. One participant indicated that it was pointless to try to convince doctors, for like all lobbies, they are against society. Doctors profit by the operation of circumcision and one can hardly expect them to willingly reduce their income. Circumcision and the commerce of the foreskin constitutes a lucrative industry in the United States, amounting to several hundred million dollars a year. Despite this, some doctors have been converted and have become opponents of circumcision, especially those at the end of their careers who have less to loose. Some came to bring their testimony and to argue against circumcision. One of these gave to NOCIRC the Circumstraint tray 195 on which he used to perform circumcisions and delivered an address entitled, "Leave it alone!".

                      2. The nurses

                      Nurses also participate in circumcision. These nurses can be easily mobilized against circumcision by reason of the atrocious suffering they have witnessed during the circumcision of babies. Circumcision is performed without anaesthesia. We viewed a film of the operation and heard repeatedly the screams of the infant being operated upon. It was truly unbearable. It is not an accident that circumcision is always performed behind closed doors, the parents not being permitted to watch. The baby is strapped by its hands and feet and immobilized on a molded plastic tray which conforms to its body. The foreskin is pulled to its maximum length and crushed by a metal clamp before it is sliced off with a scalpel. We saw one of these plastic trays: a veritable instrument of torture.

                      Nurses, however, fear that they will be relieved of their duties and dismissed if as conscientious objectors they refuse to participate in the operation. The founder of NOCIRC, for example, was a nurse. She lost her job because of her opposition to circumcision. Actually, it would seem that opposition is now becoming easier to assert. A dozen nurses from St. Vincent Hospital in Santa Fe, New Mexico (of which several were Jewish) 196, were present at the symposium and gave us their reasons for taking their decision. These reasons are:
                      • Neonatal circumcision is a violation of a new-born male's right to a whole (intact) body.
                      • There are no compelling medical reasons for amputation of the penile foreskin. Amputating the foreskin deprives the infant of a protective and sexually functional part of his body.
                      • Circumcision is a surgical procedure with risks of complications, including bleeding, infection and mutilation.
                      • Neonatal circumcision is painful. Often, inadequate or no anaesthesia is used. Post-operative pain management is rare.
                      • Parental information on this subject is all too often incomplete or based on myths.
                      • The infant is unable at this vulnerable age to state his own wishes or to protect himself.
                      The nurses moved everyone in the auditorium to tears.

                      3. The insurance companies

                      Insurance companies could play an important role in the abolition of male circumcision. In Canada, where insurance companies refuse to pay the cost of circumcision, the rate of circumcision is falling dramatically. This is also the case in certain American states. The organizers and participants of the symposium would like to convince the insurance companies to cease covering the expense of male circumcision.

                      4. The religions

                      Male circumcision is practiced by the adherents of the three monotheistic religions: Jews, Muslims, and Christians.

                      Concerning Jews, the mandate for male circumcision comes from the Bible. There one reads:

                      God told Abraham: "...Here is our alliance which shall be observed between me and you, i.e. thy race after thee, may all your males be circumcised. You shall have the flesh of your foreskin cut off and it shall be a sign of alliance between me and you...When they reach their 8th day all your males shall be circumcised from generation to generation... My alliance shall be branded in your flesh as a perpetual alliance. The uncircumcised, the male whose foreskin has not been cut off, this very life shall be cut off. He violated my alliance" (Genesis 17:9-14).

                      It is in fact from this community that the fiercest opposition to the abolition of circumcision is mounted. The so-called "medical" justifications for circumcision were formulated principally by Jewish doctors. It would seem even that the development of male circumcision among Christians in the United States was a premeditated action on the part of the Jewish medical community after the second World War. By circumcising as many Christians as possible, they sought to make it more difficult to distinguish between Jews and non-Jews in the event of a future persecution of the Jews. It would seem also that there is a hint of Jewish proselytising behind circumcision : A circumcised Christian is more easily converted to Judaism than an uncircumcised one because he will not fear having to submit to circumcision as an adult. Notice here that the Western world has passed laws prohibiting female circumcision, but dares not to do the same for male circumcision for fear that they will be considered anti-Semitic by the Jews. One must note, however, that even the voice of American Jews is being added to the cry against the practice of circumcision (see below).

                      Muslims systematically practice male circumcision. However, the Koran makes no mention of circumcision. On the contrary, one can find verses which can be interpreted as being against circumcision:
                      • Our Lord, You did not create all this in vain (3:191).
                      • He perfected everything He created (32:7).
                      • [The devil said]: "I will mislead them, and I will create in them false desires; I will order them to slit the ears of cattles, and to deface the fair nature created by God" (4:119).
                      One can deduce from the first verses that the foreskin is an integral part of the human body created by God, and that one should not imagine that by cutting it one is perfecting the work of God. The third verse considers the alteration of Nature as obedience to the Devil.

                      The practice of male circumcision among Muslims derives from the practice of the Jews: Each Muslim must be circumcised like Abraham, who is considered a model man. One invokes also the recitations attributed to Mohammed. These recitations, however, were collected 200 years after the death of Mohammed.

                      Concerning Christians, Saint Paul advocates circumcision of the heart instead of circumcision of the flesh (Epistle to the Romans 2:29). Despite this, there is a trend among evangelical Christians in the United States, who follow the Bible to the letter and who believe that this book contains principles of medical science which the believer must follow, such as circumcision. According to them, "what is good enough for the Chosen People, is good enough for all mankind". Mormons too practice circumcision even though their holy book considers the dictates of the Bible concerning circumcision to be obsolete.

                      5. International organizations

                      International organizations refuse to involve themselves in this issue. They are afraid of being considered anti-Semitic. This is the case notably with the World Health Organization, The Population Council of the UN, the Inter-African Committee, UNICEF, and Amnesty International. These organizations, responsible for overseeing the respect of human rights, are always ready to criticize -correctly so - female circumcision, but have become accomplices in the violation of the rights of male infants to an intact body. The fear of anti-Semitism paralyzes them.

                      6. National legislature: Towards a criminalization of Male circumcision

                      Is it necessary to pass a law criminalizing male circumcision? This was the question that arose frequently at the symposium. Although numerous Jews who are opposed to circumcision attended the symposium, they were generally against the adoption of such a law. The majority of participants, however, were of the opinion that a law should be enacted which criminalizes male circumcision along with female circumcision. There is no reason to distinguish between the two forms of circumcision: both are mutilations of healthy sexual organs of non-consenting children. There is no justification for such mutilations. If the foreskin were useless, Nature would not have make it. It is imperative in any case to leave the child intact until the age of 18 when he will have the freedom to decide for himself whether he wants to be circumcised or not. He is then even free to have his ears amputated if he chooses, but one does not have the right for forcibly remove his body parts when he is a baby.

                      I was the only lawyer present at the symposium. I requested that next time the organizers should invite other lawyers and professors of law in order to be able to begin a law project with the aim of condemning male and female circumcision. I also proposed:
                      • To identify those professors of law who might be interested in presenting this subject in their lectures and to make available to them the necessary materials;
                      • to provide law libraries documents to enable researchers to make further studies in this area.
                      Certainly, the adoption of a law criminalizing male circumcision would provoke the anger and opposition of the Jews. But if a law were adopted, the United States would be the first to be able to do so because of its unconditional support of Israel. This is the only country which need have no fear of being considered anti-Semitic, and it is in this country that opposition to circumcision is the best organized.

                      URGENT!!! your help is badly needed - fundraising for marriage


                      • #41
                        well akhi

                        i can only respond as follows:

                        well pleased am i with Allah as my Lord, Muhammad as my Prophet, and Islam as my deen

                        other than that, i am free from

                        many times i have found that "modern science" was wrong, and islam has always been correct, thus Allah sent down an ayat saying, on this day i have perfected your reliigion and called it islam

                        nothing supercedes islam in any fashion, at any time
                        .لا نريد زعيما يخاف البيت الإبيض
                        نريد زعيما يخاف الواحد الأحد
                        دولة الإسلامية باقية


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by abdulhakeem
                          To Mutilate in the Name of Jehovah or Allah
                          Originally posted by abdulhakeem

                          Legitimization of Male and Female Circumcision


                          IV. HOW TO RESTORE THE FORESKIN

                          This title may cause laughter. It is actually a technique known in the past, notably in the Hellenistic Period (323-30 B.C.) and the Roman Empire (27 B.C. to 140 A.D.). It is being revived in the United States.

                          This technique starts with the viewpoint that male circumcision is an affront to the physical integrity and an impairment of the normal functioning of the male organ, especially when a large part of the foreskin is amputated. This technique consists in stretching the skin of the penis in order to compensate for the parts removed in circumcision. One must pull the skin of the penis and tape it in place in the first stage before suspending metallic objects of a certain fixed weight using surgical tape. The process takes about 15 months before the skin of the penis returns to the length it would have had had it not been circumcised.

                          This technique was used by Jim Bigelow on himself and on others 197. Jim Bigelow is not a physician, but a psychologist. He earned his doctorate in psychology at Claremont Graduate School and served as a Professor of Psychology at Whittier College. He also pastored several Evangelical churches. He has explained this technique in a book 198. I bought this book, which is full of observations not only about restoration of the foreskin, but also about circumcision in general, notably as it is practised in the United States. It is a scientific publication, 239 pages long, very serious and heavily documented. It is probably the most vibrant attack on male circumcision ever written.

                          Jim Bigelow is a charming man, full of humor. He was present at the symposium. He delivered a speech using many slides. He did not hesitate to mention his history of success and confessed to me at the end that he wrote the book in the spirit of Christian charity. The restoration of the foreskin using his method was successfully achieved by hundreds of circumcised men, not only Christians, but also Jews (a fact which has not failed to provoke the anger of Rabbis). Received at first with skepticism by the medical community, his publication and his technique has ended by being recognized. Several Europeans have tried it. Two doctors even came to the symposium from Australia. Testimony from numerous Christians and Jews in the auditorium offered support to Jim Bigelow, and confessed that they experienced an enormous increase in sexual pleasure after restoration. Furthermore, many support groups for circumcised men wishing to restore their foreskin exist all over the United States, and even in Europe with the mission of providing free advice and moral support 199.

                          V. DEMONSTRATION IN WASHINGTON

                          On the 26 of May the organizers of the symposium and the participants made a demonstration in Washington in front of the Physicians Committee for responsible medicine (P.O.Box 6322, Washington DC 20015). Many participants brought with them copies of their birth certificates, signed by the doctor who circumcised them. In front of this organization they burned their birth certificates along with copies of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which does not protect the rights of children against sexual mutilation. As this organization is situated across the street from a national television station, several photographers and cameramen were present at the demonstration.

                          The director of the organization (Mr. Neal Barnard, M. D.) asked that the demonstrators form a committee to meet him. The president of NOCIRC, the president of NOHARMM 200, two other members of NOCIRC, a Jewish nurse, who is a conscientious objector who refuses to participate in circumcision, and myself (a Christian of Palestinian origin) were selected. The discussion lasted about 45 minutes.

                          The director was very nice and allowed each a chance to speak. I introduced myself as a Swiss Lawyer, a Christian of Palestinian origin, and the nurse introduced herself as an American Jew, proud to be in my company as a Palestinian. This served to relax the director. He said that there were so many medical problems to regulate in the United States that he could not take up the problem of circumcision without ignoring some other problem. He also mentioned the budget problem, to which we replied, that by beginning with respect for the child, he would have less to bother with and at the same time would save a lot of money. As for our goals, we told him that it was necessary to educate parents and to make a law forbidding male as well as female circumcision. The child does not give his consent, and in the case of circumcision the parents cannot give such consent. In any case, in order for the parents to give valid consent, it is necessary that they be informed, which is never the case in the United States. I expressed my indignation at the high and unjustified rate of circumcision performed in the United States; a practice which violates the same human rights which the United States pretend to defend.

                          After leaving the meeting with the director, the Jewish nurse and I declared before the cameras that this marked the very first time in human history that a Jew and a Palestinian stood united to protect each others children instead of killing them as in the Middle East. We were very proud indeed.

                          This feeling of pride was shared by all the participants of the symposium. All had the sense of being pioneers and that taking this position had historic significance. It is the first time in history that a group has decided to fight to put an end to a practice unanimously considered to be barbaric and degrading.

                          The various speeches of the symposium are being published. I fervently hope that the European medical community will take an interest in this research and will take a position against both male and female circumcision. I especially hope that European nurses will follow the example of the courageous Santa Fe nurses and will refuse to assist in any more circumcisions.


                          In our opinion, a God who demands that his believers be mutilated and branded on their genitals the same as cattle, is a God of questionable ethics. It could be legitimate to perform either male or female circumcision, as any other surgery, for specific, extremely rare, medical reasons on specific individuals. But to arbitrarily mutilate children, boys or girls, under the pretext that it is for their own good, shows an influence of cynicism and fanaticism.

                          That is why there is no valid justification of the distinction made between male and female circumcision. Doctor Zwang goes further: "Female circumcision will never stop as long as male circumcision is going on. How do you expect to convince an African father to leave his daughter uncircumcised as long as you let him do it to his son?" 201 There is no alternative but to condemn the attitude of international and non-governmental organizations which dissociate one type of circumcision from the other, giving legitimacy to male circumcision in the process.

                          Religion has been a means of justifying both male and female circumcision. It is time to expose the irrationality behind this thinking and reveal the harmful influence of some religious circles which are in favour of it or refuse to denounce it. That is the goal of this study which, I hope, will contribute to the respect of the rights of all children.

                          For more information I possess a great number of documents on male and female circumcision. They are at the disposal of all interested persons. I am also ready to discuss this problem with those interested. I may be contacted at the following address: Sami Aldeeb, Swiss Institute of Comparative Law, Dorigny, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland. Tel. 021/6924912. Fax 021/6924949.


                          Dr. Sami Aldeeb is a Doctor of Law; Graduate in Political Sciences; Staff Legal Advisor in charge of Arabic and Muslim Law at the Swiss Institute of Comparative Law, Lausanne; Lecturer at the Institute of Canon Law, University of Human Sciences, Strasbourg, France. The author is most grateful to Jacqueline Maire, of ETHIC, New Westminster, Canada, to Martin Sychold, Staff Legal Advisor at the Swiss Institute of Comparative Law, and to Frederick Hodges, for having translated this text from the French original. This text is also available in French and Spanish version which can be ordered directly from the author.

                          URGENT!!! your help is badly needed - fundraising for marriage


                          • #43
                            CIRCUMCISION (AL-KHITAAN)

                            List of TopicsFrom the manners prescribed for the new-born child is the circumcision (Khitaan) which is the surgical removal of the skin surrounding the head of the boys penis and the skin dangling above the girl's vagina.

                            (A) Its Prescription

                            The proofs of the prescription of circumcision are very many. From them is what is reported by al-Bukhaaree and Muslim from Aboo Hurairah radiyallaahu'anhu - who said: "Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: <The Fitrah (natural way) is five: circumcision, shaving the private parts, trimming the mustache, clipping the nails and plucking hair from the armpits.>"1

                            So in this hadeeth circumcision is quoted at the head of the actions of the Fitrah. Ibnul-Qayyim said: "These are from the Fitrah, since the Fitrah, is the true religion - that of Ibraaheem and these actions were ordered by Ibraaheem, and they were from the words by which he was tested."2

                            (B) The Ruling for Circumcision The scholars hold two views about the ruling for circumcision.

                            The first saying: that it is a recommended Sunnah and their proof for this is the hadeeth: <circumcision is sunnah for men, a noble action for women>3

                            And that he united it with the other recommended actions in the hadeeth of the Fitrah. They also use as evidence the saying of al-Hasan al-Basree: "That all peoples, white and black, Romans, Persians and Abysinnians accepted Islam in the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him) and none of them were investigated (concerning circumcision)" - so that shows that it is only a recommendation, and this is the view of al-Hasan al-Basree and Aboo Haneefah- rahimahuallaah.

                            The second View: that it is an obligation - is what is correct, if Allah wills, based upon the following evidences:

                            (1) Allah - the Most High - ordered His Messenger (peace be upon him) to follow the way and religion of Abraham in His saying:

                            "Then, We have inspired you (O Muhammad saying): "Follow the religion of Abraham Hanifan (Islamic Monotheism to worship none but Allah) (Sooratun-Nahl, Ayah 123)

                            And circumcision is from his religion, and this nation is commanded with whatever its Prophet (peace be upon him) was commanded with unless there is further proof to show that it is something particular to him.

                            (2) He ordered a man who enter into Islam to get himself circumcised, saying to him: <Remove the hair of unbelief and get yourself circumcised.>4

                            And an order in principle produces an obligation as is well-known to the scholars of Usool-ul-Fiqh (The Principles upon which Fiqh is Based).

                            (3) The person who remains uncircumcised has the possibility that his purification and prayer will be nullified -since the foreskin covers the penis and urine may gather under it and thus full purification may not be achieved - in which case the correctness of his prayer would depend upon circumcision.5 Therefore Ibn 'Abbaas - radiyallaahu'anhumaa - said: "Prayer is not accepted from him"6 Since that which is essential for fulfillment of an obligation is itself obligatory.

                            (4) It is also one of the symbols and signs of the Deen, through it Muslims can be distinguished from non-Muslims. Therefore al-Khattaabee mentioned that if a circumcised person was found dead amongst the corpses of uncircumcised people (i.e. on a battlefield) - then he should be prayed over and buried in the Muslim cemetery.7

                            There are also further proofs of its obligation which can be found in reference works.8

                            A Reply to the Evidence of those Holding it to be a Recommendation only. The evidences brought by those who hold that the first saying are replied to as follows:

                            As for the hadeeth: <Circumcision is Sunnah for men, a noble action for women.> - then it is reported from Ibn 'Abbaas with a weak chain of narration. Even if it were taken to be authentic then the meaning of his saying 'Sunnah' would be: That it was something established by the Messenger and ordered by him as an obligation. Just as the Sunnah is the way, the correct methodology to be applied and the Sharee'ah to be followed - and it is something which covers both obligations and recommendations. Furthermore particularizing it to refer only to things which may be left is a new terminology which cannot be used as evidence.

                            As regards its being joined with recommended actions in the hadeeth about the Fitrah - then this cannot be used as a proof here since the characteristic of the Fitrah include things which are obligatory - such as washing the mouth and nose (in wudoo), and clipping the mustache if it grows long, and things which are recommended - and cutting the nails is recommended - or it may be an obligation. So the hadeeth is not an applicable proof here.

                            As for the saying that the Messenger did not investigate any of those who accepted Islam about it - then that was because the 'Arabs used to practice circumcision - as did the Jews, and as for the Christians - then some of them practiced circumcision and others did not. Furthermore, everyone who entered into Islam knew that it was one of the signs of the Deen so they would hasten to get it done just as they would take a bath.

                            (C) The Time for Circumcision

                            There is a recommended time for the circumcision, an obligatory time and a permissible time.

                            (1) As for the recommended time, then it is the seventh day after the birth - i.e. the day of the aq. As for the saying that this is an imitation of the Jews, then that is not correct, and nothing is reported about it as Imam Ahmad said.9

                            There are two hadeeth reported about the recommendation of circumcising on the seventh day - as Shaikh al-Albaanee says: The first is the hadeeth of Jaabir who said: "Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) performed the aq of al-Hasan and al-Husayn and circumcised them on the seventh day."10 And the Hadeeth of Ibn 'Abbaas - that seven are from the Sunnah on the child's seventh day and in it there occurs: " .... he should be named and circumcised." Both these hadeeth are declared weak by Shaikh al-Albaanee said: "However, each hadeeth supports the other since they are reported by different narrators and neither is reported by anyone accused of lying, and it is accepted by the Shaafi'ees who hold that it is therefore recommended to circumcise the child on the seventh day after the birth."11

                            I say: that is also reported from Faatimah - that she circumcised one of her children on the seventh day.12

                            And when Wahb ibn Munabbih was asked about the wisdom of circumcising on the seventh day he said: "To make it easy for the child."13

                            Modern medicine has also shown us the importance, benefit and desirability of performing it on this day - as will be seen in this section about the wisdom of circumcision. This is the case if the child's organ is normal, however if the child is born and the opening through which the urine passes is lower or high than normal - then the doctor may delay the circumcision for a while in order to carry out an operation to correct this, making use of the foreskin for a skin graft - and performing the circumcision at the same time.14

                            (2) As regards the permissible time - then it is permissible to perform the circumcision before the seventh day, or afterwards, until before puberty.

                            (3) Then if the time of puberty comes near one enters the obligatory time period since puberty is the time when the actions of worship - purification, prayer and so on become obligatory - and it is not correct from him unless he is circumcised. Ibnul-Qayyim said, addressing the fathers: "It is obligatory upon the guardian to circumcise the child so that he attains puberty and has been circumcised - since this is something essential for the accomplishment of an obligation."15

                            (D) Circumcision (Khafd) of Girls

                            It has become clear to us that circumcision is obligatory. However, does this apply to females or is it particular to the males. This is what we will discover - if Allah wills.

                            The view that we arrived at when discussing the ruling of circumcision was indeed particular to males. however, with regard to females then the scholars have three opinions:

                            (1) Some scholars - such as the Shaafi'ees, and a narration from Ahmad hold that it is obligatory upon the females.

                            (2) The majority - such as the Hanafees, the Maalikees, the Hanbalees and others - hold that it is prescribed for women and is recommended (mustahabb).

                            (3) Others hold that it is not prescribed for them -and this is a weak saying.

                            * Discussion and Arrival at the Preferred View.

                            Perhaps the closest of the sayings to the truth - and Allah knows best - is that circumcision is prescribed for women and allowed for them and is not an obligation, and that is due to the following:

                            (1) His saying: <When the two circumcised parts unite then bathing becomes obligatory>16 is a proof of its prescription and permissibility for women, since the two circumcised parts are those of the male and those of the female. Ahmad said: "This shows that the women used to be circumcised.?17

                            (2) The saying of the Messenger (peace be upon him) in the hadeeth of Umm 'Atiyyah to a female circumciser: <When you circumcise then do not cut severely, since that is better for her and more pleasing to the husband.>18

                            (3) And to those who declare it to be obligatory upon the women, then it is said: Rather the order refers to the men and it is not correct to transfer the ruling to the women, since they differ from men in their nature and constitution and there is no proof for its obligation upon them except for an analogy - and that cannot be applied here as we have mentioned.

                            (4) As for the hadeeth of Umm 'Atiyyah then it shows no more than an allowance as has preceded, not an obligation - and Allah knows best

                            (E) Discussion about the Circumcision of Girls.

                            Some doctors and others try to belittle female circumcision and claim that it is harmful, an evil custom and is detrimental to health. However, this is a false claim since a number of doctors have affirmed that it produces a number of benefits, some of which we will mention when discussing the wisdom of circumcision.

                            The harm that is attributed to this operation cannot be ascribed to circumcision itself, rather to two matters:

                            (i) Cutting too severely - as occurs in some Islamic lands - such that the ****oris or its hood is totally removed, indeed sometimes even the outer lips (labia) are removed and the vaginal orifice closed. It is essential to point out here that this is not the prescribed Sharee'ah method of circumcision but rather a barbaric act rejected by Islam and forbidden by the Messenger (peace be upon him) who warned against it saying: <When you circumcise then do not do so severely ... >

                            (ii) or the harm is also due to this operation being carried out by those who do not specialize in this field, or by the use of unsterilized instruments which causes infection or harmful illnesses.19

                            So when we consider this harm, we find that it is not caused by circumcision itself, but rather by contradicting the text forbidding cutting severely, or by using unhygienic instruments, and this cannot be used to prevent the operation itself - if properly performed - since if male circumcision were to be performed by cutting to excess or with unhygienic instruments - then that would also be detested and rejected. So would this be a reason to prevent male circumcision so the same goes with regard to females.

                            So from what has preceded it becomes clear that female circumcision - if done correctly - such that the cutting is limited, and done with proper instruments - is something prescribed and produces health and psychological benefits - and is far removed for harmful effects or danger.

                            (F) Particular and Special Cases

                            The ruling about circumcision may vary according to the circumstances, and from one person to another - since a child may be born without a foreskin - and this is very rare.20

                            So in this case circumcision is not performed as there is no need, nor is there any need to brush the razor over his penis - and this is not correct and is of no benefit. As for one whose foreskin is such that a part of the head of the penis is visible, then he must be circumcised so that all of the head is visible.

                            Likewise, with regards to females, a girl may be born not needing to be circumcised, as is the case with women from some lands having a cold climate, whereas women of lands with a hot climate may require circumcision since the hood of the ****oris may grow so large as to prevent sexual intercourse, or it may increase her desires when her clothes rub against it.

                            (G) Wisdom and Benefits of Circumcision.

                            Circumcision carries very great Sharee'ah benefits, and great medical benefits - which have been affirmed by Islam and discovered by scholars and doctors. So there follows some of the wisdom and benefits which have become apparent:

                            Before mentioning the wisdom of circumcision, we should first mention the wisdom behind its being recommended on the seventh day. This will be clear from the fact that the seventh day is the best day to protect the child from the effect of any bleeding or infection caused by the operation. Medicine tells us that the number of red blood cells increases during the hours after birth and then the increase falls and reaches its lowest level between the third and the seventh day. This falls causes the blood to flow more easily so that white blood cells and anti-bodies are able to flow easily to any part of the body in order to counter any infection due to a wound or inflammation. Likewise during this week the liver becomes fully operational as does blood coagulation. Furthermore bacteria reach the intestines so that vitamin K is produced which is vital to prevent hemorrhage - which completely stops after this week.21

                            * From the Sharee'ah wisdom of Circumcision

                            (1) Circumcision is the head of the characteristics of the Fitrah prescribed for the followers of the true religion, it is therefore a sign and indication of Islam.

                            (2) Circumcision also shows one's willing servitude to Allah, and is a sign of this. This is why you may find that a part of the ear lobe or the like of a slave is cut off as a sign of his enslavement, or the scarring of the face by some African tribes to show their tribal attachment. So it should not be denied that the cutting in circumcision is a sign of the person's servitude to Allah and his ascription to being one of the slaves of Allah upon the correct religion.22

                            (3) The foreskin which is removed in circumcision is a place of impurity and filth, and shaitaan - as is well known - loves filth and impurity and feels at home with it. So when the child is circumcised it is removed from this impurity and from that which is comforting to shaitaan.

                            * As regards the medical benefits then they are clear from the following:

                            First: Doctors do not differ about the importance and medical benefits of circumcision for males, and they are:

                            (i) that it prevents infection due to microbes which is caused by retention of urine by the foreskin and narrowness of the urinary exit

                            (ii) it reduces lusts and the sexual urge and the ill-effects produced by them

                            (iii) it reduces premature ejaculation23

                            (iv) it protects the man from a number of dangerous diseases which may afflict him such as inflammation or cancer of the penis and a number of other diseases. Studies have shown that those who are afflicted by cancer of the penis are from those who are uncircumcised, whereas the circumcised are not afflicted by it24

                            (v) circumcision also protects the wife, since women married to circumcised husbands have fewer incidences of cancer of the neck of the womb than those married to uncircumcised husbands25

                            There are a great deal more medical benefits which can be referred to in medical books.

                            Ibnul-Qayyim - rahimahullaah - summarized these benefits, saying: "Circumcision comprises cleanliness, purification, health, regulation of desires and embellishment of one's appearance.26

                            Second: Female circumcision shares some of the benefits of male circumcision, and has extra benefits particular to it - some of them being mentioned by our Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who said that it is: <Better for the woman and more pleasing to the husband> and that it is: <Better for the face and more pleasing to the husband>27

                            And as is known these benefits do not reach the level of importance of the benefits of male circumcision. However, they are benefits and productive of good effects.

                            Here are some of the benefits which have been discovered:

                            (i) A reduction of infections resulting from microbes gathering under the hood of the ****oris.

                            (ii) Attacks of herpes and genital ulcers are less severe and less harmful with men and women who have been circumcised.28

                            (iii) A further benefit that is apparent for them and more so for their husbands, is that women of hot climates often have a large ****oris which arouses their desires when it rubs against the adjacent clothing. It may even grow to such a size that sexual intercourse is not possible. Therefore, circumcision reduces her desires and their effects in the first case, and makes intercourse possible in the second.27


                            1. Reported by 'al-Bukharee [E.T. 7/516/No. 779] and Muslim [E.T. 1/159/No. 495]

                            2. 'Tuhfatul-Mawdood' p. 90

                            3. Reported by Ahmad (5/75) from the father of Abu Maleeh and al-Baihaqee (8/325) from Ibn 'Abbaas - as his own saying and as a prophetic hadeeth - and its chain of narration contains weakness. See: ad-Da'eefah' (No. 1497)

                            4. Reported by Ahmad (3/415), Abu Dawood [E.T. 1/93-94/No. 356] and al-Baihaqee (8/323-324) and its chain contains weakness. However, it is 'hasan' due to witnessing narrations- see 'al-Irwaa.' (1/120)

                            5. 'Tuhfatul-Mawdood' p. 203

                            6. al-Baihaqee(8/325) as his saying only

                            7. 'Fathul-Baaree' (10/342)

                            8. See; 'Tuhfatul-Mawdood' p. 108, 'Sunanul-Baihaqee (8/325) and 'Fathul-Baaree' (10/431 -)

                            9. 'Tuhfatul-Mawdood' p. 103

                            10. Reported by at-Tabaraanee in 'as-Sagheer' (2/45) and al-Baihaqee (8/324) from Jaabir

                            11. 'Tamaamul-Minnah fit-Ta'leeq 'alaa Fiqhis-Sunnah (p. 68) and al-Majmoo' (1/303)

                            12. Reported by Maalik and Abu Dawood in 'al-Maraaseel' (No. 380) and al-Baihaqee (9/304) and its chain is broken but its meaning is witnessed to - as has preceded. [E.T. These narrations from her do not, however, mention circumcision]

                            13. 'Tuhfatul-Mawdood' p. 112

                            14. 'al-Islam wat-Tifl' of Wajeeh Zaymul-'Aabideen, p. 20

                            15. 'Tuhfatul-Mawdood' p. 111

                            16. SSAHEEH: Reported by Ahmad (6/239) and al-Baihaqee. (Saheehul-Jaami':385)

                            17. 'Tuhfatul-Mawdood' p. 117

                            18. Reported by Abu Dawood [E.T. 3/1451/No. 5251] and al-Baihaqee (8/324) and declared 'hasan' by shaikh al-Albaanee in 'as-Saheehah (No. 722)

                            19. Adapted from an article in 'al-Mujtami' magazine entitled: 'Circumcision and Modern Illness' No. 931

                            20. Some people think that one who is born not requiring circumcision has been specially blessed and had special status - this is however, a false superstition having no basis in the intellect or the Sharee'ah.

                            21. 'Manual of New-born Care' p. 5 by John Coloherly

                            22. 'Tuhfatul-Mawdood' P. 115

                            23. 'Circumcision and Modern Illness' in al-Mujtami's magazine p. 50

                            24. 'at-Tibbun-Nabawee wal-Ibmul-hadeeth' by Dr. Mahmood an-Naseemee: 1/384-385

                            25. Ibid

                            26. 'at-Tuhfah' p.114

                            27. Reported by al-Baihaqee (8/324) and see 'as-Saheehah' No. 722

                            28. 'Circumcision and Modern Illness' p. 51

                            Last edited by abdulhakeem; 27-11-04, 08:55 PM.
                            URGENT!!! your help is badly needed - fundraising for marriage


                            • #44
                              forget wot i just said
                              Last edited by Al-Irhaab; 27-11-04, 09:01 PM.

                              There is no nobility in anyone who lacks faith.

                              The wise man knows that the only fitting price for his soul is a place in Paradise.


                              • #45
                                Can anyone, more skilled that I at searching the Islamic texts, say if there is any reference to when a circumcision should be performed?

                                Is it actually specified that it must be performed on young children?
                                Please Re-update your Signature



                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.