Congenital Deformity Hadiths
qas...@ziplip.com
The Prophet Muhammad - upon him and his House
blessings and peace - described the state of
the healthy newborn as al-fitra - the pristine
state - and equated this primordial perfection
with the religion of Islam, the natural religion.
In the process he alluded to the fact that deformity
in the newborn is so rare as to being close to inexistant.
Al-Bukhari, Muslim, the four Sunan, and the Musnad
narrated from Abu Hurayra that the Prophet said:
<<There is no child born except in pristine
disposition (fitra). Then the two parents turn
their child into a Jew, a Christian, a Magian.
Likewise, the animal gives birth to a fully
formed calf. Do you see in it the least disfigurement?>>
Muslim and Ahmad narrate from Ibn Mas`ud t that
when someone asked if the apes and swine of that
time were descendants of the apish and swinish
disfigurement of the Sabbath-breakers (Q 2:65, 5:60,
7:166) the Prophet replied:
<<Allah Most High never gave offspring nor
posterity to the deformed.>>
These two hadiths anticipate, 1,400 years ago, the
observations of modern obstetrics and embryology. We
do not see many deformed babies in real life since
the majority of grossly malformed embryos and fetuses
never come to term. Yet, even if deformed fetuses
are born and survive, they cannot reproduce.
Hajj Gibril
--
GF Haddad
Qas...@ziplip.com
RonG
> CONGENITAL DEFORMITY HADITHS
> These two hadiths anticipate, 1,400 years ago, the
> observations of modern obstetrics and embryology. We
> do not see many deformed babies in real life since
> the majority of grossly malformed embryos and fetuses
> never come to term. Yet, even if deformed fetuses
> are born and survive, they cannot reproduce.
>
> Hajj Gibril
Where do you come up with that nonsense?
If they have complete genitalia and no chromosomal abnormality, they they
CAN reproduce. The original siamese twins had many children.
Even some with genetic abnormalities can have children.
(http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/4826.php)
When it comes to genetics and biology I wouldn't trust much written
twenty years ago, let alone 1,400 years ago.
The Hadiths anticipate nothing. Any book which in ignorance made
pronouncements on science by mere chance might be right on
SOMETHING.
That does not mean that it can be relied upon for anything else.
If you want to discuss science, learn some.
Jeremiah McAuliffe
> Yet, even if deformed fetuses
>are born and survive, they cannot reproduce.
Huh?
There are parents with cleft palates, who are blind, or with deformed
limbs (or no limbs). There are "little people" who reproduce, as do
the deaf, the mentally retarded, and as do many with other various
congenital birth defects-- even including "hidden" things like sickle
cell anemia and heart defects-- that some might call "deformities".
(Though that is a rather insulting way to put it. "Birth defects"
seems the better, more compassionate, term to use.)
This would seem to be clearly observable evidence that contradicts
your interpretation of the hadith. Unless of course you are using
"deformities" in a purely symbolic sense, but you don't seem to be
doing that.
The hadith reflect earlier human observations of breeding, but not
actual genetics. The idea of "bloodlines" has been around for a long,
long time and in all cultures to my best understanding. People and
animals come from "good stock" or is of "noble breeding" or has "royal
blood" or is a "bad seed" or "the apple doesn't fall far from the
tree" are all pre-scientific ways of describing what had been observed
regarding breeding. But that is not the same as contemporary
genetics. Nor is it a fantastic prediction of Mendel's discovery, much
less that of Watson and Crick which allowed us to begin to understand
how DNA actually works to produce what it is we actually observe.
There is nothing fantastic about someone living 1400 years ago
articulating what is observed in the manner of these hadith.
Especially when people had already been observing red domesticated
animals giving birth to gray domesticated animals for thousands of
years and noticed a resemblance between parent and child. But to say
that is the same as "genetics" in the contemporary sense is simply a
fantastic and unrealistic exercise of one's imagination.
Indeed, its a real fantastical stretch to go from a pre-scientific
understanding of "genetics" that comes from early observations of
breeding and efforts at animal husbandry or selective breeding to
saying people (or a person) living 1400 years ago somehow understood
actual genetics, or predicted the future manner of understanding
"bloodlines"-- i.e. chromosomes, genes and their mutual interaction,
DNA, RNA, a double helix combining four proteins, meioses, mitosis,
alleles, mutations, etc. That simply isn't the case.
The only actual way to know if something fantastic (or at least
something unusual) was being said on the topic 1400 years ago would be
to compare it with what the general beliefs were at the time.... that
would entail finding and presenting some other contemporaneous written
materials on the topic. However, even from these hadith it seems at
least some contemporaries (i.e. the Jew asking about it) understood
what was observed regarding breeding the same way as articulated by
Muhammad....
It would seem we are now not only mistaking the Qur'an as some kind of
science textbook, but the hadith as well? Its not even clear the
hadith are actual history, or simply what people a century after
events wanted the history to be!
Imho a complete and total mistake of literary genre.... one might as
well treat a book of poems about trees as a botany text, or a botany
text as poetry. The only problem is you end up with both bad science
and bad poetry. Doing this certainly isn't anything that could be
classified as scholarly.
God knows best.
Jeremiah McAuliffe ali...@city-net.com
http://speed.city-net.com/~alimhaq/mcauliffe/
Heavy Music
http://www.ampcast.com/jeremiah
Omar Mirza
qas...@ziplip.com wrote in message news:<BUIHJWP0OBMNFRMICKIE...@ziplip.com>...
> The Prophet Muhammad - upon him and his House
> blessings and peace - described the state of
> the healthy newborn as al-fitra - the pristine
> state - and equated this primordial perfection
> with the religion of Islam, the natural religion.
I always understood this to be a reference to the disposition of their
characters, rather than the well-formedness of their bodies.
> In the process he alluded to the fact that deformity
> in the newborn is so rare as to being close to inexistant.
I don't see how he alluded to this in the hadith you gave below. It
seems to me he merely gave an illustration from the animal kingdom.
<<There is no child born except in pristine
disposition (fitra). Then the two parents turn
their child into a Jew, a Christian, a Magian.
Likewise, the animal gives birth to a fully
formed calf. Do you see in it the least disfigurement?>>
It is pretty obvious that "fitra" here refers to the innate
disposition to accept correct belief in God, as opposed to the
distorted and confused thinking about God promoted by corrupted
religious traditions.
The example of the calf merely serves to illustrate the perfection of
this innate disposition with which humans are endowed at birth.
With regard to this hadith
> Muslim and Ahmad narrate from Ibn Mas`ud t that
> when someone asked if the apes and swine of that
> time were descendants of the apish and swinish
> disfigurement of the Sabbath-breakers (Q 2:65, 5:60,
> 7:166) the Prophet replied:
>
> <<Allah Most High never gave offspring nor
> posterity to the deformed.>>
Here are the relevant hadiths from Abdul Hameed Siddiqui's translation
of "Sahih Muslim", from the "Kitab al Qadr". Comments follow below.
Chapter 7: THE SPAN OF LIFE AND LIVELIHOOD DOES NOT INCREASE OR
DECREASE BEYOND THAT WHAT IS LAID DOWN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 033, Number 6438:
Abdullah reported that Umm Habiba, the wife of Allah's Apostle (may
peace be upon him), said: 0 Allah, enable me to derive benefit from my
husband, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), and from my
father Abu Sufyan and from my brother Mu'awiya. Allah's Apostle (may
peace be upon him) said: You have asked from Allah about durations of
life already set, and the length of days already allotted and the
sustenances the share of which has been fixed. Allah would not do
anything earlier before its due time, or He would not delay anything
beyond its due time. And if you were to ask Allah to provide you
refuge from the torment of the HellFire, or from the torment of the
grave, it would have good in store for you and better for you also. He
(the narrator) further said: Mention was made before him about
monkeys, and Mis'ar (one of the narrators) said: I think that (the
narrator) also (made a mention) of the swine, which had suffered
metamorphosis. Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Verily, Allah did
not cause the race of those which suffered metamorphosis to grow or
they were not survived by young ones. Monkeys and swine had been in
existence even before (the metamorphosis of the human beings).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 033, Number 6439:
This hadith has been reported on the authority of Mis'ar with the same
chain of transmitters but with this variation that the hadith
transmitted on the authority of Ibn Bishr and Waki', the torment of
the Hell-Fire and the torment of grave have been mentioned together
(and there is no conjunction" iw" or" between them).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 033, Number 6440:
Ibn Mas'dd reported that Umm Habiba said: 0 Allah, enable me to derive
benefit from my husband, Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him),
and from my father Abu Sufyan, and from my brother Mu'awiya. Allah's
Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to her: Verily, you have asked
Allah about the durations of life already set, and the steps which you
would take, and the sustenances the share of which is fixed. Nothing
would take place earlier than its due time, and nothing would be
deferred beyond that when it is due. So, if you were to ask Allah
about your safety from the torment of Hell-Fire and from the torment
of the grave, it would have been better for you. A person said:
Allah's Messenger, what about those apes and swine which suffered
metamorphosis? Thereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said:
Verily, Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, did not destroy a people or
did not torment a people, and let their race grow. Apes and swine had
been even before that (when the deniers of truth were tormented and
suffered metamorphosis). This hadith has been narrated on the
authority of Sufyin through another chain of transmitters but with a
slight variation of wording.
[END OF QUOTE FROM SIDDIQUI'S TRANSLATION OF SAHIH MUSLIM]
I don't have the Arabic in front of me, and I don't completely trust
Siddqui's translations, but I don't see why the Prophet was not simply
referring to the particular people who got punished with deformity,
rather than people who are born deformed through no fault of their
own.
Wa al-Salam,
Omar
GF Haddad
> On Mon, 7 Apr 2003 23:08:46 +0000 (UTC), qas...@ziplip.com wrote:
>
> > Yet, even if deformed fetuses
> >are born and survive, they cannot reproduce.
>
> Huh?
>
> There are parents with cleft palates, who are blind, or with deformed
> limbs (or no limbs). There are "little people" who reproduce, as do
> the deaf, the mentally retarded, and as do many with other various
> congenital birth defects-- even including "hidden" things like sickle
> cell anemia and heart defects-- that some might call "deformities".
> (Though that is a rather insulting way to put it. "Birth defects"
> seems the better, more compassionate, term to use.)
>
> This would seem to be clearly observable evidence that contradicts
> your interpretation of the hadith. Unless of course you are using
> "deformities" in a purely symbolic sense, but you don't seem to be
> doing that.
Here is a text from the site quoted by the other respondent:
"The chances of a woman with Downs Syndrome becoming
pregnant is about 50%, however, most males are sterile
and can't have children. In history there is one story
of a man producing a pregnancy and the mother had Downs
Syndrome as well. The Pregnancy miscarried about halfway through."
http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/4826.php
[snip]
> The only actual way to know if something fantastic (or at least
> something unusual) was being said on the topic 1400 years ago would be
> to compare it with what the general beliefs were at the time.... that
> would entail finding and presenting some other contemporaneous written
> materials on the topic. However, even from these hadith it seems at
> least some contemporaries (i.e. the Jew asking about it) understood
> what was observed regarding breeding the same way as articulated by
> Muhammad....
The fact that the Jew was versed in revelation confirms
the source of the Prophetic description.
Even so, recently, the Jewish conception of the first-couple
genesis account did not stand up to the "genetic bottleneck"
refutation by his biologist respondent - if we are to believe
the internet article to that effect - on the grounds that
"the only way man could descend from a single pair (rather
than from an entire group of transitional hominids) is if
the original pair were literally giants in the pre-nutrition
age.... [I]n order for the human race to reach the state it
was in during the 17th century, the 'Adam and Eve' story
would only be plausible if the first man was 90 feet tall."
Now, the very height quoted in the hadith of Adam's creation
(60 cubits).
http://www.al-jazeerah.net/adam_90_feet_tall.htm
or
http://www.aol40.com/adam_90_feet_tall.htm
> It would seem we are now not only mistaking the Qur'an as some kind of
> science textbook, but the hadith as well? Its not even clear the
> hadith are actual history, or simply what people a century after
> events wanted the history to be!
Sloppy language. First, the "we" applies only to the speaker
himself, who is fond of speaking as if born yesterday.
There is a huge body of Islamic scientific literature
based not only on the Qur'an but even more on the hadith.
Second, if Avicenna and the entire Muslim medical profession
never confused the Qur'an with a science textbook, there
is no real risk of others doing so.
Third, the hadith is more detailed and analytical in
approach than the Qur'an, and easily meets at least some
of the characteristics of scientific discourse, including
modern scientific discourse. As for substance, is modern
science able to fault anything in the large body of
dietetics and herbal medicine information found in the hadith?
Finally, the hadiths are definitely "actual history" even
if the unnatural sense of endemic conspiracy theory.
What McAuliffe apparently means to address is authenticity.
However, the issue of authentic Prophetic attribution is
not the point of the texts I just posted, nor would I
venture to discuss it with those studiously unaware of its criteria.
> Imho a complete and total mistake of literary genre.... one might as
> well treat a book of poems about trees as a botany text, or a botany
> text as poetry. The only problem is you end up with both bad science
> and bad poetry. Doing this certainly isn't anything that could be
> classified as scholarly.
Bad thinking and bad reasoning are probably why one
gets stuck in denial rather than humbly proceed to
take the time to investigate the texts and their
meanings instead of rushing to voice platitudes.
Hajj Gibril
Jeremiah McAuliffe
Haddad) wrote:
>Bad thinking and bad reasoning are probably why one
>gets stuck in denial rather than humbly proceed to
>take the time to investigate the texts and their
>meanings instead of rushing to voice platitudes.
Yes. My thoughts exactly.
It is unfortunate that those who often seem to put themselves forward
as Muslim leaders and official interpreters do not seem to follow this
sage advice, even though they themselves may be aware of it, and
indeed, even mouth it at times.