Circumcision and Controversy


In the name of Allāh,
the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Peace and Blessings of Allāh on Mohammad.
Allāh–the Glorious and the High,
Lord of the worlds
Mohammad–who brought the world
to our feet and eternity to our arms.

To cut or not to cut!
The battle rages on over a piece of penile skin.

From the traffic on the Internet, even people of religious persuasions are honking against male circumcision; and seemingly people of authority. And Ibn Warraq wrote in his book Why I am not a Muslim (pp. 2, 305): “Circumcision is not mentioned in the Koran, and most jurists at most only recommend it.” These “jurists” must have gleaned their information about Islam from the same “Babylonian Jew from Southern Mesopotamia” who is alleged to have “instructed” the Prophet Mohammad–(Why I am not a Muslim p.50). 
   One tactic employed to  generate opposition to circumcision is the showing of pictures of two male babies side-by-side, one uncircumcised and the other freshly circumcised and still blooded; (this person needs to observe childbirth and open-heart surgery).
   However, once the cut is healed even the most venomous opponent would agree that the circumcised penis is hands down more attractive and appealing (and stench-free) than the non-circumcised one. Like contrasting Cleopatra to Medusa.


God and Circumcision: In the Bible, God made a covenant (or promise) to be a God to Abraham and his descendants; and this covenant was sealed in the blood of Abraham’s circumcision; and which circumcision the descendants of Abraham (Israelites and Ishmaelites/Arabs) are to observe if they want God to be their God. Circumcision is the everlasting covenant between God and Abraham and Abraham’s seed. And is to be effected when the “man child” is eight days old:

“And I (God) will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee….This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee. Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And you shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations”–(Genesis 17:7-12).

Those who are not circumcised have broken this covenant with God and are cut off from their people (and have no link to God): “And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant”–(Genesis 17:14).
   This covenant of circumcision is so sacred that Jews observed it even on the day of Sabbath–(John 7:22-23).
Clearly the uncircumcised man cannot claim to be a follower of Abraham or Moses or Jesus or Mohammad!
Thus, circumcision is mandatory for the Muslim males. It is not to be “most only recommend.”

ISLAM AND CIRCUMCISION: Muslims follow the religion of Abraham–(Qur’an 2:130; 3:94; 16:123); the religion of Abraham (and all prophets) is Islam–(Qur’an 42:13), and this religion requires that males be circumcised–(Genesis 17:7-14; Bokhari. Vol; 7, #779; Vol; 8, #312; Abu Dawud, Vol. 1, #356).
   Islam does not require female circumcision; though it seems it was evident in the time of the Prophet. Abu Dawud, Vol. 3, #5251 notes a weak hadith of the Prophet Mohammad (i.e. a hadith lacking the required line of transmission for it to be considered authentic); that states: “Umm ‘Atiyyat al-Ansariyyah said: A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.”
   This hadith seems to convey that female circumcision was not a common practice; perhaps it was a corrective measure as women can suffer from an enlarged clitoris from “either a congenital or a hormonal basis,” which can restrict the flow of urine (much as a man’s enlarged prostate can restrict the flow of urine)–(For details see Ency. Britannica, 15th. Edition, Vol. 15, article, Reproductive System Diseases –Genetic and Congenital Abnormalities– paragraph “In the female,” p.697). 1
With modern medicine and machinations in our hands there is no more need for female circumcision. Tribal areas are to be given education and aid against FGM.
Notably, Coptic Christians in Egypt and South American Christians are also said to have practiced female circumcision.
If circumcision was commonplace in Arabia, it would not have been necessary for “Umm ‘Atiyyat al-Ansariyyah” to tell the Prophet “A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina.” The Prophet would have known. And for certain there would have had to be more than one  woman “circumcizer.” And not only in Medina.
-If Islam had require circumcision of women, as one critic tries to project to lure Muslims away from Islam and make Islam distasteful to non-Muslims (though this critic cannot show a religion superior to Islam or prove that atheism is truth), then during the Prophet’s reign, at least, all Muslim women would have been circumcised. 
-If Islam had require women be circumcised, Muslim fathers and mothers who desire Jannah would have circumcised their hundreds of millions of daughters worldwide.

In opposition to male circumcision, one quarter argues that since Islam gives “females equality” with man how can Muslim males be tortured by circumcision?
   First, circumcision is not “torture” –I know! I was circumcised, and at an age when I was very conscious.

(I am certain children bawl and perhaps bawl louder and longer from just a bruise or from a cut on the hand or foot or elsewhere.   So long as the blade is sharp the cut is just a sting; what is more needed is proper care for the healing; and, without doubt, it is easier for a baby, who is not mobile, to heal, and to heal faster. Perhaps now there need not be any sting to circumcision: the penis can be anesthetized before cutting).

Second, as Allāh” gives “females equality” with man, man is required to give woman mahr, maintain her, and pay alimony, would Muslim women who oppose circumcision give man mahr, maintain him and pay him alimony in equality?  Allāh also requires man to shave his head (at the Hajj), would Muslim women who oppose circumcision shave their heads in equality?
   As Islam accords equality to male and female, and as shown Islam requires the Muslim male be circumcised, will the Muslim women who wrongly oppose male circumcision, will you now in this sphere of equality have your genitals circumcised?

Muslim men and women who oppose circumcision must know they are kindling their Hell-fire with their tongues and/or pens. They need to learn Islam rather than fight to have Islam conform to their dictates.

Jesus and circumcision: Jesus was circumcised when he was eight days old, according to the covenant between God and Abraham–(Luke 2:21). 
   There is no record of Jesus condemning or speaking against circumcision. Nor could he, for he proclaimed that he came not to change the law or the prophets but fulfill, even though heaven and earth shall pass away not one title or jot of the law shall pass till they all be fulfilled–(Matt. 5:17), he taught that eternal life lies in obeying the commandments given to Moses–(Matt. 19:16-19), and he even bid his followers to abide by the teachings of the Scribes and Pharisees because they represent Moses, even though they were hypocritical–(Matt. 23:2-3), and, as shown, the Mosaic law requires circumcision.
In fact, the Biblical Fathers who upheld the Mosaic Law are regarded as “gods” by God: “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High”–(Psalm 82:6); and Jesus affirmed this distinction of Psalm 82:6 in his arguments with the Jews: “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God”–(John 10:34-36. Notably, Jesus saying he is Son of God
may very well have meant that he is son of one of these ‘prophets’ (“gods”) who received Divine revelation’, and NOT son of God, the Creator). 
   Moreover since Christians believe that Jesus was “Son of God” and even God Himself, for Jesus to condemn circumcision he would be condemning his “Father’s” and His own “everlasting” covenant with Abraham and his descendants.

Paul and circumcision: In contradiction to God and Jesus Paul, whom Christians mostly quote for support of their beliefs, taught: “What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision–(Rom. 3:1). 
   Unless he is an atheist, whether the circumcised Jew works righteousness or not he (and his parents) has honored this covenant of God; and there is “profit” in this.

   Paul wrote “Behold, I Paul (not Jesus or God, mind you!), say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love”–(Gal. 5:2-6).
   But, contrary to Paul’s pronouncement, as noted above circumcision is so sacred that Jews broke the Sabbath to enforce it, and Jesus bid his followers to obey and follow the Pharisees who carried out the Mosaic law, and for his followers to “keep the commandments” given to Moses if they want to have eternal “life” (which means that Jesus was telling his followers to follow Judaism; how then there is a religion Christianity; and under Jesus’ name?) And God said to Abraham that circumcision was an everlasting covenant and whoever is not circumcised has broken this covenant: shall be cut off from his people.

  Regarding Paul’s statement that “every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.”
While as believers in God we are to strive as best as we can to follow Divine precepts, it is doubtful that there are many men and women who do the “whole” law. Then,
perhaps just a few men (whether Jewish or Muslim) would qualify to be circumcised. And it would be pointless for God to instruct parents to circumcise their child at eight days old.

   But why would Paul want to dabble in circumcision? The reason is clear, as Muhammad Ali points out, “when St. Paul saw that the Jews would on no account accept Jesus Christ as a messenger of God, he introduced the pagan doctrine of sonship of God into the Christian religion, so that it might become more acceptable to the pagans.” 
   And since the pagans did not need to be circumcised to worship their already numerous “sons of God” there was no way they were going to have themselves clipped for accepting Jesus. Thus, the only logical step for Paul to take was to resort to his usual “craft” and “guile” position and “cut” circumcision out of Jesus’ (and all the prophets to Abraham) teaching. 
   Clearly circumcision is the “blood”-line to God (And this “blood”-line requires belief in the Purity of Godhead –that there is no God but one God– as taught by Moses, Jesus and Mohammad–(Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29; Qur’an 2:163; 38:65-66; 112:1-4).

   Notably, while Paul was condemning the law and harping a “grace” based on faith –“whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love” (Gal. 5:2-6)– while Paul was singing this “hopeful” song, James, like Jesus (Matt. 5:20; 19:16-19), was echoing observance of the law and works. James state:

“What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man says he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him…Thou believest hat there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead…For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also”–(James 2:14-26).

   Why this theological chasm between Paul and James? Maurice Bucaille affords us the answer in his insightful work The Bible The Qur’an and Science:

“As far as the decades following Jesus’s mission are concerned, it must be understood that events did not at all happen in the way they have been said to have taken place and that Peter’s arrival in Rome no way laid the foundations for the Church. On the contrary, from the time Jesus left earth to the second half of the Second century, there was a struggle between two factions. One was what one might call Pauline Christianity and the other Judeo-Christianity.”“Paul is the most controversial figure in Christianity. He was considered to be a traitor to Jesus’s thought by the latter’s family and by the apostles who had stayed in Jerusalem in the circle around James. Paul created Christianity at the expense of those whom Jesus had gathered around him to spread his teachings… Paul’s style of Christianity won through definitively, and created its own collection of official texts.” (Emphasis added. For details and more on this topic please see Bible corrupt & obsolete). 

Circumcision is painful and torture: You have never gotten a cut on your body, and even a severe cut?
Isn’t it painful and torture to pierce the little girl’s raw ears with needle to give her ear-rings?
Isn’t it painful to have hysterectomy and vasectomy so you wouldn’t have children or have more children?

   Isn’t childbirth painful and torture, why have kids, are you masochistic?
Isn’t your partner falling out of love with you (and unrequited love) painful and even torture, why then bother to fall in love? In fact losing out in love can be so excruciatingly painful it can and does lead to murder and even suicide. (I’ve yet to hear of someone committing murder or suicide for being clipped).

   Isn’t it pain and torture to cut the necks of the dumb, innocent bird and beast to satisfy your mouth and belly?
   Isn’t it pain and torture to break your bones to extend your feet so you can be taller and/or look more attractive?
Isn’t waxing the hair from your legs and other body parts painful?

   God gave you small breasts (and buttocks) isn’t it painful to have your body cut and stuffed with botux and silicone just so you look more ample/plump? 
   So boys become infected and even die from circumcision; (not to minimize this) but children also become infected and die from other operations, even when properly cared for.
The pros and cons of circumcision might never end –though circumcision seems to have only merits and no demerits.

   So your parents thought you will be religious like them and circumcised you but you turned out atheist or Idolater. So you were nipped a piece so what? Who wants to constantly wash smegma (especially in countries where water is precious as gold or more precious) and worry about exuding foul genital odor?

   If you’re still hung-up about your parents having you clipped when you knew nothing and had no care, it is not as if they excised one of your lungs or kidneys and hacked it.
What about their giving you life, their sleepless nights worrying and comforting and keeping vigil over you; putting food into your belly; clothes on your body and shelter over your head; and the trust-fund they may have scrounged and deprived themselves of so you can have a better life than they had? (This is their duty you say? It is also their duty to have you clipped).

   So your father and mother should have waited till you’re a grown man to make your own decision. Fine. So you’ve romped the world for forty years and you finally realized that the only reality is God and the only lasting joy is in the next life. You want to follow the religion of Abraham –which requires honoring God’s covenant and necessitates circumcision. Big problem!
Hercules is terrified! Not only of being cut; he will have to lay away for maybe a week or two or more from work and from Aphrodite. So he calls mom and dad to task –why didn’t they have him nipped when he had no care no commitment and knew nothing? They didn’t let him choose between school and the tree-house! They didn’t let him choose between piano lessons and the baseball and the basketball! Why did they left him to choose the moyle? 
Poor parents, they never win!

   If losing a pinch of skin when you were a toddling is all you have to worry about or is your biggest problem you should go down on your hands and knees and forehead and thank God for your blessings. The rabble-rousers and nit-pickers also.
   To say that God would enjoin on man acts that are harmful or injurious to him is to say that God, Who is most solicitous for the welfare of man, is criminal. 
   In their zeal to establish themselves as more merciful and compassionate than God, man has created the “circumcision” problem where there is none.
   The money collected by the various anti-circumcision outlets should be used to provide proper medical facilities for this process.        



1.   Men over thirty-five may consider having a yearly examination for enlarged prostate. Symptoms of enlarged prostate are said to be frequent urinating, difficulty urinating, sporadic flow, and getting up at nights (more than once) to urinate. Research seems to indicate that an enlarged prostate can be reduced [or be prevented] by herbs, such as saw palmetto, etc. Zinc is also said to be good for the prostate, though its daily dosage should not be exceeded. Check your herbal health store.
   Women may consider having a yearly mammogram for breast cancer, and a pap test for cervical cancer, and also have adequate intake of calcium, especially women of child-bearing years.
   There was/is a masterful presentation on the Internet titled A Complete Handbook of Nature Cures that lists and gives the treatments for a multitude of diseases and their natural treatments including impotence and vaginitis. Please See