"What acquainted you with Jihad? Reading of the Qur'an and authentic Hadith"

"Yet American Muslim advocacy groups continue to exhort Americans to read the Qur'an in order to discover that it is peaceful. Evidently they do this knowing that most Americans will not read it, but that the challenge alone will convince some of them that the Qur'an indeed teaches peace."
-- from a posting above

The invitation to read the Qur'an is made on the assumption that:

1) Most Americans will not read the Qur'an with any understanding -- it takes reading, re-reading, and even commentary, to understand why so many phrases that seem innocuous, or similar to phrases one might find in other religions, such as "struggle in the path of God," has a specific meaning, that this meaning is elucidated in such passages as 9:29 and 9:5 and all the other violent Jihadist verses, or even those less violent, that calmly insist a Believer "must not take Jews or Christians for friends, for they are friends only with each other."

2) The doctine of abrogation, or naskh, is never mentioned, so that it is expected that those Infdiels who do read the Qur'an will focus, as they naturally would, on such passages as "there is no compulsion in religion" and fail to realize the meaning given that seemingly heart-warming and comforting and recognizable phrase with the reality of Islam, where every kind of disability is placed on non-Muslims (amounting to a kind of "compulsion" that does lead over time to conversion or "reversion" to Islam), and that there is certainly "comupulsion" in the punishment, by death, of those who leave Islam.

3) Emphasis on the Qur'an alone keeps Infidels from finding out, or reading the "authentic" Hadith, and the Hadith are even more damning in what they expose of Muslim beliefs.

4) Emphasis on the Qur'an alone also keeps Infidels from reading the Sira (the life of Muhammad), and finding out about the murder of Asma bint-Marwan and of a 90-year-old man, the decapitation of the 600-900 bound prisoners of the Banu Qurayza, the attack on the inoffensive Jewish tribe of the Khaybar Oasis, the consummated "marriage" to nine-year-old Aisha (which led Khomeini to lower the marriageable age of girls in Iran to nine), and so on. It is the example of Muhammad, seen by Believers as uswa hasana (a Qur'anic phrase), al-insan al-kamil, that is most telling for Infidels, and that Muslims do not want them to find out too much about.

5) There is a whole lot of stupidity and laziness going around, not least among the Infidels. This is exploited. The parody of education that is too often provided in the Western world, and blandly accepted by parents who have forgotten, or never knew, what to expect, is having effects beyond making all of our lives less interesting, more boring, and more intolerable. Such a collapse now has civilization-threatening effects. This, however, is unlikely to matter, just so long as students get their diplomas, and then move on up to a higher level of ignorance in colleges and universities, where the only thing that matters is the beating heart of such institutions -- the Development Office.

I thought CAIR and their ilk blame poverty for Jihadist and suicide bombers ?

I'm shocked , shocked I tell you !

I thought CAIR and their ilk blame poverty for Jihadist and suicide bombers ?

I'm shocked , shocked I tell you !

I thought CAIR and their ilk blame poverty for Jihadist and suicide bombers ?

I'm shocked , shocked I tell you !

We had already established that the so called "Principle of Abrogation" does not exist; the Muslims do not follow anything like it. It seems to be an invention of "Islam-haters" so that they could mutilate a peaceful religion and depict it as a violent one.

We must record here that there seem to be two groups of "war-mongers" supporting each other though on the surface giving the impression of fighting each other.

Please see
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19331

Quoting from that is very important as to the source of the information. Quoting we have:
===
Al-Qaeda: Code Name for a CIA Operation?
By MEMRI
MEMRI.org | August 31, 2005

Nese Duzel, of the center-left, liberal Turkish daily Radikal, interviewed Turkish professor, former Turkish intelligence officer, and newspaper columnist Mahir Kaynak(1) on the subject of Al-Qaeda's global terrorism.(2) Kaynak claimed that the U.S. government was behind both 9/11 and the assassination of president John F. Kennedy. The interview was also quoted at length by columnists from other Turkish newspapers.

The following are excerpts from the interview:
There is No Al-Qaeda; It's a Code Name for a CIA Operation
...

====

Regarding MEMRI, from
http://www.memri.org/aboutus.html
we have:
===
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) explores the Middle East through the region's media. MEMRI bridges the language gap which exists between the West and the Middle East, providing timely translations of Arabic, Farsi, and Hebrew media, as well as original analysis of political, ideological, intellectual, social, cultural, and religious trends in the Middle East.

Founded in February 1998 to inform the debate over U.S. policy in the Middle East, MEMRI is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit, 501 (c)3 organization. MEMRI's headquarters is located in Washington, DC with branch offices in Berlin, London, and Jerusalem, where MEMRI also maintains its Media Center. MEMRI research is translated to English, German, Hebrew, Italian, French, Spanish, Turkish, and Russian.

===
Please notice that MEMRI is very much in USA and performs analysis for the benefit of USA.

MEMRI reports that Al-Qaeda is an Intelligence Operation.

Can we say that the war-mongers have created a fictitious operation called Al-Qaeda so that the US public could be duped and their resources squandered on weapons industries?

Mohideen,

What drug do you take, I have to get some, seems to create some great fantasy...

I think it is interesting that less than 5% use "Palestine" as their excuse for jihad. I had always heard that "Palestine" and the U.S. troops stationed in Saudi Arabia were the two main motivations for the jihadists. Bush removed the troops from Saudi soil in 2003 in an effort to appease the terrorists. Now in 2005, even if Bush and Sharon's ill-advised attempt at appeasement worked in Gaza/West Bank/Jerusalem/etc., it would (surprise!) still not make much difference. The justification for jihad simply moves on to the next excuse, which according to this survey will be Chechnya.

We had already established that the so called "Principle of Abrogation" does not exist; the Muslims do not follow anything like it. It seems to be an invention of "Islam-haters"

So you're allowed drink alcohol then? Cheers!

Didn't even Allah Himself say he abrogated certain suras?

Surprised not to find Hurricane Katrina which killed innocent 'infidels'

desi_singh said "Surprised not to find Hurricane Katrina"

Or, "I just enjoy killing"

Mohideen:

In the second sura, 106th verse of the Qu'ran, it reads: "Nothing of our revelation (even a single verse) do we abrogate or cause be forgotten, but we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof. Knowest thou not that Allah is able to do all things?" (Pickthall transliteration)

Either this verse remains valid, verifying the principle of abrogation within Islam, or it has itself been abrogated, verifying same.

Have you read this book?

Either this verse remains valid, verifying the principle of abrogation within Islam, or it has itself been abrogated, verifying same.
Have you read this book?
Chatillon at September 6, 2005 05:28 PM

Dear Chatillon,

I had been reading the translation of the Holy Quran from 1963, thanks to God Almighty.

Verse 2:106 is the proof that “The Principle of Abrogation” is not valid now. Verse 2:106 was revealed when Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was alive; God Almighty sent revelations to him and thus a later revelation replaced an earlier one. That applied during the life time of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was the seal of the Prophets, peace be upon them. There is none to receive revelation after Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. There is no revelation now. Even Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, after his descent would follow Islam as expounded in the current version of the Holy Quran.

The Holy Quran was recited by Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, once every year during the month of Ramadaan, the month of fasting. During the last Ramadaan, the Angel Gabriel, peace be upon him, made Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, recite the Holy Quran twice during the month of Ramadaan. The current version of the Holy Quran is as per the recitation in the last year of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. So, what is currently used by the Muslims is complete. No existing Verse of the Holy Quran can be abrogated.

Statements like Verse 9:5 abrogates Verse 2:256 are wrong. Each and every Verse of the Holy Quran is alive and effective. No abrogation.

Mohideen Ibramsha said "Verse 2:106 is the proof that “The Principle of Abrogation” is not valid now. ... That applied during the life time of Prophet Muhammad ... Each and every Verse of the Holy Quran is alive and effective."

So 2:106 only applied during Muhammed's life (not today) and every verse is effective today?

Ouch. Head hurt. Must. Stop. Reading. Mohideen.

Why do those who kill in the name of islam do so,
Mohideen Ibramsha? If the qur'an preaches peace, why do those who quote the qur'an kill Jews and Christians? I have read the qur'an and some of the hadith, it is a bloody religion.

Mohideen is always good for a chuckle.

"We had already established..." he sez. Who is 'we', Mohideen? The same people who tell us: "Say that Islam is a religion of peace or we kill you...?"

MEMRI, my dear Mohideen, has 4 billion times more credibility than the absurd nonsense of Mohammedans like yoursel, who would have us believe that the earth is flat and the sun sinks into a murky pond at day's end.

Take your unholy crap and rub it, along with the RoP!

Mohideen says that MEMRI says that:

"Nese Duzel, of the center-left, liberal Turkish daily Radikal, interviewed Turkish professor, former Turkish intelligence officer, and newspaper columnist Mahir Kaynak...There is No Al-Qaeda; It's a Code Name for a CIA Operation
"

THEN he tries to tell us that it's MEMRI's OFFICIAL POSITION

Do not confuse the newspaper with the news.

I am 100% Burqa Free
http://www.freedomads.org/live/124.jpg

One more link...islamic "Batchelor Show"
http://www.freedomads.org/live/114.jpg

Good grief! Bachelor↑

In America, what do you consider a self proclaimed 'moderate muslim' that knows the Koran well?

A) a confused person
B) just that: a moderate muslim
C) a liar and an extremist
D) big chance of being a liar and extremist and small chance of being confused
E) big chance of being confused and small chance of being a liar and extremist

Unless you answered C or D the survey is over.

If you answered C or D and live in the U.S. which of the following are you doing?
A) doing nothing different
B) packing my bags and getting my visa
C) buying firearms and ammo for protection
D) installing digital surveillance around all my important assets
E) C&D

In America, what do you consider a self proclaimed 'moderate muslim' that knows the Koran well?

A) a confused person
B) just that: a moderate muslim
C) a liar and an extremist
D) big chance of being a liar and extremist and small chance of being confused
E) big chance of being confused and small chance of being a liar and extremist

Unless you answered C or D the survey is over.

If you answered C or D and live in the U.S. which of the following are you doing?
A) doing nothing different
B) packing my bags and getting my visa
C) buying firearms and ammo for protection
D) installing digital surveillance around all my important assets
E) C&D

Why are we debating upon an archaic and plagiarised 1500 year old book which has no relevence whatsoever in today's world.

In America, what do you consider a self proclaimed 'moderate muslim' that knows the Koran well?

A) a confused person
B) just that: a moderate muslim
C) a liar and an extremist
D) big chance of being a liar and extremist and small chance of being confused
E) big chance of being confused and small chance of being a liar and extremist

Unless you answered C or D the survey is over.

If you answered C or D and live in the U.S. which of the following are you doing?
A) doing nothing different
B) packing my bags and getting my visa
C) buying firearms and ammo for protection
D) installing digital surveillance around all my important assets
E) C&D

Mohideen Ibramsha said "Verse 2:106 is the proof that “The Principle of Abrogation” is not valid now. ... That applied during the life time of Prophet Muhammad ... Each and every Verse of the Holy Quran is alive and effective."
So 2:106 only applied during Muhammed's life (not today) and every verse is effective today?
special_guest at September 6, 2005 06:19 PM

Dear special guest,

Thanks for pointing out a possible misunderstanding. The correct – intended meaning – is:

Verse 2:106 is the proof that “The Principle of Abrogation” is not valid now. Verse 2:106 was revealed when Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was alive; God Almighty sent revelations to him and thus a later revelation replaced an earlier one. That (the Principle of Abrogation) applied during the life time of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

Verse 2:106 applied always from its time of revelation.

Thanks again.

One more link...islamic "Batchelor Show"
http://www.freedomads.org/live/114.jpg
Good grief! Bachelor↑
Carolyn2 at September 7, 2005 12:26 AM (at 12.25 AM too)

Excellent piece of art! Probably generated in India as the letters assume the shape of the Hindi letters (and not Arabic letters), and the building resembles a mosque in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

A search for – Al-Jazeera Bachelor – in Google NEWS resulted in no documents to display.

We believe the Tradition numbered 81 in Volume 1 of Sahih Al-Bukhari is relevant in this context. Quoting the tradition, we have:
===
Narrated Anas
I will narrate to you a Hadith and none other than I will tell you about after it. I heard Allah's Apostle saying: From among the portents of the Hour are (the following):

Religious knowledge will decrease (by the death of religious learned men).
Religious ignorance will prevail.
There will be prevalence of open illegal sexual intercourse.
Women will increase in number and men will decrease in number so much so that fifty women will be looked after by one man.
===

Who is this lone bachelor among fifty virgins to choose? Tradition numbered 27 in Volume 7 of Sahih Al-Bukhari offers some guidelines. Quoting, we have:
===
Narrated Abu Huraira
The Prophet said, "A woman is married for four things, i.e., her wealth, her family status, her beauty and her religion. So you should marry the religious woman (otherwise) you will be a loser."
===

As the lone bachelor would choose on the basis of religion, the most religious four would become his wives and the remaining 46 would become his “what the right hand possesses”. Since piety is the parameter, there is no beheading.

It looks like; the art referred to is done by a non-Muslim. In any case, no believing Muslim would draw the picture of a human.

I am 100% Burqa Free
http://www.freedomads.org/live/124.jpg
Carolyn2 at September 7, 2005 12:22 AM

Do I understand that to be “burqa free” is to show the face? If it be so, it is Islamic. We quote Tradition numbered 524 in Volume 5 of Sahih Al-Bukhari in support of the above observation.
===
Narrated Anas
The Prophet stayed for three rights between Khaibar and Medina and was married to Safiya. I invited the Muslims to his marriage banquet and there was neither meat nor bread in that banquet but the Prophet ordered Bilal to spread the leather mats on which dates, dried yogurt and butter were put. The Muslims said amongst themselves, "Will she (i.e. Safiya) be one of the mothers of the believers, (i.e. one of the wives of the Prophet ) or just (a lady captive) of what his right-hand possesses?" Some of them said, "If the Prophet makes her observe the veil, then she will be one of the mothers of the believers (i.e. one of the Prophet's wives), and if he does not make her observe the veil, then she will be his lady slave." So when he departed, he made a place for her behind him (on his camel) and made her observe the veil.
===

The veil is required of the mothers of the believers. None of them is alive now. Hence, we should not compel any woman to cover her face. Likewise, if a woman desires to cover her face, we cannot compel her to reveal her face as per 2:256 of the Holy Quran.

However, we are uncomfortable about the lady revealing her elbow in view of Tradition numbered 1902 of Sunan Abu Dawood, quoted below:
===
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin
Asma, daughter of AbuBakr, entered upon the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) wearing thin clothes. The Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) turned his attention from her. He said: O Asma', when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this, and he pointed to her face and hands.
===

Do not confuse the newspaper with the news.
bad technician at September 6, 2005 08:55 PM

MEMRI is different. It had been accused of selectively translating articles in order to make the average American believe that the Muslims, in particular the Arabs, are bad.

See the following links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yigal_Carmon

Even though it is possible that a Colonel of IDF reserve could have a change of heart, it is more probable that he continues to believe the same beliefs and thus would like to see Israel succeed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East_Media_Research_Institute

We quote from the above URL:
===
Juan Cole has accused the institute of "cleverly cherry-pick[ing] the vast Arabic press, which serves 300 million people, for the most extreme and objectionable articles and editorials".
===

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Middle_East_Media_Research_Institute

Quote from the above URL:
===
(as the Abu Aardvark blog illustrates rather nicely) their translations may be accurate (though Brian Whitaker does question some of them), but their selection is far from representative - though it pretends to be - and is calculated to make the Arab media look far more anti-Semitic than it actually is.
===

http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,773258,00.html

Quoting, we have:
===
The second thing that makes me uneasy is that the stories selected by Memri for translation follow a familiar pattern: either they reflect badly on the character of Arabs or they in some way further the political agenda of Israel. I am not alone in this unease.
Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations told the Washington Times: "Memri's intent is to find the worst possible quotes from the Muslim world and disseminate them as widely as possible."
===
The rebuttal by MEMRI is found in
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/comment/0,10551,778373,00.html
We quote from this rebuttal:
===
Memri is involved in a variety of projects, apart from translating material into most European languages and Turkish: an economic project, headed by a former World Bank expert, an Arab anti-semitism documentation project, studies of school books from Arab educational systems, monitoring Friday sermons in the Arab world.
===

So, MEMRI is not just a newspaper. It has its own agenda including ‘an Arab anti-semitism documentation’ project, even though Arabs are Semites! Are we to believe that a group that is too sensitive to anti-Semitic material would not by its very nature concentrate its translation to serve its overall agenda? MEMRI has a goal. In our opinion, that goal is the victory of Israel and the subjugation of her Arab neighbors.

To our understanding, the motivation for MEMRI translating “There is No Al-Qaeda; It’s a Code Name for a CIA Operation” might be a forewarning to the apprehended collapse of the US Dollar and the Zionists moving to the emerging power, the united Europe!

For, you can not furnish any shred of evidence, independent of the Quran, to establish that Muhammad was not faking the Quran, or that he was not an impostor.
Can you ?
KKK at September 7, 2005 12:42 AM

We don’t need to in view of Tradition numbered 534 in Volume 9 of Sahih Al-Bukhari, quoted below:
===
Narrated Ibn Abbas
Whenever the Prophet offered his Tahajjud prayer, he would say, "O Allah, our Lord! All the praises are for You; You are the Keeper (Establisher or the One Who looks after) of the Heavens and the Earth. All the Praises are for You; You are the Light of the Heavens and the Earth and whatever is therein. You are the Truth, and Your saying is the Truth, and Your promise is the Truth, and the meeting with You is the Truth, and Paradise is the Truth, and the (Hell) Fire is the Truth. O Allah! I surrender myself to You, and believe in You, and I put my trust in You (solely depend upon). And to You I complain of my opponents and with Your Evidence I argue. So please forgive the sins which I have done in the past or I will do in the future, and also those (sins) which I did in secret or in public, and that which You know better than I. None has the right to be worshipped but You."
===

God Almighty is our evidence to the fact that Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was not the author of the Holy Quran, but that the author of the Holy Quran is God Almighty Himself. Further, God Almighty Himself is the evidence that Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was the Seal of the Prophets, peace be upon them, and that he was not an impostor.

The impostor is to appear. From Tradition numbered 1051 of Sunan Abu-Dawood, we have:
===
Narrated Anas ibn Malik
The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist). The tyranny of any tyrant and the justice of any just (ruler) will not invalidate it. One must have faith in Divine decree.
===

Since there are Muslims living now, the Antichrist is yet to appear. That is, the impostor is yet to appear.

Mohideen:

Thank you for your responses, lengthy though they might be.

As I understand it then, you admit that the principle of abrogation existed during the term of Mohammed's career. This happy coincidence would then account for the change of the Qiblah from Jerusalem to Mecca, the repudiation of the so-called Satanic verses, and so on, true? And yet the entire book remains true and unchangeable? Oh my! I think I have vertigo.

In any case the young people referred to in the Turkish web site, who are studying this Qu'ran book, must truthfully be reading instructions to hate and fight, as relayed to humanity by Mohammed on behalf of Allah. According to the percentages presented, the largest segment of the poll got acquainted with jihad on this basis.

I am glad that there are better books to read than the Qu'ran and better paths to tread than Islam, which set the bar for personal responsibility / accountability far higher than any such level Mohammed ever set for himself, "Seal of the Prophets" indeed!

Another "prophet" by the name of Adolf Hitler wrote his autobiography and called it "Mein Kampf," i.e "My Struggle" (or "My Jihad" if you like). He didn't bother to abrogate it either and the world would do well to remember what the results were.

I would like to remind all MEMRI-haters that MEMRI does not make up stories, it only reflects what is being said and written in Arab press. If you hate your face in the mirror, it's probably because you're ugly. As to the selectiveness of it's approach, I can only say that Middle Eastern press is FULL of things worthy of MEMRI's frontpage.

The Mohammedan poster calling himself "Mohideen":

"MEMRI has a goal. In our opinion, that goal is the victory of Israel and the subjugation of her Arab neighbors."

Term sez:
Of course! These 4.5 million murderous, hateful, primitive barbarian Israelis will do anything to subjugate the 500 million Arabs around them!

Then Mohideen, the Mohammedan warrior digs up stuff from 2002 in order to smear MEMRI:

"The second thing that makes me uneasy is that the stories selected by Memri for translation follow a familiar pattern: either they reflect badly on the character of Arabs or they in some way further the political agenda of Israel. I am not alone in this unease."

Term sez:
It just so happens that Arabs and Muslims are more often than not of rather bad character and are hellbent to prove it to the world. If you 'feel uneasy' about this, Mohideen, it is probably more a case of constipation. But of course we are waiting for someone like yourself o demonstrate to us that 'Arabs are of good character...'

Mohideen continues:

"Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations told the Washington Times: "Memri's intent is to find the worst possible quotes from the Muslim world and disseminate them as widely as possible."

Term sez:

Mohideen, by quoting from 'Al Guardian' and this other fearless defender of the Mohammedan faith, Ibrahim Hooper, who represents an organization that has a history of aiding and abetting terrorism, he discredits and soils himself, and not only that:

"Colonel of the IDF reserve would like to see Israel succeed..."

Of course! A colonel of the IDF: What is he to do to please you Mohideen?

Side with the genocidal Arabs instead?

mohideen: You state that (your) god almighty wrote the koran. Perhaps your "god?" did write this gibberish you call the koran.
The Creator God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the Father of Jesus Christ most definitely didn't.
The Dead Sea scrolls contained the book of Isaiah. This copy was in this cave untouched and untampered with for hundreds of years before the ignorant pagan mohamad wrote his dribble.
This same copy of Isaiah has been found to be identical with what we have today in the Bible.
So much for this clown mohamad being told by God to re-write the Bible as it had been de-based over the years.
No mohideen another god or being inspired the koran, NOT the God of the Bible, NOT the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. NOT the God and Father of Jesus Christ.
mohideen I'm afraid, by Biblical standards, you worship a false, pagan god. A god of death, destruction, degregation and despair. numbat

Here "war against Allah" means rejecting the message of Islam, and being critical of it.
KKK at September 8, 2005 12:58 AM

Wrong. Every non-Muslim either consciously or unconsciously rejects Islam. If we accept KKK’s interpretation, then the Muslims are compelled to fight every non-Muslim; that is not so.

The punishment is specified for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger. Here the war is like the current war in Iraq, a war that kills Muslims or attempts to kill the Muslims.

As regards mischief alone, we need to follow 5:13 quoted below:
===
5:13 But because of their breach of their Covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard: they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the Message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them – barring a few – ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind.
===

Consider 6:68-70 also in the light of the current discussion. Quoting, we have:
===
6:68 When thou seest men engaged in vain discourse about Our Signs, turn away from them unless they turn to a different theme. If Satan ever makes thee forget, then after recollection, sit not thou in the company of those who do wrong.

6:69 On their account no responsibility falls on the righteous, but (their duty) is to remind them, that they may (learn to) fear Allah.

6:70 Leave alone those who take their religion to be mere play and amusement, and are deceived by the life of this world. But proclaim (to them) this (truth): that every soul delivers itself to ruin by its own acts; it will find for itself no protector or intercessor except Allah; if it offered every ransom, (or reparation), none will be accepted; such is (the end of) those who deliver themselves to ruin by their own acts: they will have for drink (only) boiling water, and for punishment, one most grievous; for they persisted in rejecting Allah.
===

Anyone who rejects Allah, naturally rejects His Messenger. What are the Muslims to do with those who reject Allah (and by implication His Messenger), leave them alone. Here is a practical explanation of 2:256 that there is no compulsion in Islam.

The punishment – that they will have for drink (only) boiling water, and for punishment, one most grievous – describes the punishment in the Hereafter and not on earth.

The Online Jihad site translates these illuminating poll results from a Turkish jihadist site:
The question: "What acquainted you with Jihad?" …
READING OF THE QUR'AN AND AUTHENTIC HADITH - 24.65% (125)
…
Yet American Muslim advocacy groups continue to exhort Americans to read the Qur'an in order to discover that it is peaceful. Evidently they do this knowing that most Americans will not read it, but that the challenge alone will convince some of them that the Qur'an indeed teaches peace.
Robert at September 6, 2005 10:52 AM

The Jihadwatch site had been implying that the Muslims are duty bound to wage war to spread Islam; that the jihad to be conducted is the offensive jihad. Here we present evidence that the jihad to be carried out is defensive jihad and not offensive jihad.

Tradition numbered 71a in Volume 3 of Fiqh-us-Sunnah is mainly regarding the distribution of zakat. However, it does touch upon jihad. We give the full Tradition below and then extract the portion important for our discussion.
===
The Preference of the Majority Opinion Over That of ash-Shaf'i
The author of ar-Rawdah an-Nadiyyah says: "Distributing all of the zakah to one group is more benefiting to the realization of the word of Allah." In brief, one may say that Allah made zakah applicable only to the eight specifically mentioned categories. Spelling out these categories does not mean that the zakah has to be distributed among them equally or even that it has to be divided among them. The intended meaning, however, is that the categories of sadaqah are similar to various groups of people who are eligible for it. Thus, one who is obligated to pay anything to any category of sadaqah and gives it to a person in a parallel group is considered to be fulfilling what Allah commanded him to do. Contrary to this, if one divides his zakah due into the acknowledged eight categories, if all eight exist, then that would not only be contrary to the practice of the Muslims throughout history, but it would cause hardship to the payer of zakah. For example, if the collected zakah were meager, it would be of no benefit to any designated category--even if it was of one kind, to say nothing if it was of numerous kinds. To endorse such a practice would be tantamount to counter what the Prophet, upon whom be peace, did when he permitted the payment of a penance (kaffarah) from the charity collected for Salmah ibn Sakhr. Obviously, the hadith of as-Suda'i cannot be used as evidence.

There is not a single case in the entire corpus of hadith literature which could be used to make the distribution of zakah to all groups of people obligatory. Using the hadith of Mu'adh as evidence that the Prophet, upon whom be peace, instructed him to take zakah from the rich Yemenites and give it to their poor will not be of much help because it does not establish that the zakah was distributed to all the groups. Nor is the hadith of Ziyad ibn al-Harith as-Suda'i valid in this regard because in its chain of narrators is 'Abdur-Rahman ibn Ziyad al-'Afriqi, whose credibility has been questioned by many scholars. Assuming that this hadith is valid for the point under discussion, the meaning of the division of zakah into parts is its distribution according to the apparent meaning of the Qur'anic 'ayah and what the Prophet, upon whom be peace, had in mind. Assuming that the division of zakah itself is intended, the distribution has to be done according to the specified categories. In this case, any transfer of the share of one group to another, even if the group concerned was for some reason non-existent, will not be permissible. Such an approach will be contrary to the consensus of Muslim scholars. If we accept that, then the deciding factor for the sadaqah's distribution is the leader's wish rather than, and not the specific categories of eligible people. Thus, there is no evidence that makes division obligatory, and it is consequently permissible to give some sadaqah to those eligible people and some to other groups. Indeed, when the leader collects all the sadaqat from his people and all eight categories are eligible to receive them, each group has the right to claim its share. However, he does not have to divide the collected sadaqat among them equally or distribute it without any distinction, for he can give any amount to any group or groups that he wants to, or he can give some without giving the rest if he thinks it is in the interest of Islam and its people. For example, if the sadaqah was collected and then a jihad was announced, meaning that it would become necessary to defend the territory of Islam against the unbelievers, the leader can give some or all of it to the deserving warriors. This also applies to other concerns if the interest of Islam necessitates it.
===

Extracting the relevant part – for emphasis – we have:
===
a jihad was announced, meaning that it would become necessary to defend the territory of Islam against the unbelievers
===
The meaning of jihad itself is to defend. There could be no offensive jihad.

Even the most peaceful individual would fight for his / her survival. Just because the Holy Quran has Verses educating the Muslims in war does not mean Islam is not a religion of peace.

So, unless you are rejecting Maulana Maudoodi's explanation and advocating your own sanitized version, I think you are engaging in clueless negationism against the critical view of Islam.
KKK at September 9, 2005 01:26 AM

Some members opining in this site were very successful in quoting even parts of a Tradition to convey a meaning diametrically opposite to the real meaning. So, it is extremely important for a Muslim to verify the statements alluded to Maulana Maudoodi. I spent the past hour trying to locate an URL on the tafseer of 5:33 by Maulana without any success. Accordingly, I do not know whether my opinion is against the real opinion of Maulana.

I would be very happy to explore the relationship between my opinion and that of Maulana if a Internet reference could be provided. I had purchased the translation of the Holy Quran by Maulana. Unfortunately, those volumes are away in India. Thus, I cannot verify through the print media.

We must understand the fact that Fiqh-us-Sunnah has a much higher standing than any individual’s opinion. When Fiqh-us-Sunnah defines jihad as defensive action, if anyone says otherwise that person has to explain, not us.

We are not against critical views on Islam. Research progresses mainly through criticism. We welcome honest and true criticism. Criticism based on full statements viewed in proper context; not out of context pieces of statements.

Incidentally, in our opinion, the creation of Pakistan itself was an affront to Islam. The only region exclusive to Islam is the Arabian Peninsula; every other region must accept non-Muslim faiths also. We can visualize the mischief of the victors of WWII when they violated Islam by creating Israel where it does not belong, and created a nation exclusively for Muslims in an area where it does not belong.

The war in Iraq, non-Muslims (infidels/Christians) vs. Muslims (momin/believers) is a fight to protect Allah's message from the agression of non-Muslims.
KKK at September 9, 2005 01:21 AM

Wrong again. The war in Iraq was not started as a war against Islam; it was started as a war to protect the US against the WMD of Saddam. The war in Iraq is a war of independence waged by the citizens of Iraq against the invaders whether they are from USA, UK, or from Iran. That war is not a war to protect Allah’s Message. Yes, it might end up upholding the Truth of Islam, which is a possible by product.

Mohideen:

The problem I have with words such as "defensive", "innocence", "justice", "martyrdom", etc. as used by people from an Islamic background is that their definitions are often radically different than my understanding of the word, product as I am of the West.

Having read through large parts of the Qur'an, I think I better understand the Islamic interpretation of these words. In addition, your postings, deliberately or inadvertently, have also demonstrated the Muslim use of these words and I thank you for that.

Now, speaking as a Westerner, it is my view that if justice is to be done throughout the world, and if innocent people are to be protected from martyrdom at the hands of zealots and fanatics eager to find insult, then a suitable defense must be made. The first step towards peace would be to reach consensus on just what this statement means. Unfortunately, even that step seems to be some time off in the future.

Surprised not to find Hurricane Katrina which killed innocent 'infidels'

Posted by: desi_singh at September 6, 2005 04:35 PM

WHO SAYS THEY WERE INFIDELS??

After all the flood came to what do they call it the cresent city???

I saw a lot of people saved who were wearing Crosses??

over 220,000 saved and went to Texas!!!

and the #s haven't come in yet??

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH, WISDOM, SIGHT, AND COURAGE TO STAY THE COURSE TO VICTORY TO DESTROY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM AMEN

PS
What about all them Mulsums killed in that plane crash in Indonesa the other day??

How many was it??

Dear Catherine,
God Almighty is Merciful to all His creation with respect to this life on earth. The religions claim special treatment with respect to the Hereafter only. At least that is the claim of Islam.

So, let us look at a natural disaster as a disaster common to all of us irrespective of religion.

We do hope that the distressed population recovers soon, and gets back to normal life.

However, it is not advisable to live on a perpetual challenge to nature. I personally hope that the insurance payments, if any, would be used to build a new city strictly above the mean sea level. That is, better leave the current submerged New Orleans as a lake and not rebuild there.

Having read through large parts of the Qur'an, I think I better understand the Islamic interpretation of these words.
Chatillon at September 9, 2005 06:05 PM

Dear Chatillon,
I do not know how a western mind thinks. If I understand your post correctly, I believe you do understand the meaning of the words – defensive, innocence, justice, martyrdom etc – from both perspectives – Islamic and Western.

Even though the two of us are of absolutely no consequence compared to the power centers of Bush and Osama, clarity has a potential of spreading as the waves in water. May I request you to give your understanding of the words from both perspectives?

Let us try.

Read the tafseer of Maulana Maudoodi on the historical context of surah Al-Ma'idah (the tablespread, which is surah # 5 in the total of 114 surahs in the Quran). The tafseer clearly states that Jews were ridiculing or creating chaos in collaboration with the Quraish tribe when Muhammad was extending his spread of Islam in the process of creating an Islamic state. The verse (005:033) gives stern warnings to these 'troublemakers' (Jews and Quraish) if they create opposition to Islam.
KKK at September 9, 2005 01:26 AM
===
Visit the University of Southern California, Muslim Student Association website:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau5.html
Click on the surah # 5 and the associated explanation (tafseer) of Maulana Maudoodi. Hopefully (?) one shall find the following lines from his tafseer to surah Al Ma'idah
"To achieve this object, punishments have been prescribed for those who create chaos in the Islamic State, and the Believers have been urged to exert their utmost to establish the Right Way; the sanctity of property has also been emphasized. 33 - 40 "
This, as I read it, imples that chaos created by the non-believers (kafirs) in an Islamic State is to be dealt harshly as explicitly stated in Quran (005:033).
KKK at September 10, 2005 12:48 AM

The site http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/ has the translation of the Holy Quran by Yusuf Ali, Pickthal, and Shakir. It does not have the translation by Maulana. So, we have no way to verify the translation of 5:33 given by Maulana from the Internet.

The USC site gives the following translation of 5:33
===
005.033
YUSUFALI: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;
PICKTHAL: The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;
SHAKIR: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement,
===

What is the mischief referred to? We need to look at the preceding verses. For simplicity, we combine the translation by one author of the Verses 5:27 to 5:33.

005.027
YUSUFALI: Recite to them the truth of the story of the two sons of Adam. Behold! they each presented a sacrifice (to Allah): It was accepted from one, but not from the other. Said the latter: "Be sure I will slay thee." "Surely," said the former, "Allah doth accept of the sacrifice of those who are righteous.
005.028
YUSUFALI: "If thou dost stretch thy hand against me, to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee: for I do fear Allah, the cherisher of the worlds.
005.029
YUSUFALI: "For me, I intend to let thee draw on thyself my sin as well as thine, for thou wilt be among the companions of the fire, and that is the reward of those who do wrong."
005.030
YUSUFALI: The (selfish) soul of the other led him to the murder of his brother: he murdered him, and became (himself) one of the lost ones.
005.031
YUSUFALI: Then Allah sent a raven, who scratched the ground, to show him how to hide the shame of his brother. "Woe is me!" said he; "Was I not even able to be as this raven, and to hide the shame of my brother?" then he became full of regrets-
005.032
YUSUFALI: On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
005.033
YUSUFALI: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

We expect the translation by Maulana to be similar. Please see the translation of 005.032 in which it is clearly stated that – although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land – showing that mere punishment in the Hereafter was not enough to check the excesses committed against the believers. Thus, to ensure that the future believers are given the freedom to defend themselves from excesses against them, they are given permission to punish the guilty in this life also.

In Islam, the punishment for a murderer is the punishment by death; creating mischief – say if someone advises that the believers could be killed and there would be punishment in the Hereafter only – such mischief might lead to murder of the believers by others. Thus, the mischief maker is punished by other means: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land. It is our understanding that the mischief maker would be executed or crucified if the person has killed a believer; he / she would be punished by cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides if she / he has caused injury, but not death. The mischief maker would be expelled if he / she committed no bodily violence, but only spread the lie so that the society is spared future bad influence by the mischief maker.

We have stated as above in view of 2:179 quoted below:
===
In the law of equality there is (saving of) life to you O ye men of understanding! That ye may restrain yourselves.
===

So, criticizing Islam in no way incurs bodily harm; the Muslims are expected to reply to the criticisms, and no more.

A Muslim nation has no permission to exceed the punishment more than the damage it suffered. Not like the current rulers of USA who have killed Muslims many times over the loss in 9/11 in Afghanistan and Iraq, even though 9/11 itself was a false flag operation of the Government of USA.

Dear KKK,

You had quoted twice. The second time you had given the link to the USC web site, which you had repeated just now. That has been verified; it is a comment on Verses 33 to 40.

In your post at 01.26 am of September 9, 2005 you had stated:
===
The verse (005:033) gives stern warnings to these 'troublemakers' (Jews and Quraish) if they create opposition to Islam.
===

Since you are referring to a specific Verse it has to be the meaning of that Verse by Maulana. Please read my response fully. Your apprehensions were answered.

Criticizing Islam does not lead to any physical harm. From our perspective, it is not important that we locate the translation by Maulana. We do not require any third party verification regarding the commentary on Verses 33 – 40.

To cite, Asma-bint-Marwan, was a poetess who was not fond of Islam. She composed satirical/insulting verses directed to the prophet and Islam, and recited them aloud in the market where people used to come for shopping.
Prophet, enraged and insulted by these verses had her decapitated while she was asleep in her tent with her kids. This guy by the name Bilal did this brutal act, and prophet was reported to have stated that an enemy of Islam was eliminated. He blessed Bilal, and since that time killing people critical/insulting Islam was considered to be an act of holiness.
KKK at September 10, 2005 07:40 PM

The ALIM CD has the translation of the Holy Quran by Yusuf Ali, Malik, Asad, and Pickthal, along with the Surah introductions by Malik and Maududi. The Traditions collected as Al-Muwatta, Al-Tirmidhi, Fiqh-us-Sunnah, Qudsi, Sahih Al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and Sunan of Abu Dawood are included in this CD. These define Islam.

A search on ‘Marwan’ yielded 70 Traditions none of which refer to the decapitation of
Asma bint Marwan. A search on the CD on ‘Bilal’ yielded 166 Traditions none of which refer to the decapitation. So, if ever there is any Tradition regarding this decapitation, it must be from one of the non-authentic collections. We do not waste our time considering statements from non-authentic sources.

As regards Salman Rushdie, he attracted a death threat from Ayatollah Khomeini. We do not follow Ayatollah Khomeini, and thus we do not need to defend the fatwa against Salman Rushdie. We follow Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

It is very interesting that KKK claims something on the basis of Maulana’s translation, unable to provide a verifiable source, and when we consider other translations and show that he is wrong, he comes back accusing us. We searched http://www.amazon.com on ‘Quran’ and found 367 books with ‘Quran’ in their titles, none related to the works of Maulana. A search in Amazon on ‘Koran’ yielded 303 books with ‘Koran’ in their title, none related to the work of Maulana. God Almighty showed us a source: http://www.halalco.com/ which sells the translation of the works of Maulana. See http://www.halalco.com/quran_m.html for details. God Almighty willing, we hope to buy the required volume and respond. Those desirous of verifying our quotation are invited to order the volume to be cited from http://www.halalco.com/ and verify our message.

In the absence of any authentic evidence to support the decapitation of Asma bint Marwan, we stick to our conclusion that criticizing Islam does not result in bodily harm.

Now why would Watt (or prophet's first biographer Muhammad Ibn Ishaq) falsify the incident, if that could be the reason for it being rejected from the Islamic tradition system?
KKK at September 12, 2005 12:28 AM

Falsification is the worst offence. There are many mistakes. A biography does not get tested as much as a Tradition. Thus, biographies and histories are not considered on par with the Traditions.

An authentic Hadith, that is, an authentic Tradition is free of mistakes. Further, it has to be consistent with the Holy Quran and other Traditions which are consistent with the Holy Quran. We had by the grace of God Almighty found more than one Tradition found in the collections today to be inconsistent and thus on that count rejected them.

The Science of Hadith excluding the ‘Consistency Test’ is explained in
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/scienceofhadith/brief1/
Please note that the Sahih Al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are shown as examples of authentic collections in the above document in a diagram.

Without in any way imputing any motives to Mr. Watt or Mr. Muhammad ibn Ishaq, we are constrained to reject any statement not found in ALIM CD. Any statement not found in ALIM CD must be established by appropriate reasoning to be authentic to be accepted. The onus of providing such reasoning rests on the person(s) quoting such statements and not on us.

Let us hasten to add that just because a statement is found in ALIM CD that statement must be accepted as true. Any statement that fails the ‘Consistency Test’ is bound to be rejected. Accordingly, we might when the occasion demands test the consistency of the statements found in ALIM CD and decide on their truthfulness.

Let us hasten to add that just because a statement is found in ALIM CD that statement must be accepted as true. Any statement that fails the ‘Consistency Test’ is bound to be rejected. Accordingly, we might when the occasion demands test the consistency of the statements found in ALIM CD and decide on their truthfulness.
There is a mistake in the above given by us. It should be:
===
Let us hasten to add that just because a statement is found in ALIM CD that statement need not be accepted as true. Any statement that fails the ‘Consistency Test’ is bound to be rejected. Accordingly, we might when the occasion demands test the consistency of the statements found in ALIM CD and decide on their truthfulness.

Maulana Maududi did not translate the Quran as in the USC website. He provided the explanations/contextual meanings etc., and the English translations are by Pickthall, Yusuf Ali and Shakir.
KKK at September 10, 2005 07:40 PM

By the grace of God Almighty we purchased “The Meaning of the Quran,” Volume III (Surah Al-Maidah & Al-Anam) Arabic Text with Translation and Commentary by S. Abul Ala Maududi; English Rendering by: Ch. Muhammad Akbar; Edited & Revised by: A. A. Kamal, M.A.; Islamic Publications Ltd., 13 – E, Shahalam Market, Lahore (Pakistan); Eighth Edition March 1988.

We have given all the above details as there is no ISBN and thus the above might uniquely identify the text that gets quoted below.

5: 27 – 31 And tell them accurately the story of the two sons of Adam. When they two offered their sacrifices, the offering of the one was accepted but that of the other was not accepted. The latter said, “I will kill you.” The other answered, “Allah accepts the offerings of the pious people only. (C48) Even if you stretch your hand to kill me, I shall not lift my hand to kill you, (C49) for I fear Allah, the Lord of the Universe; I would rather prefer that you should bear the burden of my sin as well as of your own sin, (C50) and become a dweller of Hell; this is the just retribution of the iniquity of the aggressors.” Even after this his evil soul prompted him to slay his brother without the slightest compunction: so he killed him and became one of the losers. Then Allah sent a raven which began to scratch the ground to show him how he might hide the corpse of his brother. Seeing this, he cried, “Woe be to me! I have not been able to do even as this raven has done and so devise a plan of hiding the corpse of my brother.” (C51) After this he became very remorseful of what he had done. (C52)

5: 32 That was why We prescribed for the children of Israel: (C53) “He who killed any person, unless it be a person guilty of man-slaughter, or of spreading chaos in the land, should be looked upon as though he had slain all mankind, and he who saved the life of any person should be regarded as though he had given life to all mankind.” (C54) But the majority of them went on committing excesses in the land even after Our Messengers came to them one after the other with clear directions.

Let us copy the translation by Yusuf Ali and compare. Copying we get:
===
005.032
YUSUFALI: On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
===
Are there differences in meaning? None. We continue with Maulana.

5: 33-34 The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and run about to spread mischief in the land (C55) is this: they should be put to death or crucified or their alternate hands and feet should be cut off, or they should be banished from the land. (C56) This is the disgrace and ignominy for them in this world and there is in store for them a harsher torment in the Hereafter, except those, who repent before you have power over them for you should know that Allah is Forgiving and Compassionate. (C57)

Again let us copy the translation of 5:33 by Yusuf Ali. We have:
===
005.033
YUSUFALI: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;
===

See again. There is no difference in the translation in terms of meaning. Hence, we conclude that there would be no bodily harm for criticizing Islam.

For the sake of completeness, we quote the comments 48 to 57 given by Maulana.
===
C48: That is, “It is no fault of mine that your sacrifice has not been accepted; it is because you lack piety. You should, therefore, try to foster piety in yourself instead of making an attempt at slaying me.”

C49: It does not mean: “If you attempt to kill me, I will sit with folded hands before you, ready to be killed without any resistance.” What it means is this: “You may cherish evil intentions of murdering me, but I will not; you may make schemes for my murder but I will do nothing to forestall you, even after knowing that you are making preparation for my murder.” In this connection, it should be understood clearly that it is not virtue to offer oneself for murder, nor is it a virtue to refrain from resisting an aggressive attack. True virtue is that one should not plan the murder of an enemy though he might be in search of an opportunity to kill the one. A virtuous man would rather prefer like the noble son of Adam that the enemy might be the aggressor and not he.

C50: That is, “I would rather prefer that you alone should be guilty of the sin of cherishing evil intentions of slaying me than that I should also be guilty of the same thing. Thus you shall bear the burden of your own sin of aggression and of the injury I might inflict on you in self-defence.”

C51: Thus Allah warned the erring son of Adam of his ignorance and folly through a raven. And when once he became aware of the fact that the raven was better equipped for hiding the dead body, he was not only filled with remorse on this account but also began to feel that he had done an evil deed by slaying his brother. This is implied in “After this he became very remorseful of what he had done.”
C52: The story of the two sons of Adam has been related here to reproach the Jews in a subtle manner for their plot to kill the Holy Prophet and some of his eminent Companions. (Please refer to E.N. 30 of this Surah).
The similarity between the two events is quite obvious. The Jews plotted against the Holy Prophet and his Companions for the same reason for which the erring son of Adam had slain his pious brother. The Jews became jealous of the Holy Prophet and his Companions because God withdrew His Favour from the People of the Book and bestowed it upon the un-lettered Arabs just because the former lacked piety and the latter were God-fearing. Instead of considering the matter coolly and considering why they had been condemned and making up for their error which had brought God’s wrath on them, they plotted to kill those people whom God had blessed with His favours. And they did so in spite of the fact that they knew it well that their evil reaction could not win the favour of Allah but would make them even more condemnable than before.

C53: That is, “Allah enjoins the Israelites to refrain from murder because they are showing the same murderous symptoms as were shown by the cruel son of Adam. That is why such strict checks on murder were applied.” But the pity is that these precious instructions are not found in the present Bible. The Talmud, however, says, “To him who kills a single individual of Israel, it shall be reckoned as if he had slain the whole race and he who preserves a single individual of Israel, according to the Book of Allah he preserves the whole world.” It also says that a judge of the Israelites in a case of murder would warn the witness saying, “To him who kills a single individual of Israel, it shall be reckoned as if he has slain the whole race.”

C54: This is to emphasize the sanctity of human life: it is essential for the preservation of human life that each and everyone should regard the life of the other as sacred and help to protect it. The one who takes the life of another without right, does not commit injustice to that one alone, but also proves that he has no feelings of mercy for others. Hence he is most surely the enemy of the whole human race, for if every individual suffered from the same kind of hard-heartedness, the whole human race would come to an end. On the contrary, if one helps to preserve a single human life, he is indeed a helper of all mankind for he possesses those qualities upon which depends the survival of the whole human race.

C55: Here “the land” refers to that country or territory in which the maintenance of law and order is the responsibility of the Islamic State and “to wage war against Allah and His Messenger” is to wage war against the righteous system of government established by the Islamic State. As Allah likes that such a system of government should be established, He sent His Messenger to establish an equitable system of government, which should guarantee peace and justice to human beings, to animals, to trees, to vegetation and to everything in the earth, which may enable human beings to develop to the fullest their natural capabilities; which should exploit natural resources of the earth for the true progress and improvement of humanity and not for its destruction. It is obvious that any attempt, big or small, to undermine or overthrow such an established system, is in reality a war against Allah and His Messenger. It does not make any difference whether that mischief is created by criminals and murderers who cause disorder in the settled and peaceful society, or by armed forces who attempt to overthrow the Islamic State and establish some corrupt un-Islamic system instead. And every sovereign treats such a violation directed against his authority or against any of his officials as war against himself.

C56: An abstract these alternative punishments has been given for the benefit of the judge so that he may exercise his discretion and award punishment according to the nature and extent of the crime. The real object of this is to show that any attempt by any person residing in the Islamic State, to overthrow its government is high treason and a most heinous crime, and that the offender is liable to be awarded any of these capital punishments according to the circumstance.

C57: This implies that if they have refrained from creating mischief and from making any attempt at overthrowing the righteous system, and have shown by their conduct that they are peace-loving and law-abiding good citizens, none of the above mentioned punishments will be inflicted upon them, even if they might have committed any of the crimes before their repentance. They would, however, be liable to be called to account in a court of law for any offence against any individual, such as murder, theft etc., but they will not be tried for any previous offence of treason or rebellion or war against Allah and His Messenger.
===

We expect that any unbiased reader would agree that a criticism of Islam needs to be argued against; there could be no bodily harm of the criticizer.

Your (and other Mohammedans) attitude of asking the non-Muslims to accept your preferred version of the ALIM CD etc., is the root of the problem.
KKK at September 13, 2005 12:42 AM

Fantastic! To avoid the problem, are the Muslims to accept as Islam that given to them by non-Muslims? Islam has to be what is accepted as such by Muslims; thus the contents of the ALIM CD are to be considered today as the definition of Islam. Before the advent of this CD, the Muslims used to list the individual books contained in the ALIM CD as representing Islam.

In terms of translations of the Holy Quran, the International Fiqh Academy considered all the available translations, including the one by Maulana, and decided that the most accurate translation is the one given by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. The sites like http://www.freequran.org distribute the translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali.

In any discussion, we need to have a common frame of reference: the accepted collection of Islamic knowledge is given in ALIM CD.

If the experts giving opinion in this site and similar sites are really interested in removing the offensive jihad from the earth, they would be successful accepting the common reference of ALIM CD and then establishing that Islam recommends violence. The fact of the matter is: Islam is indeed a religion of peace.

We believe that Jihad is ingrained in the Quran, and that Quran and Western values are anti-thesis of each other.
KKK at September 13, 2005 12:42 AM

True jihad is ingrained in the Holy Quran: the defensive jihad. We know that the western values are indeed compatible with that of the Holy Quran. That is how many Americans and Europeans are embracing Islam now.

See http://www.jihadunspun.com/intheatre_internal.php?article=104132&list=/home.php&

Even though the author of the above URL argues for “offensive jihad”, his statement below is very useful for us. We quote:
===
When dealing with a particular issue and before reaching a Fatwa when one was in fact required, scholars gathered and recorded all relevant evidence from Qur’an, Hadith, relevant practice or verdicts by the messenger of Allah (PBUH) and the righteous Khalifs after him. As things progressed, scholars refined definitions and terms that were not known during the time of early generations. Jihad was then divided into “Jihad Al-Daf’a” (Defensive Jihad) and “Jihad Al-Talab” (Offensive Jihad) …
===

We do the same as the scholars giving Fatwa do. The major difference is that we rely on the consistency of the Holy Quran. The insistence on consistency permits a verdict to be given as soon as enough information to arrive at a verdict is collected. We do not collect all available information as such an effort ends up collecting innumerable redundant information and is highly inefficient.

The jihad as defined in the Holy Quran and the Sunnah is a single comprehensive jihad, which includes war to defend the Muslim nation, not to expand Islam. Let no mortal claim that he / she has the authority to abrogate, which rests with God Almighty alone. Verse 256 of Chapter 2 of the Holy Quran cannot be abrogated as it is found in the Holy Quran. Thus, there is no compulsion in Islam. Further, we have already quoted – in this discussion – from Fiqh-us-Sunnah to the effect that jihad is defensive only. Fiqh-us-Sunnah is the consensus of the scholars.

We would like to remind ourselves that there are two groups of war mongers apparently fighting each other but really helping each other in destroying Islam. One is the CIA; and the other is the Al-Qaeda, which is the creation of the CIA and a false flag operation of the CIA as per a retired Turkish Intelligence Officer.

The accepted collection is really Muslims view. It is not necessary for non-Muslims to accept the ALIM CD crap.
KKK at September 14, 2005 12:21 AM

What is the aim of Jihadwatch? If it is to wean the Muslim youth away from the jihad sponsored by Al-Qaeda, the creation of CIA, you have to talk to them using their language: the accepted books that define Islam.

If you refuse to do that, you are creating a phantom – a mutilated Islam – and simply justifying the mindless war that kills innocents in countries that have no defense against the air power. This simply means the might is right. Pray, where is your civilization?

We would like to quote Verse 32 from Chapter 9 of the Holy Quran:
===
Fain would they extinguish Allah’s light with their mouths but Allah will not allow but that His light should be perfected even though the unbelievers may detest (it).
===