| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
I have explained here why CAIR's fatwa is phony. Now the insightful and courageous Larry Elder (thanks to A Friend) weighs in as well:
The fatwa denounces Islamic extremism. Or does it?...For starters, the fatwa never defines "innocent lives" and condemns killing someone "unjustly." This represents a hole big enough to drive a Hummer through. Terrorism expert Steven Emerson said, "It [the fatwa] does not condemn by name any Islamic group or leader. In short, it is a fake fatwa designed merely to deceive the American public into believing that these groups are moderate. In fact, officials of both organizations [FCNA and CAIR] have been directly linked to and associated with Islamic terrorist groups and Islamic extremist organizations. One of them is an unindicted co-conspirator in a current terrorist case; another previous member was a financier to al-Qaeda."
Some U.S. Muslim leaders, scholars and commentators also saw through the ruse. Omid Safi, who teaches religion at Colgate University, said the fatwa did not go far enough, "...I would be more inclined to say there are elements of extremism in many parts of our tradition. Rather than simply saying these are not a part of Islam, I would acknowledge that these trends are there and do away with them."
Well, there we have the best thing I've ever heard my man Omid say. He is starting to sound like...me!
Muqtedar Khan, author of American Muslims: Bridging Faith and Freedom, said of the fatwa, "They should have been at least specific about events, if not individuals or organizations. They did not condemn al Qaeda or [Osama] bin Laden. It would have had more punch to end all these claims that American Muslims are not doing enough to end terrorism if they had."What does the Council on American-Islamic Relations say about these critics? Its spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper, said the Council failed to mention persons or groups because "it would have been a laundry list"! Hooper added, "I think you can safely regard anyone listed on the State Department list [of terrorist groups] as included." Such a list might include groups like Hamas. But according to terrorism expert Emerson, "CAIR has repeatedly attacked the prosecutions of Islamic terrorists arrested and/or convicted since 9/11 and has attacked the government's freezing of Islamic terrorist fronts as part of a 'war against Islam' by the United States. CAIR has led protests against the deportation of radical Islamic clerics who have called for jihad or who have been fundraisers for Hamas."
Since CAIR does not wish to list names, they might consider amending their fatwa, along the following lines:
1. It is a sin for a Muslim to kill a non-Muslim, except in self-defense. And Islam is not, we repeat, not, under attack.
2. The Israeli-Palestinian struggle represents a dispute between two legitimate nationalist movements. This dispute must be resolved peacefully between the two parties.
3. Islam is not incompatible with democracy.
Short and sweet. No names named. But this statement acknowledges the extremism operating under its name in Islam, and it rejects the idea that the West and the "Zionists" threaten Islam.
Posted by Robert at August 11, 2005 7:02 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Since CAIR does not wish to list names, they might consider amending their fatwa, along the following lines:
1. It is a sin for a Muslim to kill a non-Muslim, except in self-defense. And Islam is not, we repeat, not, under attack.
2. The Israeli-Palestinian struggle represents a dispute between two legitimate nationalist movements. This dispute must be resolved peacefully between the two parties.
3. Islam is not incompatible with democracy.
Robert at August 11, 2005 07:02 AM
We strongly advice CAIR not to yield to any of the above suggestions. Remember 2:120 when dealing with the Jewish controlled advocates of “good behavior” on the part of Muslims.
===
2: 120 Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religion. Say: “The Guidance of Allah – that is the (only) Guidance,” wert thou to follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither Protector nor Helper against Allah.
===
Islam as portrayed by the Holy Quran and Sunnah is indeed a religion of peace. Robert discusses a mutilated Islam in his book: “The Politically Incorrect Guide to ISLAM (And the Crusades)” He mutilates Islam by propounding the ‘Principle of Abrogation.’ The terrorists might say that certain Verses of the Holy Quran predominate over certain other Verses. They are wrong. Accepting the terrorists’ wrong interpretation of Islam as “Gospel Truth,” and claiming that the Holy Quran must be modified is decidedly the wrong approach.
The correct approach is to strengthen the hands of the moderate Muslims who understand that each and every word of the Holy Quran as available today is alive and effective and challenge the terrorists giving support to the moderate Muslims.
Robert suggests that the Muslims should say: ”Islam is not, we repeat, not, under attack.” How could this be true? If influential persons like Robert mutilate Islam using the ‘Principle of Abrogation,’ how can we say that “Islam is not under attack?” Islam is under attack until the false ‘Principle of Abrogation’ is rejected and the discussion is on the basis of the whole of the Holy Quran, and not a mutilated version.
The creation of Israel was meant to be a challenge to Islam. Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, had said as below:
===
1. Tradition numbered 814 from Sahih Muslim
Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab
Umar heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslims.
2. Tradition numbered 18 Volume 45 of Al-Muwatta Hadith
The Expulsion of the Jews from Madina
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Two deens shall not co-exist in the Arabian Peninsula."
Malik said that Ibn Shihab said, ''Umar ibn al-Khattab searched for information about that until he was absolutely convinced that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had said, 'Two deens shall not co-exist in the Arabian Peninsula,' and he therefore expelled the jews from Khaybar."
===
There could be no religion other than Islam inside the Arabian Peninsula. So, whether we call the land Israel or Palestine, only Islam could be practiced there. If CAIR or any other group accepts the second suggestion, they violate the Sunnah.
Robert has suggested that the Muslims should declare that “Islam is not incompatible with democracy.” Never. Never can Islam and the so called majority rule in democracy co exist. Each and every Prophet, peace be upon him, had strived against the unjust behavior of the majority to establish the rule of God. If they had accepted democracy, then they should have lived in harmony with all the injustices practiced by the majority. Islam is for just treatment of all; never for the tyranny of the majority.
If ever there is genuine desire to counter the terrorists, please accept that there is no ‘Principle of Abrogation,’ and interpret Islam as it should be: it is indeed a religion of peace. As long as we mutilate Islam using the wrong ‘Principle of Abrogation,’ we are aiding the terrorists and not stopping them.
In conclusion, none of the suggestions could be accepted by a Muslim.
Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at August 11, 2005 8:53 AM
"2. The Israeli-Palestinian struggle represents a dispute between two legitimate nationalist movements. This dispute must be resolved peacefully between the two parties."
--- from the article above, listed as a desideratum
But to request of Muslims that they frame the Jihad against Israel as an "Israeli-Palestinian struggle" which is a "dispute beteween two legitimate nationalist movements" is to ask them to do more or less what, as a matter of propaganda, they have been doing for the past several decades. They have been presenting the Arab (and Muslim) opposition to the Infidel state of Israel, based clearly on the tenets of Islam (which cannot accept such a sovereign state, especially not one in the middle of dar al-Islam).
Among Elder's suggestions, this one is completely wrong -- completely backwards.
What one would ask, instead, is for Muslims and Arabs to admit the following:
Their opposition to Israel has been based on the unwillingness to permit a state run by Infidels to exist on land that Muslims once controlled. That opposition, of course, extends to all such territories (Spain, India). Ultimately the wholeInfidel world, the entire dar al-Harb, must be overwhelmed, taken into dar al-Islam. But some places -- Israel, Spain, India -- have priority, as they were once ruled by Islam, and caliph quondam, caliphque futurus appears to be the rule here of these Muslim knights of their own Arthurian legend.
So Muslims must admit that this is the basis for their opposition, and must allow for the possibility of non-Muslims to have their own states in their own historic homelands (similarly, Arab Muslims should allow Kurds and Berbers and other non-Arab Muslims to possess autonomy or even sovereignty). The phoniness of the "Palestinian people" -- invented in order precisely to promote that which Mr. Elder things should be promoted -- the idea of a conflict between two nationalities -- should be seen for the politically-inspired and quite successful propaganda that it is.
So, whatever one makes of the rest of Elder's remarks, the second point he makes is not only not useful, but dangerous.
Posted by: Hugh at August 11, 2005 9:17 AM
Their opposition to Israel has been based on the unwillingness to permit a state run by Infidels to exist on land that Muslims once controlled.
Hugh at August 11, 2005 09:17 AM
Wrong. The area of exclusive Islam is the Arabian Peninsula alone; everywhere outside the Arabian Peninsula the Muslims must co exist with non-Muslims. The claim that – a land once Islamic must be always Islamic – plays into the hands of the terrorists. The above has no sanction in Islam.
at August 11, 2005 2:51 PM
A comedian parodying Islam could not have done a better job than Mohideen to show the absurdities of the twisted logic that permeates the Muslim mind.
To summarize Mohideen, no Jews allowed (and for that matter neither are Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Shintoists, Sikhs, Zoroastrians (did I leave anyone out?), and Rastafarians, can not forget the Rastafarians (probably the purest form of spirituality around!), BUT Islam is for the "just treatment of all!"
That just treatment must be that Islam will despise all non-muslims equally. Islam were it does exists as the majority is itself the tyranny of the majority. The very language of the Koran, people of the book must feel subdued, attests to this tyranny of the majority. To force a human being, who is endowed by the creator with certain inalienable rights, to feel subdued by collective is not just treatment of all.
Do not confuse modern representative forms of democracy, with its inviolate ground rules established to avoid the very tyranny of the majority feared by Mohidden but so practiced in Muslim majority states, with mob rule. What Islam can not accept is that it is just one of many beliefs among equal peers.
Mohideen, I am glad you reared your ugly head again. On another thread you posted the "God of the Bible (original edition)" is the same God of the Koran. To refer to the original edition makes a very powerful statement.
Pray tell, where might one find this original edition, and how does it differ from all the known editions, whose translations have been verified as conforming to ancient texts exiting from a few millenia ago? Then again, considering that the Bible may be (irrespective of ones personal belief) a historical account of a people spanning several milllenia itself, at what point in this account did the original edition appear? Or is this just another Islamic machination, a fallacy created by Islam to thereby establish the legitimacy of Islam itself?
Posted by: Lisa at August 11, 2005 2:54 PM
The land of Judea was given to the Jews through God's covenant with them, the Koran even states so. No, Mohideen, you state that this the Jews should even be expelled form this land since it is now part of the Arabain peninsula. Do tell, just where is the land delimiter of the Arabian peninsula? A plain topography map (no politicalal borders shown or required) shows Judea to be more contiguous with the Sinai peninsula, not the Arabian peninsula. Since a penisula is a land mass surround on three sides by water, there must be some naturally occuring topography that delimits the land border of the peninsula. The river Jordan appears to provide at least part of this topography, clearly placing Judea outside of the Arabian peninsula.
Posted by: Lisa at August 11, 2005 3:33 PM
Within this discussion of which God gave to which people which land is the abhorrent proposition that any such land shall remain the exclusive province, to the exclusion of all others, of any one group. In giving Judea to the Jews, even God did not make this exclusionary to the non-Jew.
But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God. Leviticus 19:34
The creator of all things gave the whole of earth to his creation, all of mankind. A claim that the Arabian penisula must be and always be exclusively moslem is nothing more than bigotry in the eyes of the Lord. Perhaps Scandanavia, Iceland and Greenland shall always belong to the Vikings? Should Europe be returned to the Vandals, Gauls and Goths? Yahweh definitely gave Jamaica to the Rastafarians.
Posted by: Lisa at August 11, 2005 4:08 PM
Lisa:
"What Islam can not accept is that it is just one of many beliefs among equal peers."
Enjoyed your comments, however: I could not disagree more with the above statement. Islam is in now way equal to any other religion since it doesn't have the very basic concept of the 'golden rule', which is "do not do unto others as...."
Islam is a totalitarian ideology based on conquest and booty, it is no more than a vile and evil stratagem of war by a marauding caravan raider dreamed up in the 7th century, Mohammed,- who cleverly used religion to indoctrinate the 'believers'.
Islam is spiritually worthless, as we can clearly see everywhere on ' planet Muslim':
There is no development of the mind, no science, no medicine, nothing worth having, no arts, no literature, no architecture, nothing that we could want or need from them.
Only the oil. A tragic accident of geology. If it wasn't for that, all of Arabia would remain sand-dunes and a few beduins trucking behind camels and goats.
Posted by: Terminator at August 11, 2005 4:52 PM
Islam is a totalitarian ideology based on conquest and booty, it is no more than a vile and evil stratagem of war by a marauding caravan raider dreamed up in the 7th century, Mohammed,- who cleverly used religion to indoctrinate the 'believers'.
Terminator, you summed that up beautifully.
Posted by: Razdan at August 11, 2005 5:26 PM
Only the oil. A tragic accident of geology. If it wasn't for that, all of Arabia would remain sand-dunes and a few beduins trucking behind camels and goats.
Terminator at August 11, 2005 04:52 PM
How lucky would the world be, if it was so? We quote Tradition numbered 463, Volume 3 of Sahih Al-Bukhari:
===
Narrated Abu Huraira
The Prophet said, "Allah did not send any prophet but shepherded sheep." His companions asked him, "Did you do the same?" The Prophet replied, "Yes, I used to shepherd the sheep of the people of Mecca for some Qirats."
===
To be a shepherd is to share the honor of doing a job done by Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them, and also by Prophet Moses, peace be upon him. We do look forward to those days of peace and tranquil.
Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at August 11, 2005 6:26 PM
Terminator,
I thank you for your kind words concerning my posts. I too enjoy reading yours. Yet, I stand by my sentence
"What Islam can not accept is that it is just one of many beliefs among equal peers."
If Islam where to accept that it is just one other belief among innumerable others, whether monotheistic, polytheistic, spiritual, inner consciousness, pagan, or even non-belief, what would happen to Islam itself? It would collapse. One of its pillars, the very foundation of its belief, the need to wage jihad against unbelievers, idolators, Hindus, Jews and Christians who refuse to accept the prophethood of Mohammed would lose its entire reason for existence.
If Islam believed itself to be a peer among equals, then every verse in the Koran commanding for slaughter of unbelievers, commanding the submission of people of book to acknowledge the prophethood of Mohammed, would contradict what it also believes to be the inviolate word of Allah. Even the most perfect fictional computer ever made, the HAL 9000, could not resolve this dilemna: how can I be commanded to assert my primacy over non-believers concurrently with being commanded to regard them as my equal.
As a peer among equals, Islam would be no more. If that were to happen, hopefully they all convert to Rastafarianism.
Every time Mohideen spouts out platitudes like Islam is a religion of peace, Islam deems every one to be treated fairly, he immediately contradicts himself in the very next sentence with some reason, usually the inviolate word of Allh as appearing in the Koran, why Islam and Moslems must nonetheless remain supreme and be the lords and masters over everyone else.
The statement that Islam can not accept itself as one among equal peers therefore remains true.
Posted by: Lisa at August 11, 2005 6:31 PM
The creator of all things gave the whole of earth to his creation, all of mankind. A claim that the Arabian penisula must be and always be exclusively moslem is nothing more than bigotry in the eyes of the Lord.
Lisa at August 11, 2005 04:08 PM
The Creator of all things did create Prophet Adam, peace be upon him, and mother Eve, Allah be pleased with her, and gave them freedom to eat of the fruits of the Garden except that of one tree. Satan, the accursed, induced Prophet Adam, peace be upon him, and mother Eve, Allah be pleased with her, to eat of the forbidden fruit and caused the mankind to live on earth.
Earth is the place of battle between Satan and the descendants of Prophet Adam, peace be upon him, and mother Eve, Allah be pleased with her. As with the forbidden tree in the Garden, through Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, God Almighty has reserved just a small speck of land, the Arabian Peninsula, for the Muslims only. Even that is disputed. To us, such a dispute implies obeying Satan. May God Almighty guide us to defeat Satan.
Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at August 11, 2005 6:36 PM
Mohideen said "Islam is under attack until the false ‘Principle of Abrogation’ is rejected..."
"The creation of Israel was meant to be a challenge to Islam."
"There could be no religion other than Islam inside the Arabian Peninsula." etc.
Thank you again, Mohideen, for demonstrating the futility of using reason or compromise when dealing with Islam, even those so-called "moderate" Moslems. The sooner that the majority of non-Moslems hear your message of intolerance, the better for all of us.
at August 11, 2005 6:41 PM
Do tell, just where is the land delimiter of the Arabian peninsula? A plain topography map (no politicalal borders shown or required) shows Judea to be more contiguous with the Sinai peninsula, not the Arabian Peninsula.
Lisa at August 11, 2005 03:33 PM
The Suez Canal causes the Sinai Peninsula to become a part of the Arabian Peninsula. One point of the line demarcating the Arabian Peninsula is near the town of Iskendarun in Turkey with latitude of 36.5817 and a longitude of 36.1650. The other point is near the Iranian town of Bandar-e Khomeyni with latitude of 30.4356 and a longitude of 49.1056. All the land mass south east of this line forms the current Arabian Peninsula.
Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at August 11, 2005 7:05 PM
If I follow the rather contorted logic of the Muslim poster above, it is untrue to claim, as I do, that opposition to Israel is based on a refusal to countenance a non-Islamic sovereign state in the midst of dar al-Islam. No, says this poster, I am wrong (for the record, let me assure everyone else that I am right). The reason for opposition to Israel is, he claims, that the Land of Israel, as it is known to Jews and some Christians, or the Holy Land, as it is known to the remaining Christians, is in fact on the "Arabian Peninsula." Then this same poster offers us what the French might call his "coordinates" -- his latitude and longitude. And by his reckoning, dead or otherwise, the entire Land of Israel or Holy Land is well within the Arabian Peninsula.
And what does that mean, gentle reader? It means that of course no Jews or Christians can be allowed to reside there permanently, for as we all know from our Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, the Arabian Peninsula is strictly off-limits to all non-Muslims.
So that is his position. That is what he claims all Muslims believe. Well, let's accept that claim. Let us act as if all Muslims agree with him, that there is no place in the Land of Israel, no place in the Holy Land, for Jews or Christians -- because, you see, that area is part of the Arabian Peninsula.
Very well then, you have made yourself clear. Thakn you. I think all of us, Christians and Jews and all others, are glad to have that clarified. Now we know exactly why we have to support Israel to the hilt -- and beyond.
Posted by: Hugh at August 11, 2005 7:14 PM
Mohideen, I am glad you reared your ugly head again. On another thread you posted the "God of the Bible (original edition)" is the same God of the Koran. To refer to the original edition makes a very powerful statement.
Pray tell, where might one find this original edition, and how does it differ from all the known editions, whose translations have been verified as conforming to ancient texts exiting from a few millenia ago? Then again, considering that the Bible may be (irrespective of ones personal belief) a historical account of a people spanning several milllenia itself, at what point in this account did the original edition appear? Or is this just another Islamic machination, a fallacy created by Islam to thereby establish the legitimacy of Islam itself?
Lisa at August 11, 2005 02:54 PM
Lisa, thank you very much for agreeing that I do have a head! As a Muslim, my first line of argument would naturally be from Islam. Quoting Verse 23 of Chapter 39 of the Holy Quran, we have:
===
39:23 Allah has revealed (from time to time) the most beautiful Message in the form of a Book, consistent with itself, (yet) repeating (its teaching in various aspects): the skins of those who fear their Lord tremble thereat: then their skins and their hearts do soften to the celebration of Allah’s praises. Such is the guidance of Allah: He guides therewith whom He pleases, but such as Allah leaves to stray, can have none to guide.
===
Combining Verse 156 of Chapter 6 of the Holy Quran gives the answer. Quoting 6:156, we have:
===
6:156 Lest ye should say: “The Book was sent down to two Peoples before us, and for our part, we remained unacquainted with all that they learned by assiduous study;”
===
The two Peoples are the Jews and the Christians. The Book is the same. It was given in the language of the Prophet, peace be upon him. The evidence is found in Verses 44 and 45 of Chapter 41 of the Holy Quran.
===
41:44 Had We sent this as a Quran (in a language) other than Arabic, they would have said: “Why are not its verses explained in detail? What! (a Book) not in Arabic? And (a Messenger) an Arab? Say: It is a guide and a healing to those who believe; and for those who believe not, there is a deafness in their ears, and it is blindness in their (eyes): they are (as it were) being called from a place far distant.”
41:45 WE certainly gave Moses the Book aforetime: but disputes arose herein. Had it not been for a Word that went forth before from thy Lord, (their differences) would have been settled between them: but they remained in suspicious disquieting doubt thereon.
===
It is simple logic to understand that the Unique God gives the Unique Message in all languages. Since the Holy Quran is the protected Book, every other Book (the Holy Torah and the Holy Bible) would of necessity be consistent with the Holy Quran. The Holy Quran is the only Book that was recorded in writing as it was revealed. Thus, the chance of errors creeping in the other Books is indeed very high as they were simply committed to memory and recorded after a few years from memory. So, we claim that the original Holy Bible given to Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them, would be consistent with the Holy Quran. Since the current Holy Bible seems to be inconsistent with the Holy Quran, we assert that it is not the original.
at August 11, 2005 7:50 PM
Mohideen writes
"The correct approach is to strengthen the hands of the moderate Muslims."
Mohideen, the "good cop, bad cop" trick was invented by westerners. Please don't try to use the routine on us.
Mohideen writes
"None of the above solutions could be accepted by a Muslim."
Mohideen, no Muslim accepts any suggestions. The only thing Muslims understand is force, liberally applied. As more and more people wake up to the threat, the force will increase.
at August 11, 2005 8:59 PM
So that is his position. That is what he claims all Muslims believe. Well, let's accept that claim. Let us act as if all Muslims agree with him, that there is no place in the Land of Israel, no place in the Holy Land, for Jews or Christians -- because, you see, that area is part of the Arabian Peninsula.
Very well then, you have made yourself clear. Thakn you. I think all of us, Christians and Jews and all others, are glad to have that clarified. Now we know exactly why we have to support Israel to the hilt -- and beyond.
Hugh at August 11, 2005 07:14 PM
Dar-Al-Islam under Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him:
When Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him descends he would establish a large area of land in which Muslims alone could survive. All non-Muslims would perish as given in Tradition numbered 1370 of Sahih Muslim quoted below:
===
Narrated An-Nawwas ibn Sam'an
Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him) mentioned of the Dajjal one day in the morning. He sometimes described him as insignificant and sometimes described (his turmoil) as very significant (and we felt) as if he were in the cluster of the date-palm trees. When we went to him (to the Holy Prophet) in the evening and he read (the signs of fear) on our faces, he said: What is the matter with you? We said: Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him) you mentioned the Dajjal this morning (sometimes describing him) as insignificant and sometimes very important, until we began to think he was present in some (nearly) part of the cluster of the date-palm trees. So he said: I harbour fear in regard to you in so many other things besides the Dajjal. If he comes forth while I am among you, I shall contend with him on your behalf, but if he comes forth while I am not among you, a man must contend on his own behalf and Allah will take care of every Muslim on my behalf (and safeguard him against his evil). He (the Dajjal) will be a young man with twisted, cropped hair, and a blind eye. I compare him with AbdulUzza ibn Qatan. He who among you will survive to see him should recite over him the opening verses of Surah al-Kahf (xviii). He will appear on the way between Syria and Iraq and will spread mischief right and left. O servant of Allah! Adhere (to the path of Truth). We said: Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him), how long will he stay on Earth? He said: For forty days, one day like a year, one day like a month, one day like a week, and the rest of the days will be like your days. We said: Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him) will one day's prayer suffice for the prayers of the day equal to one year? Thereupon he said: No, but you must make an estimate of the time (and then observe prayer). We said: Allah's apostle (peace be upon him) how quickly will he walk upon the earth? Thereupon he said: Like cloud driven by the wind. He will come to the people and invite them (to a wrong religion); they will affirm their faith in him and respond to him. He will then give a command to the sky: there will be rainfall upon the Earth and it will grow crops. Then in the evening, their pasturing animals will come to them with their humps very high, their udders full of milk and their flanks distended. He will then come to another people and invite them. But they will reject him so he will go away from them; they will have a drought and nothing will be left with them in the form of wealth. He will then walk through the desert and say to it: Bring forth your treasures. The treasures will come out and gather before him like a swarm of bees. He will then call someone in the flush of youth, strike him with the sword, cut him into two pieces and (make these pieces lie at the distance which is generally between the archer and his target. He will then call (that young man) and he will come forward laughing with his face gleaming (with happiness). It will at this very time that Allah will send Christ, son of Mary. He will descend at the white minaret on the eastern side of Damascus, wearing two garments lightly dyed with saffron and placing his hands on the wings of two Angels. When he lowers his head, there will fall beads of perspiration from his head, and when he raises it up, beads like pearls will scatter from it. Every non-believer who smells the odour of his body will die and his breath will reach as far as he is able to see. He will then search for him (Dajjal) until he catches hold of him at the gate of Ludd and kills him. Then a people whom Allah had protected will come to Jesus, son of Mary, and he will wipe their faces and inform them of their ranks in Paradise. It will be under such conditions that Allah will reveal to Jesus these words: I have brought forth from among My servants such people against whom none will be able to fight; you take these people safely to Tur, and then Allah will send Gog and Magog and they will swarm down from every slope. The first of them will pass the lake of Tiberias and drink out of it. And when the last of them passes, he will say: There was once water there. Jesus and his companions will then be besieged here (at Tur, and they will be so hard pressed) that the head of the ox will be dearer to them than one hundred dinars. Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him), Jesus, and his companions will supplicate Allah, Who will send to them insects (which will attack their necks) and in the morning they would perish as one single person. Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him), Jesus, and his companions, then come down to Earth and they will not find on Earth as much space as a single span that is not filled with putrefaction and stench. Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him), Jesus, and his companions will then beseech Allah who will send birds whose necks would be like those of Bactrian camels and they will carry them away and throw them where Allah wills. Then Allah will send rain which no house of mud-bricks or (tent of) camel-hair will keep out and it will wash the Earth until it resembles a mirror. Then the Earth will be told to bring forth its fruit and restore its blessing and, as a result thereof, there will grow (such a big) pomegranate that a group of people will be able to eat it and seek shelter under its skin, a dairy cow will give so much milk that a whole party will be able to drink it. The milking camel will give such (a large quantity of) milk that the whole tribe will be able to drink from it, and the milking-sheep will give so much milk that the whole family will be able to drink from it. At that time Allah will send a pleasant wind which will soothe (people) even under their armpits. He will take the life of every Muslim and only the wicked will survive who will commit adultery like asses and the Last Hour would come to them.
===
Would this land of Islam include the current state of Israel? There is no dispute that the town of Ra’s Al Hadd of Oman is a part of the Arabian Peninsula. No Prophet, peace be upon him, has restricted the land of Islam. Thus, the town of Ra’s Al Hadd declared to be a part of the land of Islam by Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, would remain so under Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him too.
Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, is expected to reside in Jerusalem. So, to keep the town of Ra’s Al Hadd Islamic, the smell of Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, is expected to reach that town too. The coordinates of Ra’s Al Hadd are: latitude – 22.5372; longitude – 59.7950. The city of Jerusalem has the coordinates of 31.7500 as latitude and 35.0000 as longitude. From http://worldatlas.com/aatlas/imageg.htm we find:
===
Distance between Lines If you divide the circumference of the earth (approximately 25,000 miles) by 360 degrees, the distance on the earth's surface for each one degree of latitude or longitude is just over 69 miles, or 111 km. Note: As you move north or south of the equator, the distance between the lines of longitude gets shorter until they actually meet at the poles. At 45 degrees N or S of the equator, one degree of longitude is about 49 miles.
===
A simple calculation gives the distance between successive lines of latitude or longitude at a latitude of 30 degrees is 59.75 miles. The distance between Jerusalem and Ra’s Al Hadd in the East - West direction is (59.7950 – 35.000) x 59.75 = 1,481.5 miles. The distance in the North – South direction is (31.7500 – 22.5372) x 59.75 = 550.5 miles. The aerial distance works out to 1,580.5 miles. Thus, the land of Islam under Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, is a circle of radius approximately 1,581 miles with the city of Jerusalem as center.
What are we trying to do: Out bid God Almighty? If we obey God Almighty and leave the Arabian Peninsula to be a land of Islam, we do have a chance of avoiding unnecessary bloodshed.
at August 12, 2005 12:54 AM
Mohideen said "Every non-believer who smells the odour of his body will die and his breath will reach as far as he is able to see. He will then search for him (Dajjal) until he catches hold of him at the gate of Ludd and kills him. Then a people whom Allah had protected will come to Jesus, son of Mary, and he will wipe their faces and inform them of their ranks in Paradise."
From this, he deduces "Thus, the land of Islam under Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, is a circle of radius approximately 1,581 miles with the city of Jerusalem as center."
Okay, Mohideen, you've gone from blatant support for jihad to head-scratching wierdness. You're deducing the radius that Jesus (the non-believer) will be able to smell his dead body for a 1,581 mile radius? Is this related to Bukhari's admonition to blow one's nose three times in the morning in order to get rid of the Devil who slept in your sinuses? I'm beginning to get an idea of the logical process that jihadists go through to justify their actions. Thanks.
Posted by: special_guest at August 12, 2005 3:08 AM
Mohideen, I hear Osama and all the other Islamic terrorists also claim Chechnya and Kashmir as Islamic land. Wonder where they get that from the Koran? Or are you saying all the Ilsmaic scholars have got it wrong?
No matter what you say, it is pretty obvious. The muslim demands are never ending. Today it is Palestine. Tomorrow, Chechnya. After that, Kashmir... and inshah Allah... the rest of the world.
So stop this charade that all Islam asks for is for is the Arabian peninsula.
Posted by: Razdan at August 12, 2005 6:51 AM
Is this related to Bukhari's admonition to blow one's nose three times in the morning in order to get rid of the Devil who slept in your sinuses?
special_guest at August 12, 2005 03:08 AM
We believe special_guest is referring to Tradition numbered 516 in volume 4 of Sahih Al-Bukhari, quoted below:
===
Narrated Abu Huraira
The Prophet said, "If anyone of you rouses from sleep and performs the ablution, he should wash his nose by putting water in it and then blowing it out thrice, because Satan has stayed in the upper part of his nose all the night."
===
To us the above Tradition implies the following:
1. The person did not mention the name of Allah while entering the house. As per Tradition numbered 947 in Sahih Muslim, mentioning the name of Allah while entering the house stops the Satan from entering the house.
2. The person did not mention the name of Allah while eating, thus permitting Satan to share the food with him as per the same Tradition 947 in Sahih Muslim.
3. The person did not declare that ‘there is no compulsion in Islam’ and the rest of Verse 2:255 (in some collections 2:256) while going to bed. If such declaration was made, Allah would appoint a guard to protect the sleeping person from Satan as reported in Tradition numbered 530 in volume 6 of Sahih Al-Bukhari.
A Muslim is advised to follow the Traditions quoted below to ensure that Satan does not even come near him while sleeping.
Tradition numbered 947 in Sahih Muslim:
===
Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah
Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: When a person enters his house and mentions the name of Allah at the time of entering it and while eating the food, Satan says (addressing himself): You have no place to spend the night and no evening meal; but when he enters without mentioning the name of Allah, the Satan says: You have found a place to spend the night, and when he does not mention the name of Allah while eating food, he (the Satan) says: You have found a place to spend the night and evening meal. This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Jabir ibn Abdullah through the same chain of transmitters but with a slight variation of wording.
===
Tradition numbered 530 in volume 6 of Sahih Al-Bukhari:
===
Narrated Abu Masud
The Prophet said, "If somebody recited the last two Verses of Surat Al-Baqara at night, that will be sufficient for him."
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle ordered me to guard the Zakat revenue of Ramadan. Then somebody came to me and started stealing of the foodstuff. I caught him and said, "I will take you to Allah's Apostle!" Then Abu Huraira described the whole narration and said:) That person said (to me), "(Please don't take me to Allah's Apostle and I will tell you a few words by which Allah will benefit you.) When you go to your bed, recite Ayat-al-Kursi, (2.255) for then there will be a guard from Allah who will protect you all night long, and Satan will not be able to come near you till dawn." (When the Prophet heard the story) he said (to me), "He (who came to you at night) told you the truth although he is a liar; and it was Satan."
===
The explanation given in Tradition numbered 516 in volume 4 of Sahih Al-Bukhari quoted above is to mention one of the benefits of performing ablution before offering prayer to God Almighty.
at August 12, 2005 8:07 AM
Mohideen
Let me set aside my usual sarcasm and say that the more I hear from the koran, the more I understand what a convuluted,unG-dly compilation of nonsense it is.I don't care how many people revere the koran, without a heavy dose of Arab culture, it makes no sense.
The koran is the operating instructions for a hand puppet that muslims call allah. People with critical thinking skills and an innate sense of right and wrong..justice, are not impressed.
at August 12, 2005 10:50 AM
Mohideen said "The person did not declare that ‘there is no compulsion in Islam’ and the rest of Verse 2:255 (in some collections 2:256) while going to bed."
So it is compulsory in Islam to declare "there is no compulsion in Islam" whilee going to bed?
Posted by: special_guest at August 12, 2005 2:24 PM
People with critical thinking skills and an innate sense of right and wrong..justice, are not impressed.
pismopal at August 12, 2005 10:50 AM
We believe a US Marine is imbued with critical thinking skills and an innate sense of right and wrong. A search on – Fallujah Mujahid – in Google News yielded the following a few minutes back.
===
Iraqi Resistance Report for events of Friday, 5 August 2005
uruknet.info, Italy - Aug 5, 2005
... Third US Marine embraces Islam in al-Fallujah mosque, takes name Mujahid Muhammad. ...
===
Do we need say any more?
at August 12, 2005 3:12 PM
So it is compulsory in Islam to declare "there is no compulsion in Islam" whilee going to bed?
special_guest at August 12, 2005 02:24 PM
No, it is not compulsory; it is recommended. One who says so gets protected.
at August 12, 2005 3:15 PM
Mohideen, I hear Osama and all the other Islamic terrorists also claim Chechnya and Kashmir as Islamic land. Wonder where they get that from the Koran? Or are you saying all the Ilsmaic scholars have got it wrong?
Razdan at August 12, 2005 06:51 AM
They are not wrong. There is a crucial difference between “Islamic land,” and “Islam only land.” We say that “the Arabian Peninsula is Islam only land – no religion other than Islam can be practiced inside the Arabian Peninsula.” The Islamic scholars say Chechnya and Kashmir are “Islamic land – a land where both non-Muslims and Muslims can live together, but the law of the land is Sharia – the Law of Islam.”
We hope that the distinction is clear.
at August 12, 2005 3:23 PM
Qur’an 4:43 “Believers, approach not prayers with a mind befogged or intoxicated until you understand what you utter. Nor when you are polluted, until after you have bathed. If you are ill, or on a journey, or come from answering the call of nature, or you have touched a woman, and you find no water, then take for yourselves clean dirt, and rub your faces and hands. Lo! Allah is Benign, Forgiving.” [The Qur’an claims women are unclean and polluted—worse than dirt.]
NOW THIS IS NOT GOING TO WORK AT ALL IN THE WEST !!!
Catherine at August 12, 2005 12:07 AM
When a non-Muslim tries to interpret the Holy Quran mistakes do occur as the above. The phrase “you have touched a woman,” represents having sex with wife which requires a full body bath before offering prayers. Since it is important not to miss prayers, an easy way out when there is no water is given: take clean dirt and rub your faces and hands. Such rubbing of the faces and hands when water is not available is equivalent to taking a bath. One occasion requiring bathing is for a menstruating woman coming out of her menses. This particular Verse is revered as a boon by the Muslims having given them a way out of the predicament they found when they could not perform ablution due to non-availability of water.
Tell me, why would this relaxation not be accepted in the west? We had shown one sample. The rest are also due to colossal misunderstanding on the part of sister-of-the-Book Catherine.
at August 12, 2005 3:48 PM
Mohideen, no Muslim accepts any suggestions. The only thing Muslims understand is force, liberally applied. As more and more people wake up to the threat, the force will increase.
pismopal at August 11, 2005 08:59 PM
We would gladly accept good and workable suggestions. Simply don’t try to destroy our faith. As regards more and more people waking up, we see it already: the Americans are indeed waking up to the fact their government dragged them to an un-winnable war in Iraq based on blatant lies. We wait for the day when the Impeachment would be declared loud and clear.
at August 12, 2005 3:55 PM
Mohideen
I understand why you would feel that a U.S.Marine's embrace of islam (if indeed such is true) would somehow make your case. I would like to repeat my earlier remark about critical thinking! There is not a penitentiary in this country that does not have former service members doing time for making bad decisions and that includes former Marines. Lee Harvey Oswald was a former Marine as was that wacko in Texas who climbed a campus tower and began to murder innocent people. The Marine who decides to embrace islam does not surprise me as much as the African-Americans who do so. Snuggling up to a mind set that was responsible for his ancestors being sold into slavery makes me dizzy and sick to my stomach. Yes Mohideen,you do need to say more if you are going to make your case. So far you are batting a big zero.
at August 12, 2005 3:57 PM
The Marine who decides to embrace islam does not surprise me as much as the African-Americans who do so. Snuggling up to a mind set that was responsible for his ancestors being sold into slavery makes me dizzy and sick to my stomach.
pismopal at August 12, 2005 03:57 PM
No one can fault the US Constitution just because an American commits a crime. We do not give credence to the so called historical anecdotes regarding the ancestors of African-Americans sold to slavery by Muslims. Even if it were so, those Muslims did wrong, and they deserve to be punished.
It is to the credit of the African-Americans that they are willing to read the “Principles of Islam,” and embrace the same when they find that Islam is for the welfare of all; except the war mongers.
at August 12, 2005 4:07 PM
Mohiddeen seems extremely instructed in the classics of his religion, and wholly ignorant in those of others. Therefore he quotes as fact a picture of history which is disproved by innumerable documents and archaeological evidence - much of it collected by scholars who are not Christian, and in some cases, as in the rich archaeological tradition of Egypt, nominal Muslims. He is, in a sense, very learned, but in the only sense that matters - learning that explains truth - agonizingly ignorant. His equivalent in the Christian world would be someone who argued from the world-picture of, say, Dante.
But there is the difference between Christianity and Islam in terms of the study of history. Islam treats, not only the Qur'an (which would be bad enough), but an ever-increasing amount of written matter, as sacred and inviolable, and teaches all that it contains as matter of fact. Christianity does not. St.Augustine, one of the two most important figures in Western Christian tradition, begged Christian clerics not to argue against the specialized knowledge of scientists, historians and others, and, where the Scriptures seemed to conflict with common sense, to reinterpret them. The other central figure, St. Thomas Aquinas, was even more radical: he considered that there were sources of knowledge in the study of creation - natural philosophy - which had, in their own way, as much validity as Christian doctrine. By stating this, he effectively validated scientific and historical research, with the effects we see today.
The problem of arguing with someone like Mohiddeen is that he simply does not accept the premise that there are other sources of knowledge than Scripture, and that he treats everything in his holy books as quite literally true. As long as he fails to see that he is accepting as fact something that plainly is full of misstatements of plain fact, of the most crude historical errors, we cannot argue. There is nothing we could say that he would even understand - witness his extraordinary statement that the conversion of one American Marine is somehow evidence of the existence of a critical spirit in Islam. It is that very critical spirit, which Augustine and Thomas Aquinas demanded from Christians, that is wholly unknown to him. I have no doubt that Mohiddeen is himself a pleasant person, with no drive towards bloodshed, and no love of the various vices that have become associated with his religion down the centuries; but the way he argues (for want of a better word) is the best possible evidence why there cannot be common ground between the West and Islam, as long as Islam stays what it is.
Posted by: Paolo at August 12, 2005 4:32 PM
Mohideen writes
"We do not give credence to the so called historical anecdotes regarding the ancestors of African-Americans sold into slavery by muslims. Even if it were so..."
Historical? Mohideen, slavery is a fact of life in Saudi Arabia and Sudan as I type. Mohideen you are just too easy..this is boring.
There it is folks, the muslim mind at work. All one needs to do is stand back and let them express themselves. As an aside,don't start crowing about all the African-Americans who are willing to read about islam. The huge majority of them aren't going to be fooled either. The majority of converts are from America's prisons. Don't ask me to explain the significance, figure it out for yourself.
at August 12, 2005 4:35 PM
As an aside,don't start crowing about all the African-Americans who are willing to read about islam. The huge majority of them aren't going to be fooled either. The majority of converts are from America's prisons.
pismopal at August 12, 2005 04:35 PM
From http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Muscles.html#CardiacMuscle
We get:
===
Cardiac or heart muscle resembles skeletal muscle in some ways: it is striated and each cell contains sarcomeres with sliding filaments of actin and myosin.
However, cardiac muscle has a number of unique features that reflect its function of pumping blood.
The myofibrils of each cell (and cardiac muscle is made of single cells — each with a single nucleus) are branched.
The branches interlock with those of adjacent fibers by adherens junctions. These strong junctions enable the heart to contract forcefully without ripping the fibers apart.
===
Are the heart muscles differ for the prison residents and non-residents? We hope not. Faith is a matter of heart. This concept is very well explained by Prophet Noah, peace be upon him. We quote from the Holy Quran:
===
11:27 But the Chiefs of the Unbelievers among his people said: "We see (in) thee nothing but a man like ourselves: Nor do we see that any follow thee but the meanest among us, in judgment immature: Nor do we see in you (all) any merit above us: in fact we thing ye are liars!"
11:28 He said: "O my people! See ye if (it be that) I have a Clear Sign from my Lord, and that He hath sent Mercy unto me from His own presence, but that the Mercy hath been obscured from your sight? shall we compel you to accept it when ye are averse to it?
11:29 "And O my people! I ask you for no wealth in return: my reward is from none but Allah. But I will not drive away (in contempt) those who believe: for verily they are to meet their Lord, and ye I see are the ignorant ones!
11:30 "And O my people! who would help me against Allah if I drove them away? Will ye not then take heed?
11:31 "I tell you not that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden, nor claim I to be an angel. Nor yet do I say, of those whom your eyes do despise that Allah will not grant them (all) that is good: Allah knoweth best what is in their souls: I should, if I did, indeed be a wrong-doer."
===
It hardly matters where one gets to know about Islam and accepts Islam; all of them are indeed lucky.
at August 12, 2005 11:57 PM
there cannot be common ground between the West and Islam, as long as Islam stays what it is.
Paolo at August 12, 2005 04:32 PM
There is no need to change Islam; all that is required is to understand Islam. We strongly believe that anyone who reads about Islam without prejudice would appreciate the fact that it is a whole religion with a strong emphasis on peace. No whole religion can be silent about war. Thus, Islam also speaks of war. It is unfortunate that the few Verses related to war are quoted out of context and Islam is criticized as encouraging violence.
Incidentally, Islam is highly scientific. It is our opinion that science when it gets completed would be very similar to Islam. Islam is not inconsistent with evolution; it simply refutes the misconception attributed to Darwin that the human race evolved from apes. Except that difference, evolution is indeed supported by Islam.
If there could be no common ground between West and Islam, how come Islam is the fastest growing religion in the West? The logic of Islam is said to attract the critical thinking Westerners.
at August 13, 2005 12:12 AM
Mohideen...I have read parts of the Quran myself. I have read many verses where it says that Muslims should live in peace etc, especially in the early part of the Quran when there weren't many Muslims, but things seemed to change when they became enough numbers to become a force,,, I have also read verse after verse of horrors done by Muhammad and for centuries, Muslims are taught that the Jews have been the problem throughout history so are to be exterminated, but from the Iberian peninsula to the Indian subcontinent, jihad campaigns waged by Muslim armies against infidel Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists and Hindus, were punctuated by massacres, including mass throat slittings and beheadings, doesn't sound like a religion of peace to me, nor does it sound like the Jews causing the problems.... What horrifies me is that there are just so many verses that your god told Muhammad to tell the people of Islam to do to the infidel if they didn't submit and here is a just few, and Mohideen, they can be taken no other way than to slaughter the infidel if they do not submit. Verses like Qur’an 8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).” and again...., Ishaq:587 “Our onslaught will not be a weak faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have mutilated every opponent. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them, for they must suffer disgrace.” and this one,,,
Qur’an 47:4 ......continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam.”... and then, Allah, may he be exalted, says, 'When you encounter those [infidels] who deny [the Truth=Islam] then strike [their] necks' (Qur'an sura 47, verse 4)”....Abu’l-Hasan al-Mawardi, al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah." [The Laws of Islamic Governance, trans. by Dr. Asadullah Yate, (London), Ta-Ha Publishers Ltd., 1996, p. 192. need I say more, but I will... The Quran wont even let you guys be our friends, and I find that so sad... we are prepared to be your friends and except our differences, but it is your Quran which says you cannot, I supose it makes it easier to slaughter us when the time is right...The Bible says to love you enemies... The Quran says to not even be friends...
"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah:.......... and because the books tell Muslims that they can lie, how can we trust them,, eg, "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies with these exceptions: During war because war is deception, to reconcile among two quarrelling men, and for a man to appease his wife." But the Christians Bible says that we cannot lie under any circumstances... Even a thinking Muslim has to wonder why out of 22 conflicts in the world today, 20 of them involve Muslims and someone else, and why is there no problems in other countries,, only Muslim countries, why can't Muslims ever get on with their neighbours but others can..... and it takes more than a few terrorists to rape, torture and slaughter tens of thousands of people a year done by Muslims, and Sudan is a good example...Rather than believe other people Mohideen, I found out for myself regards the Quran,, and as I see that your own people can lie to you under certain circumstances, it might pay for you to do the same re the Bible, as lying is all ok for the strategy of war.. I am horrified about some of the blatant lies that Muslims are told... but that is ok I supose as the Quran allows that...You will see in the Bible that although there are wars, NO where in the Bible does it say that people are to be tortured, slaughtered or until they submit, etc. No where does it say that Christians are to take the world by force for God...God loves all, regardless of what religion or colour they are, and yes he would like all to follow what he says, so as their will be peace in the land, for our own sake and health, but he wont force anyone, and he wont kill them if they dont...Our God doesn't want people to come to him out of fear, only out of love and if they go away from God, their families and friends still love them and they are not slaughtered, ..... The Bible says that fear is of Satan...
Nationhood and Jerusalem. Israel became a nation-state in 1312 B.C, 2,000 years before the rise of Islam, and was a nation before that. The Arabs conquered Palestine in 635 AD, stealing it from its legitimate Jewish rulers,
at August 13, 2005 6:54 AM
There is a crucial difference between “Islamic land,” and “Islam only land.” We say that “the Arabian Peninsula is Islam only land – no religion other than Islam can be practiced inside the Arabian Peninsula.” The Islamic scholars say Chechnya and Kashmir are “Islamic land – a land where both non-Muslims and Muslims can live together, but the law of the land is Sharia – the Law of Islam.”
We hope that the distinction is clear.
Yes, Mohideen, its clear as mud. In one case non-muslims are to be physically exterminated, whereas in the second case they are barely allowed to live as second-class citizens.
at August 13, 2005 7:35 AM
Mohideen, I admire your persistance on this site. you say....
So, we claim that the original Holy Bible given to Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, would be consistent with the Holy Quran. Since the current Holy Bible seems to be inconsistent with the Holy Quran, we assert that it is not the original.
All I can say Mohideen is I am so glad that the Bible is not consistent with the Quran...My God is a God of love and loves everyone, no matter what religion...And if God can make the earth, and us, dont you think he can tell people what to write down, years after it was done...or dont you consider your God to know all...All that has happened and all that is going to happen...good gracious he knows your every thought. You also say''''anyone who reads about Islam without prejudice would appreciate the fact that it is a whole religion with a strong emphasis on peace... Oh Mohideen, yes peace as long as we submit or else we die, these sort of conditions Mohideen dont make peace. I see similar things in the Quran to tie people to your religion as one sees in a cult... things like, dont have outside friends, other people dont understand our religion, if you leave our religion you will go to hell, other people are evil and must not be listened to, dont trust outsiders, outsiders tell lies to snare you, what outsiders say is from satan, so cannot be trusted, etc etc... fear of others outside is a common way to keep people from leaving...
The Arab nation did go through a very enlightened time of science, bringing into the world some of the wonderful things we have today, but then it stopped. As Islam came into being about the year 6 or 700's A.C I cannot remember if those wonderful years were befor Muhammad or after, but it does not matter, as any country where Islam is established seems to go no where and for centries the Arab nation has produced nothing but fear and poverty... doesnt that make you think for yourself, and the hated infidels are going forward in so many ways..
Mohideen, many of the things that you quote from the Quran in regards to cleanliness are just common sense, and if you followed what the Bible says on these things no one would get any diseases..
Tou also say that We do not give credence to the so called historical anecdotes regarding the ancestors of African-Americans sold to slavery by Muslims. Even if it were so, those Muslims did wrong, and they deserve to be punished....
Mohideen, you obviously dont know what your own people are doing in the world, even today,, go to Sudan and see what Muslims are doing to the people,, tens of thousands of people are being raped, tortured, taken as slaves and raped, and slaughered by Muslims,, we have people sending money so as the hated Christians can buy these poor people from Muslims so as these hated christians can set these poor people free...and didnt Muhammad take slaves??? so did Muhammad do wrong also and why wasnt he punished as you say these people should be if they take slaves. Perhaps you dont read enough of your own books, I have read what Muhammad did to the people...and it isnt pretty...
at August 13, 2005 9:39 AM
didnt Muhammad take slaves???
Gaye at August 13, 2005 09:39 AM
Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, never had economic slaves; he had captives from war. He was the first Prophet, peace be upon him, permitted to have captives from war as stated in Verse 67 of Chapter 8 of the Holy Quran.
===
8:67 It is not fitting for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he hath thoroughly subdued the land. Ye look for the temporal goods of this world; but Allah looketh to the Hereafter: and Allah is Exalted in might, Wise.
===
Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, took prisoners of war instead of killing them. Most of the prisoners of war were released when they understood Islam and became Muslims on their own initiative. Many captives were bought from the Quraish and released; they were bought specifically for the purpose of releasing them. Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, never bought a slave to be kept as a slave, but to be released from slavery. What a pity the one individual who strove to abolish slavery is accused of taking slaves.
at August 13, 2005 6:50 PM
Oh Mohideen, you either dont know your own Quran, or you are trying to decieve us. you say, Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, took prisoners of war instead of killing them. I will give you just a couple of verses out of the quran...Qur’an 9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”
Ishaq:576 “Allah and His servant overwhelmed every coward. Allah honored us and made our religion victorious. We were glorified and destroyed them all. Allah humiliated them in the worship of Satan. By what our Apostle recites from the Book and by our swift horses, I liked the punishment the infidels received. Killing them was sweeter than drink. We galloped among them panting for the spoil. With our loud-voiced army, the Apostle’s squadron advanced into the fray.”
Ishaq:327 “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet had their men killed, their children and woman taken captive.”
Bukhari:V4B52N256 “The Prophet passed by and was asked whether it was permissible to attack infidels at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, ‘Their women and children are from them.’”
Qur’an 33:26 “Allah made the Jews leave their homes by terrorizing them so that you killed some and made many captive. And He made you inherit their lands, their homes, and their wealth. He gave you a country you had not traversed before.”
Qur’an 59:2 “It was Allah who drove the [Jewish] People of the Book from their homes and into exile. They refused to believe and imagined that their strongholds would protect them against Allah. Tabari IX:122 “Muhammad sent Uyaynah to raid The Banu Anbar. They killed some people and took others captive. Asma was one of the women taken prisoner.” These are only a very very few of the killings in the Quran. I believe that every race has the right to fight back when attacked, but it appears that Muhammad attacked first in the name of Allah, slaughtering and taking captives, slaves as went... keeping a girl or two for himself..
at August 13, 2005 9:01 PM
Bukhari:V4B52N256 “The Prophet passed by and was asked whether it was permissible to attack infidels at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, ‘Their women and children are from them.’”
Gaye at August 13, 2005 09:01 PM
Let us quote Bukhari Volume 4 Tradition 256 fully:
===
Narrated As Sab bin Jaththama
The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle."
===
What is ‘Hima’? Look at Tradition numbered 49 in Volume 1 of Sahih Al-Bukhari:
===
Narrated An Numan bin Bashir
I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them there are doubtful (suspicious) things and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these suspicious things saves his religion and his honor. And whoever indulges in these suspicious things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (private pasture) of someone else and at any moment he is liable to get in it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah on the earth is His illegal (forbidden) things. Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body if it becomes good (reformed) the whole body becomes good but if it gets spoilt the whole body gets spoilt and that is the heart.
===
Hima is private pasture or things forbidden for every entity other than Allah and His Prophet, peace be upon him. So, the correct meaning from Tradition numbered 256 of Volume 4 of Sahih Al-Bukhari is that it is forbidden to attack the women and children even of pagans. It was an exception for that particular occasion as Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was personally present to sanction that attack.
Please quote the Tradition or the Verse of the Holy Quran fully in its context and discuss. Do not mutilate Islam and then criticize Islam.
Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at August 13, 2005 11:50 PM
Mohideen, you bring only one of the verses above and I am not interested in someone else's interpretation of that verse, I am only interested in what the verse says in the book..I can take any sentence out of any book and twist it to what I want. When a man can take a verse like this and make it seem what it isn't, there is no wonder that there are so many different types of thinking in Islam, and what this man said seemed to contradict what this verse is saying. I know that you will say that I don't understand, and when the leader can say it is only he who can interpret, gives him total control over the people, ...... yes there are differences in a few words from then to now and I understand that, but a total change of meaning????... .
Mohibeen, I am not prepared to read Muhammad's/Allahs words and have them changed by someone else. Isn't Muhammad's words good enough or clear enough. Why do you have to have someone else to interpret what they think Muhammad meant... It is like saying that God didn't really mean that, he meant something else... Bukhari:V4B52N256 said simply and clearly that, " “The Prophet passed by and was asked whether it was permissible to attack infidels at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, ‘Their women and children are from them.’” etc etc... Now to me that is so well written and very clear as to it's meaning, that it doesn't need any interpretation,, and if Muslims want to change around the meanings of verses in the Quran, then it is over to them,, they have to answer to Muhammad and Allah later, but I prefer to take the words of Muhammad as he said them and meant them, other wise, there is in danger of anyone changing Muhammad's words to mean what ever they want, and people also try to do that with the Bible... If you try changing what the Quran says or means, then the Quran becomes nothing, it's words are useless...
I expect you to come back and tell me that the scholars know the history, and the meaning, etc,,, but that is only their word, or the people who are promoting them as being the scholars. Did Allah say that there would be people who would come and interpreter his words later...As with the Bible, I prefer to read what is written there and not take the risk of someone else's interpretation being right or wrong..
Mohideen, this has only become a war of words now, so I will not be replying to any more on this site...Thankyou for the way you have conducted your words back to me, I will not go onto sites where there is nastiness, so I have appreciated what you have said... and no your words are not getting through to me...
at August 14, 2005 10:47 AM
Thankyou for the way you have conducted your words back to me, I will not go onto sites where there is nastiness, so I have appreciated what you have said... and no your words are not getting through to me...
Gaye at August 14, 2005 10:47 AM
Dear sister Gaye,
I do not know whether my reply sounded nasty. If so, my sincere apologies are due. You have touched upon very important issues with respect to religion and the manner of understanding the scriptures. Kindly permit me to comment on those issues in what follows.
Again, if I was nasty, kindly accept my heartfelt apologies.
at August 14, 2005 11:14 PM
I can take any sentence out of any book and twist it to what I want.
Gaye at August 14, 2005 10:47 AM
If such freedom is allowed, the reader of any book becomes the author. Could any author accept such a stand? Why should we expect God Almighty to accept such a stand?
Whenever we read any literature, are we not interested in understanding the author’s story? Why can not we do the same with the scriptures?
Every word in a book has to be understood in the context in which it is used. In a Tradition, if a part of a Tradition is taken, it can lead to diametrically opposite meaning as happened with Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, and Number 256. Context is important.
at August 14, 2005 11:32 PM
The Prophet replied, ‘Their women and children are from them.’” etc etc...
Gaye at August 14, 2005 10:47 AM
What is the “etc etc…”? In this case, - I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle."
Since As Sab bin Jaththama heard as above as part of “etc etc…” that also is part and part of the reply to the query: whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger? I had explained that combining the “etc etc…” gives two meanings: one that applies to Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and the second meaning that applies to every other person. Since Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, is no more, all of us are under “every other person,” and thus no Muslim has permission to expose the women and children to danger. Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, married eight mothers of the believers, Allah be pleased with him. In contrast, no Muslim could ever marry more than four wives.
If there are other Muslims who claim that the women and children could be exposed to danger, they have to answer God Almighty on the Day of Judgment. True, I must also answer God Almighty on the Day of Judgment; as I believe, I am correct; I do look forward to be rewarded by God Almighty for correctly understanding His Word and obeying Him.
at August 14, 2005 11:50 PM
there is in danger of anyone changing Muhammad's words to mean what ever they want, and people also try to do that with the Bible...
Gaye at August 14, 2005 10:47 AM
I do not know the Holy Bible; and I dare not interpret the Holy Bible. Yes, I do try and explain the Verses in the Holy Quran touching upon the Holy Bible; to me such an act is simply an explanation of the Holy Quran.
My endeavor on this site has been to say that we should adhere to the meaning of the Holy Quran and the Traditions in their totality; we should not abrogate any Verse of the Holy Quran; we should not quote partially and arrive at wrong meanings.
To convince a Muslim that his religion is wrong requires using perfect arguments. If we use incomplete or wrong arguments, the believer in Islam is not going to reevaluate his understanding of Islam.
It is very well understood that the Traditions collected by Imam Bukhari in Sahih Al-Bukhari are the most authentic. When there is a claim that Tradition numbered 256 in Volume 4 of Sahih Al-Bukhari permits injuring women and children, it shakes the very foundation of the concept of war in Islam. Having lived the whole life of around six decades with the belief that a Muslim cannot hurt women and children whatever the nature of the conflict, the above claim requires thorough analysis. That is what we did and reported the results of our analysis.
at August 15, 2005 12:06 AM
Did Allah say that there would be people who would come and interpreter his words later
Gaye at August 14, 2005 10:47 AM
God Almighty communicated through Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. The Holy Quran was revealed through him; his life was a practical demonstration of the Holy Quran. Thus, whatever was said by Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, has the same sanctity as the Word of God Almighty.
We quote Tradition numbered 688 in Volume 5 of Sahih Al-Bukhari, below:
===
Narrated Abu Bakra
The Prophet said, "Time has taken its original shape which it had when Allah created the Heavens and the Earth. The year is of twelve months, four of which are sacred, and out of these (four) three are in succession, i.e. Dhul-Qa'da, Dhul-Hijja and Al-Muharram, and the fourth is Rajab which is named after the Mudar tribe, between (the month of) Jumaida
(ath-thania) and Sha'ban." Then the Prophet asked, "Which is this month?" We said, "Allah and His Apostle know better." On that the Prophet kept quiet so long that we thought that he might name it with another name. Then the Prophet said, "Isn't it the month of Dhul-Hijja?" We replied, "Yes." Then he said, "Which town is this?" We replied, "Allah and His Apostle know better." On that he kept quiet so long that we thought that he might name it with another name. Then he said, "Isn't it the town of Mecca?" We replied, "Yes," Then he said, "Which day is today?" We replied, "Allah and His Apostle know better." He kept quiet so long that we thought that he might name it with another name. Then he said, "Isn't it the day of An-Nahr (i.e. sacrifice)?" We replied, "Yes." He said, "So your blood, your properties, (the sub-narrator Muhammad said, 'I think the Prophet also said: And your honor') are sacred to one another like the sanctity of this day of yours, in this city of yours, in this month of yours; and surely, you will meet your Lord, and He will ask you about your deeds. Beware! Do not become infidels after me, cutting the throats of one another. It is incumbent on those who are present to convey this message (of mine) to those who are absent. May be that some of those to whom it will be conveyed will understand it better than those who have actually heard it." (The sub-narrator, Muhammad, on remembering that narration, used to say, "Muhammad spoke the truth!") He (i.e. Prophet) then added twice, "No doubt! Haven't I conveyed (Allah's Message) to you?"
===
The above Tradition ensures that no expert can claim that his or her word with respect to the interpretation of Islam is final. Every one has to strive to understand Islam; we do hope that God Almighty enlightens the seeker of Truth.
We always recommend the following:
1. The Holy Quran is correct.
2. Those Traditions that do not contradict the Holy Quran are correct.
3. Every other statement must follow from the Holy Quran and the correct Traditions. No authority can expect blind belief.
when the leader can say it is only he who can interpret, gives him total control over the people
Gaye at August 14, 2005 10:47 AM
In view of the above reasoning, it must be clear that a Muslim leader can not simply say whatever he fancies; his interpretation must be substantiated. A Muslim leader has no control on his people except to implement the Holy Quran and the Traditions. Yes, in the past history there might be leaders who might have punished fellow Muslims; who were right – the leader or the punished Muslim is to be decided by God Almighty on the Day of Judgment.
at August 15, 2005 12:28 AM
Mohideen, I said I wasnt going to come back on this,, but couldnt help myself. I see that others have not come back also, but... you say, Yes, in the past history there might be leaders who might have punished fellow Muslims; who were right etc... Mohideen, SOME, there have been tens of thousands of Muslims slaughtered by Muslims, not just some...I do believe in punishment if some one does something wrong and I feel that our laws are rediculious stupid and might as well not be there at all, but in the past our laws have been too strict and yours are horrific...
And Mohideen, Clerics are telling their people to go and slaugher the infidel, and suicide bombers are praised up, the leaders are telling Muslims to take the world, America, England, etc first then the world,, why do you think Muslims in foreign countries are having massive families, of course you would know... People with small families are able to do better things for their families so it means that they are not interested in giving them better education etc...
You mentioned science once,... Arabs did very well in science before Muhammad who came into being in the 7th century. After that there was no development of the mind, no science, no medicine, nothing worth having, no arts, no literature, no architecture, nothing that we could want or need from them. If it wernt for the oil, all of Arabia would remain sand-dunes and a few beduins trucking behind camels and goats. Sorry Mohibeen, I can only come to the conclusion that you are blind... You will simply say that we dont understand, but it seems that we seem to have read more of your books than you. You should read what Muhammad said and did in his day,, it was horrific every day...He sure wasnt a nice man, and he sure didnt know how to love his people and the people whom God had made.. He dispised the people whom God made. My God who is different to yours, loves everyone, regardless of what they do or their colour, he would rather that people followed his laws, but if they dont, he still loves them and gently guides them. My wonderful God wont slaughter people just because they wont believe...I love my God with all my heart, because he sent his son to died for me so as I could live..and Jesus will sit on the right hand of God...God sent his son to die for us, but Allah sends his sons to die for him...I know which one I would rather serve... The man who gave himself for us..
at August 15, 2005 9:32 AM
didnt Muhammad take slaves?
Gaye at August 13, 2005 09:39 AM
Yes, he did take slaves but he released them as free persons. Evidence: Tradition numbered 87 in Volume 4 of Sahih Al-Bukhari, quoted below:
===
Narrated Anas
Allah's Apostle went towards the Khandaq (i.e. Trench) and saw the emigrants and the Ansar digging in a very cold morning as they did not have slaves to do that for them. When he noticed their fatigue and hunger he said, "O Allah! The real life is that of the Hereafter, (so please) forgive the Ansar and the emigrants." In its reply the emigrants and the Ansar said, "We are those who have given a pledge of allegiance to Muhammad that we will carry on Jihad as long as we live."
===
Sorry Mohibeen, I can only come to the conclusion that you are blind...
Gaye at August 15, 2005 09:32 AM
If the only way I could retain my faith, Islam, is to be blind, God Almighty willing, I would gladly be blind.
at August 15, 2005 11:20 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)