Books and Documents

Islamic Ideology (02 Dec 2014 NewAgeIslam.Com)


  • perhaps you are talking about sufi-madarsas which may be true but this is not true with wahabi-oriented madarsas. 
    By Asif - 3/12/2015 1:18:24 AM

  • As being a Madrasa graduate, I know the ins and outs of Madrasa education. So, to the best of my knowledge, there is nothing wrong like violence in Madrasa education. What Madrasas need is a little amendment to their syllabus. A particular subject –on how to ideologically cope with the newly rising terrorism, extremism around the world- should be added to Madrasa syllabus as compulsory. For that matter, those Quranic verses and Ahadith which prohibit every kind of violence and terrorism and those ones which call for peaceful coexistence, mutual harmony, true justice, should be significantly inculcated into the minds of Madrasa students. Besides, Madrasa teachers/ Ulema should prepare their students for refuting the extremist and jihadist literature.

    The above-given idea will work much better than any other fruitless ideas against Madrasa education.    

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 1/23/2015 6:50:05 AM

  • Please reply me soon if possibly.
    Dear Ghulam Ghaus,  I have read this article and I am very happy for that. May Allah give you more courage to say truth. 
    You are a Madarsa graduate so you know better than me about Madarsa system.
    What is your view about madarsa education? Does Madarsa teach violence or extremism? Or it is all hypothetical about Madrasa?

    By Aslam Raza Barkati - 1/23/2015 5:11:11 AM

  • There is a lot of good sense in Dr. Tahirul Qadri's recommendations. Thanks for posting, Ghaus sb.
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 12/24/2014 12:53:40 AM

  • After Peshawar school attack by Taliban, Shaykhul Islam Dr. Tahirul Qadri has suggested many more good things to root out terrorism. Some of them are as follows;

    “The war against terrorism should be declared as ‘our war’ and a joint sitting of Parliament should be convened to adopt a resolution announcing the ‘National War on Terrorism’.

    “The roots of terrorism lie in sectarianism, extremism and takfiriyat— excommunicating Muslims—declaring them apostates or disbelievers. A total ban should be imposed on issuance of fatwas that declare others non-Muslims and strict punishments be prescribed for takfiris—those who excommunicate any Muslim.

    “There should be an immediate ban on Madrassas and religious parties, organisations and individuals from receiving foreign funding.

    “Peace Education Centres need to be established in order to launch an awareness campaign so that terrorists cannot brainwash or blackmail simple people.

    “A ban should be placed upon all literature that spawns and promotes hatred, sectarianism, militancy and terrorism.

    “Special anti-terrorist courts, bodies, para-military forces and agencies that are working on eliminating terrorism should be placed under direct control of armed forces.

    “The military should be better equipped to deal with the menace of terrorism and its budget should be reasonably increased for the purpose.

    “The government should set up special institutions/rehabilitation centres to educate, nurture and take care of children and youngsters who have been orphaned by terrorism, Drone attacks or operations against terrorism, in the tribal areas, Balochistan, KPK and other areas. After their education is complete, they should be provided with special grants and employment to enable them live as peaceful citizens. Or they can end up in the hands of militants and become suicide bombers or in the hands of sectarian institutions and become extremists.

    “Those creating confusion about war on terrorism should be declared as national criminals.

    “If government is serious, I offer to voluntarily provide teachers and curriculum for peace training programs.

    “Legislation should be carried out for elimination of terrorism. West even ignored human rights while legislating against terrorism.

    “Terrorism can never be eradicated unless terrorism breeding nurseries are uprooted.

    “The society will have to be made moderate by steering the youth out of ideological extremism.

    “If we are serious and not hypocrite, then war against terrorism should be declared as our own war at national level”

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/23/2014 11:58:52 PM

  • Rational asks, "why the Muhaditheen can't be considered liars or fabricators or enemies of the prophet and his companions if that incident never happened and they recorded it." . . .

    Who cares? Do you think these are intelligent questions?

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 12/10/2014 4:39:19 PM

  • The incident of burning kharijites may be true or untrue but "this issue is a particular case that has no general application", as Imam al-Shatiby said.
    Our Imams have also taken out the ruling from the same hadith that it is not allowed to burn any human being whether Muslim or non-Muslim, alive or dead.  
    I again repeat that this issue is a particular case that has no general application. 

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/10/2014 6:02:45 AM

  • Dear Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/9/2014 3:53:07 AM
    thanks. you found that.
    i must be sure about what i quote from the authentic sources of Islam i can't afford wrong quotations.
    i don't know whether Hz Ali burned them or not. it is recorded by pious Muslims you called imams.
    why the Muhaditheen can't be considered liars or fabricators or enemies of the prophet and his companions if that incident never happened and they recorded it.
    i fully agree it is not the case of general application.
    my point is not this at all. my point is why this recording is not insult/defamation to great companion of the prophet and my quotation is.

    if it was their ijtihaad and they were right to do so why it can't be sunna for the followers. if event took place for whatever reason it shows the nature of society it belonged to.
    Islam is not the Quran alone. Sharia is not based on the Quran alone. why it can't be an example to follow for extremists.
    if a great companion can do it why not others. they too are scholars.
    dissociating everything questionable from the Islam is very poor defense.

    can you reply me on this question?
    there is no circumcision in the Quran. the prophet himself was not circumcised or he was? if not how all Muslims  are practicing it? a thing called Suuna of prophet Ibrahim that is not in the Quran has become important more than Fardh/wajib prescribed in the Quran.
    A muslim can be be-namzi, be-roza, zaani, liar, fasiq, bidati but not ghair-makhtoon?
    Ghulam saheb calling us names is not going to help you.
    you should tell why your imams were fabricators and recorders of fabrications if the events can be called fabrications by enemies.
    how you can expect it from those people who learned Islam from early Muslims.
    or they were not as pious as you claim.

    By ratioanl mohammed yunus - 12/10/2014 2:16:49 AM

  • The incident of burning kharijites may be true or untrue but "this issue is a particular case that has no general application", as Imam al-Shatiby said. 
    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/9/2014 4:02:00 AM

  • The following Fatwa that was issued by Shaykh Abdallah Bin Bayyah in response to ISIS is very good to read.


    I read on a website that Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) burnt some of the Kharitjites during his caliphate. But this made me confused due to the hadith we know where the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbad torturing others with fire since this is a sort of associating others with Allah. So how did Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) do this?

    And upon you is the peace of Allah, together with his mercy and blessings.

    “This report was narrated by al-Bukhary (6922) on the authority of `Ikrimah who said: Heretics were brought before Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and he burnt them. When Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) was informed about this, he said, “If I were in his place, I would not have burnt them for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbad this saying, “Do not torment with the torment of Allah” and I would have killed them, for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.”" When a deviant group called al-Saba’iyyah, who were the followers of the Jewish `Abdullah ibn Saba’, went astray and believed that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was a god – we seek refuge with Allah from this – he (Ali) set them on fire and said, “When I saw such an enormous evil, I set them on fire and called.” Besides, this issue is a particular case that has no general application, as al-Shatiby said.

    “In general, there are many interpretations concerning this report, whether he burnt them after he had killed them, or he was just about to burn them but he did not. Whatever the case was, this was an opinion viewed by a companion that has nothing to do with associating gods with Allah. Burning a person is not permissible in the Shari`ah; but this does not amount to associating others with Allah. Associating others with Allah means to worship another god with Allah or to believe in other gods with Almighty Allah. Yes, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbad burning others and said “None should torment with fire except Allah.” [Reported by al-Bukhary (3016)]

    “Yet, this does not mean that whoever burns others with fire is considered as associating others with Allah. It rather means that this punishment is a punishment in the Hereafter, not in this world. This is what we should believe. The issue has no relation to associating others with Allah. As mentioned above, this interpretation may prove untrue. Perhaps he intended to burn them but he did not or he intended to burn them after killing them. Even if he actually burnt them, this would be a kind of ijtihad from a companion that disagrees with the text. The ultimate reference is always to the text. Nonetheless, we have to believe that they acted according to their ijtihad and that they are illuminating guides.”

    b�r te`Q�) killing them. Even if he actually burnt them, this would be a kind of ijtihad from a companion that disagrees with the text. The ultimate reference is always to the text. Nonetheless, we have to believe that they acted according to their ijtihad and that they are illuminating guides.” 
    Dear Rational, The Hadith you quoted is truly available. I thought it was not there in the Hadith.

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/9/2014 3:53:07 AM

  • Rational says, "it is not me who is defaming Hz Ali. Your imams have done it long back." . . .
    It is you who are doing it now, you are doing it here on this site and you are doing it with malicious ill-will.
    Rational quotes from Al-Bukhaari (4557),  Ahmad, 4869; Saheeh al-Jaami’, 2831. . . .
    We need to discard all of them. Using unreliable source material to defame figures respected by Muslims is despicable work.
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 12/9/2014 2:56:26 AM

  • Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 12/9/2014 1:15:26 AM
    thanks for pouring so many kind words on me.
    you have said it before and you will get more chances to repeat these or more similar words.
    after all you have mastery on such words.
    your respectable figures of Islam has left in written what they did and how they did it.

    By ratioanl mohammed yunus - 12/9/2014 2:08:25 AM

  • Al-Bukhaari (4557) narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “ ‘You (true believers in Islamic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind’ [Aal- Imraan 3:110 – interpretation of the meaning].” He said: “You are the best (i.e., the most beneficial) of people for mankind, you bring them in the chains that are around their necks until they enter Islam.Can people be brought in chains except in the case of jihad??

    The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I have been sent ahead of the Hour with the sword so that Allaah will be worshipped alone, and my provision has been placed in the shade of my spear, and humiliation has been decreed for those who go against my command, and whoever imitates a people is one of them.” Narrated by Ahmad, 4869; Saheeh al-Jaami’, 2831.

    By ratioanl mohammed yunus - 12/9/2014 2:04:50 AM

  • GM, at last you repeat the same words because you have nothing to say.
    it is not me who is defaming Hz Ali. Your imams have done it long back.
    it is your double standard that you don't condemn the person who recorded all this but you chase doggedly others for just quoting the same.
    those ahadith cast the light on the society of that time. slaves were made to have labor as well as sex.
    By ratioanl mohammed yunus - 12/9/2014 1:55:55 AM

  • Rational, fighting about what is in this Hadith or that Hadith is silly. Your sole aim after all is to defame Hazrat Ali or some other respected figure in Islam. Your sources are weak and your purpose is dishonorable. What makes you pursue such a lowly path?
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 12/9/2014 1:15:26 AM

  • Dear Ghulam Ghaus Sb

    Thanks for appending the link to the Open Letter. The following sentence in the very first page should be observed by all commentators on the website unless they do not want to benefit from the learned:

    "However, the phrase, ‘sent with the sword’ is part of a Hadith that is specific to a certain time and place which have since expired. Thus it is forbidden to mix the Qur’an and Hadith in this way, as it is forbidden to mix the general and specific, and the conditional and unconditional."

    By the way, the word 'saif', 'sword' in English does not appear in the Qur'an.   

    By muhammad yunus - 12/8/2014 11:48:46 PM

  • Dear Ghulam Ghaus Sb,

    People go on quoting Ahadith and calling them the second foundation of Islam but do not always apply the discretion and wisdom that is required while quoting them. Reason is very simple. Great many forged, fabricated, speculative, legendary and inaccurate material inevitably entered the Hadith corpus as you will know well and is spelled out in my following referenced article that still awaits your comment.  

    Evolution of Hadith Sciences and Need for Major Paradigm Shift in Role of Hadith Corpus and Scope of Madrasa Education


    I am quoting below the Section 1 of the article to caution all commentators against quoting Ahadith that conflict with the Qur'anic message and are deemed week:

    The Early Imam’s warnings against the authenticity of the Ahadith they compiled.

    “Why do people impose conditions which are not in Allah’s book (Kitab il lah)? Whoever imposes such conditions as are not in Allah’s Laws (Kitab il lah), then that condition is invalid even if he imposes one hundred such conditions, for Allah’s conditions (as stated in the Qur’an) are truth and more valid” -  Imam al-Bukhari [2].

    "If we discuss about all those accounts which are held authentic (Sahih) before the learned, and suspect by a critical scholar (who demands a proof of personal meeting between the narrators and transmitters of Hadith in each generation), - we would simply be tired (because they are so large in number)." …‘This argument is novel in its approach, and it is wrong that early scholars did not believe in this. Neither is its denial by those who came later, any ground for its repudiation... and God is there to help repudiate what is wrong in the religion of the learned and I trust in Him” – Imam Muslim [3].

    These quotations from the two foremost pioneers of Hadith compilation may be shocking to those who regard the Hadith as a form of divine revelation side by side with or complementary to the Qur’an. But truth must be told as the Western world cites weak and forged Hadiths (technically Ahadith) selectively to demonize Islam, while many educated Muslims, ignorant of the historicity of the Hadith sciences, cite weak Hadiths selectively despite the compilers’ warning against them [2,3].

    Kindly read the article time permitting and comment.

    Regarding any of my suggestion, please use your own judgment in following up or deferring it for a later time.

    By muhammad yunus - 12/8/2014 11:39:28 PM

  • Full Text of Muslim Theologians' Open Letter to Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, Refuting His Ideology of Jihad That Justifies Killings of Innocent Civilians, Muslims and Non-Muslims”



    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/8/2014 10:58:42 PM

  • ghulam ghaus saheb has promised to support secondry source Ahadith whole life with full devotion.
    he has carried some series of comments to prove the importance of secondary source.
    he has gone to extent that the Quran is incomprehensible without secory source.

    By ratioanl mohammed yunus - 12/8/2014 10:03:29 PM

  • Sahih Bukhari- Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:
    Narrated 'Ikrima:

    Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

    now Bukhari is not aira ghaira nathhu khaira in Islam. he is one pillar of Isslam. he was devout sincere imam of majority sunnis.
    if he collected such non-senses or insulting accounts, how he can be imam of so many Muslims?
    secondary source to Muslims is second foundation of religion islam.

    By ratioanl mohammed yunus - 12/8/2014 9:58:22 PM

  • Dear Ghulam Ghaus Sb,

    I wonder if you have read the original Arabic version of the denouncement letter to ISIS Chief from 120 Islamic scholars from across the world. I have read the remarks by Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council of American-Islamic Relations, who released it in Washington. He said, “Even translated into English, the letter will still sound alien to most Americans.”


    The thing is the 18 page letter in Arabic refutes each of the claims of Abu Bakr Siddiq, point by point, and demonstrates that what he is doing is out and out anti-Islamic. However, the denunciation falls short of paralleling him with the Kharijites of early Islam who were deemed to have lost allegiance to the faith of Islam, were treated as terrorist apostate of Islam and hunted down and killed (target-killed). 

    The article I referenced is easy to read, runs hardly three pages, is backed by the Qur’an and authentic historical record, challenges ISIS leadership’s claim to the faith of Islam,  and can be read and understood by millions and millions of Muslim youth, who can neither access the 18 page denunciation nor understand its highly technical language. Thus the article can be far more effective in curbing his influence and debunking the charm of ISIS and militant jihad. 

    My suggestion: Please post an Urdu, Arabic and French version without delay. The English version can be reposted as the opening peace. You and your forum need the conviction of faith to challenge the neo-Kharijites (ISIS, Boko Haram and the likes) for unless your faith is strong enough you cannot challenge the faith of the others. In any case, the article draws on historical synergy for passing a “capital punishment” in the spiritual realm and lets the Qur’an and the early history of Islam pass the verdict. 

    By the way, you are right to assert that the suggestion that Hazrat Ali burned the Kharijites is false and obviously a later era accretion to getting rid of the Kharijites even by burning them alive. But I know, burning human alive is totally forbidden in Islamic law, though some people have tried to argue that the Prophet first gave permission in its favour and later retracted. But you know the problem with secondary sources, it is punctuated if not loaded with apocryphal material. This is the reason that I try to build all my arguments around the Qur’an and draw only on those elements of the secondary sources that do not conflict with it.

    As it has happened throughout the history of Islam, the most pervert and immoral lot focus on what is the weakest and most bizarre in Islamic Medieval discourses/ Sharia Law – somewhat like vultures who peck at the piles of the guts, the organs and the offal and all that stinks for fresh meat does not appeal them.

    By muhammad yunus - 12/8/2014 9:26:59 PM

  • Mr ghaus knows well there is hadith about burning of some people alive. He is only saving hz Ali by not acecpting the presence of hadith.
    Proof is there he must tell why he not accepting it.
    If he thinks my allegation is false he can say there is no such hadith. It is there. You also know it. By speaking lawyer's language you are just escaping.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 12/8/2014 8:40:47 PM

  • Rational asks Ghaus sb., "What is your proof it is false? . . .

    The burden of proof is on the one who alleges, not on the one who calls the allegation false.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 12/8/2014 3:21:20 PM

  • Mr. Ghulam Ghaus Sb has rightly said, "Mr. Ibrahim, We Muslims have been refuting violent ideologies, taking every possible initiative to eliminate every kind of injustice, violence, terrorism growing in our multicultural societies across the world."
    By Raihan Nezami - 12/8/2014 9:31:58 AM

  • Dear ghulam ghaus
    I knew it you will say it false. What is your proof it is false? Is it not in ahadith books? Why it is false and what you say is true?
    Why your pious Imams recorded such false ahadith? 
    What about rest I quoted? Are they too false? Who wrote this history of Islam?

    You stand on sandy base.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 12/8/2014 9:07:09 AM

  • Mr Rational, you say, "it also must be remembered hz Ali burned alive some of them."

    This is false, false, false, false, false hundred % false.

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/8/2014 7:47:10 AM

  • Dear Muhammad Yunus Sb,

    This article says, “120 widely approved Muslim scholars from around the world approved an open letter to the head of ISIL, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, denouncing his terrorist group as anti-Islamic. The letter based upon the irrefutable references taken from the Qur’an and Hadith and released on Sep. 24, 2014 refutes the fanatical ideas of Mr. Ibrahim and the extremist ideologies of ISIL members committing the larger and more sweeping barbarism that has so far engulfed two Muslim countries, Iraq and Syria.

    The letter can be summarised in the following paragraph: it is forbidden in Islam to kill innocent lives including Muslims, non-Muslims, emissaries, ambassadors, diplomats, journalists, aid workers, priests etc. Ignoring the reality of contemporary times is forbidden when issuing legal rulings. Jihad in Islam is merely a defensive war. It is not allowed in Islam to label any Muslim with Kufr unless he or she openly declares disbelief. All these acts—forcing people to convert, denying women, children of their rights, torturing the people, disfiguring the dead and attributing the evil and terrorist acts to God Almighty and demolishing the shrines and graves of any one of the holy Prophets and companions—are strictly forbidden in Islam.”

    This is good. I have read the names of all widely renowned 120 scholars. However, we Muslims should not think it enough; rather we should work more and more to circulate such beautiful Islamic teachings of peace, brotherhood, tolerance and patience. Besides, i also need to obey your advice. Inshallah, I will do circulate your article among Ulemas.  

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/8/2014 7:43:20 AM

  • It also must be remembered hz Ali burned alive some of them. This knowledge comes from the same source.

    It must also be remembered that hz uthman was killed by the sons of sahaba.
    And where those kharjits came from?
    It also must be remembered that same sahaba were eager to settle the issue of khilafat. Then they deprived ansars from the khilafat securing khilafat within quraish.
    These are the hard facts of Islamic history. Which kharjit was responsible for the creation of ahia sect? Which khafjit was responsible to rouse hz Aisha against hz Ali.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 12/8/2014 7:31:47 AM

  • Dear Ghulam Ghaus Sb,

    I hope you are aware that Caliph Ali likened the Kharijites with mad dogs. His logic: a mad dog transmits its venom into its victim and turns him mad and his victim does the same thing, causing an endless increase in their number unless they are eliminated. He therefore treated them as having lost their claim to faith, fought against them and killed them, despite their profound devotion to the Islamic spirituality – prayers, Qur’anic recitation, austere living, literalist compliance with Sunnah. The terror outfits like ISIS and Boko Haram are no different from the Kharijites as expounded in my following article that calls upon the international Ulema fraternity to issue a fatwa against them following the precedent of Caliph Ali. A fatwa from the heartland of Islam could be most effective. But if they take too long, these neo-Kharjiite will endanger the survival of their monarchy and may even eye their country as the natural capital of an (un)Islamic Caliphate. You may circulate my article among the Ulema fraternity to get a fatwa issued by the Indian Ulema – before it is too late.

    Call For International Fatwas To Declare The Terrorists Who Advocate Wanton Killing Of Innocent People In The Name Of Islam As ‘Terrorist Apostates’, Like The Kharijites Of Early Islam


    Now to your question, why are the Muslims blamed for violence is simply because the ISIS, Boko Haram and other terror outfits are perpetrating violence in the name of Islam. As long as the Muslims shelter them as co-religionists, they will be identified with them and regardless of how many Muslims are killed, Islam will be perceived as a cult of violence.

    By muhammad yunus - 12/8/2014 6:36:40 AM

  • At this tumultuous time, is there any way out to come out of this great dilemma?

    I think, if you have no knowledge of true Islam, you better be at peace and silence in any corner of your house, hiding your face inside. And if you have true knowledge of Islam, so please come out of your house and defend your Islam, defend your true fellow Muslims from two types of problems mentioned in the last comment under this thread.  

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/8/2014 12:17:03 AM

  • Muslims are being killed more than any other religious adherent, even then Muslims are being portrayed as violent.

    What a web of problem!

    No need to be confused, it is so-called Muslims who are killing real Muslims.

    Others are doing, what?

    They are portraying Muslims as violent, without any discrimination between so-called Muslims and real Muslims.

    As a result, the real Muslims are facing problems from both sides; one side is killing them and other one is portraying them as violent.

    What a great dilemma for real Muslims!    

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/8/2014 12:10:26 AM

  • Dear Muhammad Yunus Sahib, Assalam Alaikum.

    Thanks a ton for adding the Quranic references that prohibit every kind of barbarism, terrorism, extremism, fanaticism and encouraging me to do more work to propagate true version of Islam with miraculously peaceful meanings of the Quran that can easily inculcate the factual understanding and truly humanistic approach of Islam even into minds of the laymen.  

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 12/4/2014 12:10:31 AM

  • Dear Ghaus Sahab,
    1. Baghya is also condemned in the verse 42:42.
    2. The Qur'an also uses the word fasad to denote violence and anarchy and condemns and forbids it in the following verses:
    2:204/205, 13:25, 28:77, 28:83,
    3. Muslims are commanded not to overdo in retaliation and forgive people 16:126-128, 42:40, 45:14.
    If you add these references to your list you have more than a score of Qur'anic verses to defend it against any sweeping charge from any quarter, whatever the motive. Actually many well meaning non-Muslim may also connect barbarism with Islam as the Muslim Ulama could not muster the courage or lacked religious conviction to issue a fatwa against the terror-outfits as I proposed in my following article:
    Call for international Fatwas to declare the terrorists who advocate wanton killing of innocent people in the name of Islam as ‘Terrorist Apostates’, like the Kharijites of early Islam. 
    By muhammad yunus - 12/3/2014 6:32:24 AM

  • Dear Ghaus Sb

    I am really very happy to see your compelling and scholarly rebuttal of some knave or naive writer connecting the heinous crimes of ISIS and other terror outfits with the Qur'an. I particularly liked your concluding remark: "No matter whatever way you, Mr. Ibrahim, adopt in order to foment hatred among Muslims and non-Muslims, Islam will remain forever to teach justice, tolerance, patience, peace and forbid what and how you say ‘beheadings’ and ‘mutilations.’"

    Keep it up. There should be more people like you among the Muslim intelligentsia to defend the faith from attacks by the non-Muslims, ex-Muslims, hypocrites among non-Muslims and those Muslims (as per their names) who are bent on judging Islam based on the weakest ahadiht, harshest Sharia rulings and most bizarre episodes from the Sira - the segment of Islam's secondary sources that are more of mythology than theology and were always set aside by the learned Muftis, Muhaddith and Jurists of Islam as apocryphal 

    May God increase you in knowledge and guide the Islam bashing writers to read the Qur'an as it commands us to read.  


    By muhammad yunus - 12/3/2014 5:50:29 AM

  • Ghaus sb. shows the correct way to read and learn from the Quran. The Quran clearly condemns killing innocent civilians and permits jehad only as a defensive measure.
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 12/2/2014 2:00:47 PM