offense no defence and when no defence no question no doubt and no confusion. We should not
let the former take place.
Almighty knows the best. Even if we apply our mind and thus we find a principle
of Jurists that when two Ahadith are different in meaning we should follow the
one which is according to the nature of the Quran and Hadith, that is
undoubtedly peace and leave the other if its meaning or context is different and
have no basis to wage what is termed as “offensive Jihad”. There is no concept
of offensive Jihad in Islam. Offensive attitudes cannot and should not be
called Jihad. Jihad was and is only for defence. Great Jurists unanimously
prohibit offensive attitudes during Jihad. Jihad cannot be done by any organization
or any group of individuals, rather it is done on a state level, but only when
there is no chance left for saving the country except for fighting for defence
and fighting for restoring peace and security in the country.
as far as criteria of defensive war is concerned, an Islamic country should not
kill women, children, priests etc. To prove this point, there is a special
chapter including many Hadees from Saheeh Bukhari and Saheeh Muslim given
below. But what about the Hadees that makes some exceptions to killing women
and children in the state of defensive war, provided it is not deliberate, the
very idea has been discussed in the following article:
Prohibited the Killing of Women and Children
are so much hadith where the Prophet condemned the killing of innocent women
and children during time of war that it is impossible to deny them.
004, Book 052, Hadith Number 257.
By 'Abdullah : During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found
killed. Allah's Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.
004, Book 052, Hadith Number 258.
By Ibn 'Umar : During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found
killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children.
019, Hadith Number 4319.
: Prohibition of killing women and children in war.
is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that a woman was found killed in one
of the battles fought by the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). He
disapproved of the killing of women and children.
019, Hadith Number 4320.
Chapter : Prohibition of killing women
and children in war.
is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles;
so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women
008, Hadith Number 2663.-----------------------------
: Not known.
By Rabah ibn Rabi' : When we were with the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) on an
expedition, he saw some people collected together over something and sent a man
and said: See, what are these people collected around? He then came and said:
They are round a woman who has been killed. He said: This is not one with whom
fighting should have taken place. Khalid ibn al-Walid was in charge of the van;
so he sent a man and said: Tell Khalid not to kill a woman or a hired servant.
021, Hadith Number 008.
Section : Prohibition against Killing
Women and Children in Military Expeditions.
related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that a son of Kab ibn Malik (Malik
believed that ibn Shihab said it was Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab) said, "The
Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade those who
fought ibn Abi Huqayq (a treacherous jew from Madina) to kill women and
children. He said that one of the men fighting had said, 'The wife of ibn Abi
Huqayq began screaming and I repeatedly raised my sword against her. Then I
would remember the prohibition of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him
and grant him peace, so I would stop. Had it not been for that, we would have
been rid of her.'"
021, Hadith Number 009.
related to me from Malik from Nafi from Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah,
may Allah bless him and grant him peace, saw the corpse of a woman who had been
slain in one of the raids, and he disapproved of it and forbade the killing of
women and children.
021, Hadith Number 010.
related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Abu Bakr as-Siddiq was
sending armies to ash-Sham. He went for a walk with Yazid ibn Abi Sufyan who
was the commander of one of the battalions. It is claimed that Yazid said to
Abu Bakr, "Will you ride or shall I get down?" Abu Bakrsaid, "I
will not ride and you will not get down. I intend these steps of mine to be in
the way of Allah."
Abu Bakr advised Yazid, "You will find a people who claim to have totally
given themselves to Allah. Leave them to what they claim to have given
themselves. You will find a people who have shaved the middle of their heads,
strike what they have shaved with the sword.
advise you ten things| Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person.
Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not
slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter
them. Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly."
The Prophet made some exceptions to the
Killing of Women and Children
004, Book 052, Hadith Number 256.
By 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."
019, Hadith Number 4321.
Chapter: Permissibility of killing women
and children in the night raids, provided it is not deliberate.
is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah
(may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the
polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.
are many possible meanings for these Hadith. I was kind of surprised when I
read it at first. But we don’t know the EXACT situation or what the Prophet
truly meant. Maybe, maybe THOSE particular women and children were planning to
fight against the Muslims with the enemy.
the Muslim army just could not have blown this chance to attack the enemy that
they still had to attack them no matter at what cost in order to stop the risk
of more bloodshed (do a little bad for the greater good).
very fact that the companions of the Prophet asked the Prophet's permission
shows that the Prophet used to be strict regarding his prohibition on the
killing of women and children. However, when a situation arises and there is no
choice, things could get ugly. The Prophet even forbade the cutting down of
palm trees in war, however during the siege of Banu Nadir the Prophet had to
make an exception. So exceptions do arise unfortunately.
Ibn Hajar Al Asaqalani says in Fath Al- Baari that the point is not to target
the women and children intentionally but if there is absolutely no other way to
kill the enemy than by injuring the women and children because they are mixed
with the men then there is no other choice. (Source:
possibility is that the hadith has been abrogated and that even if women and
children accompany the enemy during war then they still should not be killed.
(See http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=0&Rec=4747 for the
Nawawi says in his tafseer of Saheeh Muslim that women and children are only
killed only if they cannot be distinguished. But because it was so dark and
they could not be distinguished, the Muslims had not choice. (Source: http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=1&Rec=4215)
tafseer of Abu Dawud says the same thing here (Source:
of Women and Children According to the Bible
Muslims ever get any trouble from a Christian that says Islam advocates for the
killing of innocent women and children then give him a taste of his own Bible.
This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what
they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt.3 Now go,
attack the Amalekites and totally destroy [a] everything that belongs to them.
Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and
sheep, camels and donkeys.' "
Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man,18 but
save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an
inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes.
for this article: http://www.answering-christianity.com/bassam_zawadi/did_prophet_muhammad_kill_innocents.htm
After mentioning the hadith texts taken out of context, why
not to discuss passages from the Bible:
Now therefore kill every male among the little ones,
and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women
children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for
And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him
through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: Slay
utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women:
but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary.
Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house.
And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are
therein, to the LORD: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that are
with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent. And ye, in
any wise keep yourselves from the accursed thing, lest ye make yourselves
accursed, when ye take of the accursed thing, and make the camp of Israel a
curse, and trouble it. But all the silver, and gold, and vessels of brass and
iron, are consecrated unto the LORD: they shall come into the treasury of the
LORD.So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets: and it came
to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted
with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up
into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. And they
utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old,
and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they
have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox
and sheep, camel and ass.
[1 Samuel 15:3]
Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against
her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces,
and their women with child shall be ripped up.
Alhamdulillah, Islaam truly is a religion of mercy!!! Many
"Judeo-Christian" countries of the West are meting out these acts of
pure savagery and then covering their deeds and then put the spot-light on a
few bands of wrong-doers in the Muslim world. We won't forget Iraq, Palestine,
Afghanistan, Bosnia or anywhere else where such Biblical verses
wereimplemented, and the UN just sat there and watched.
Look at Islaam however. We're totally prohibited from these
heinous crimes, yet we are told that in an event that there happens to be women
and children in a place under attack, that it doesn't need to be held back
because of their presence. On the other hand, in the Bible we read that infants
should be diced and slashed?
Can this hadith narrated by Imam Bukhari be a saying attributed to the Prophet of peace, Muhammad (peace be upon him)?
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik,
"O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."
Sahih Bukhari 1:8:387, See also: Sahih Bukhari 1:2:24
Please see below the hadith texts which are the root of today's Jihadist terrorists:
“The Prophet 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)." Bukhari (52:256)
In this hadith, Prophet is seen as the one who establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Jihadist terror bombings.
Similarly, one more hadith reported by Imam Bukhari says: “The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause.” Bukhari (52:65)
These hadith words are the basis for offensive Jihad, spreading Islam by force. This is how it is understood by the jihadist terrorists of today.
defend every Hadees, if it is. I never call the fabricated one “Hadees”. Actually
you are still confused at the definition of Hadees. Let me tell you that
fabricated sayings are never Hadees among the scholars of Hadith. They say it
also tell you that I believe in every Hadees of our holy prophet Muhammad peace
be upon him and not the fabricated Hadees. Like many so-called Muslims, I do
not discredit Hadees just for whims and the so-called desires of the world. I fear
I have to be accountable to Allah Almighty.
believe in every Hadees if it is not fabricated, but you seem to disbelieve in
every hadees even if it is not fabricated.
You are missing the point and the woods for the trees. Let me
repeat what I said:
The problem with revisionist
history is that it focuses entirely on the negatives completely ignoring the
positives. While such listing of all the negatives may be factual and accurate,
it does not present a complete and holistic picture. In a thousand year
history, one can collect an impressive list of all the negatives to fill tomes.
There are two periods – pre 1967
and post 1967. The Jews before 1967 saw no wrong. The revisionists after 1967
see nothing right. I could have quoted the pre 1967 historians who saw no wrong
but I chose Cohen because he is consciously trying to reconcile between the ‘romantics’
and the `revisionists’. The two paras that you quoted from Cohen is the most he
could do to justify what the revisionists say. The rest of the article is a
negation of the two paras that you quoted. The revisionists even when they are
100% right, represent only 1% of the truth, if you take the cumulative
experience of the Jews as the base. For
example, number of Jews who faced persecution multiplied by period in
years vs aggregate of the lifespan of
each Jew for the Islamic period. If this is 0.2%, then the fact that the Jews
were persecuted cannot be denied but the fact is also that in totality, this
was insignificant. For this reason, Jews
in Islamic areas do not have a collective memory of persecution whereas they
have it as far as Christendom is concerned.
Bernard Lewis book is post
1967 and also Cohen’s book. Lewis may have taken a balanced view like Cohen or
could be a revisionist or you may be selectively reading the few paras that
make you happy. It is easier to deal with a complete book or article or a
summary of the book. Summary statements are easily recognizable for example
those that I quoted from Cohen’s book. Cohen’s article is a complete article
which contains both the negatives and the positives.
The problem with revisionist history is that it
focuses entirely on the negatives completely ignoring the positives. While such
listing of all the negatives may be factual and accurate, it does not present a
complete and holistic picture. In a thousand year history, one can collect an
impressive list of all the negatives to fill tomes. The following is a balanced
article which touches on the favorite subject of Secular Logic of the dhimmi
status and the inferior position of non-Mulsims. While this is mentioned and
was fact, it was not clearly a fact for all and for all times and in all places
since the remaining part of the article negates what one may come to expect
from the implications of the inferior status of the dhimmi.
When Jews and Muslims Got Along
Mark R Cohen
hostile relations between Israel and the Muslim world make one wonder if
Jewish-Muslim relations were ever amicable. The idea of a so-called Golden Age,
a Jewish-Muslim interfaith utopia in Islamic Spain and elsewhere in the middle
ages, has rightly been called a myth: it overlooks the inferior legal status of
Jews during that time and glosses over episodes of conflict and hardship. But
to say that Muslims have always persecuted the Jews, and that anti-Semitism in
the Arab-Muslim world today represents a continuation of fourteen centuries of
oppression, would be just as wrong--indeed, a counter-myth.
In the premodern Muslim world Jews, like all non-Muslims, were second-class
subjects, but they enjoyed a considerable amount of toleration, if we
understand toleration in the context of the times. They were a "protected
people," in Arabic, dhimmis, a status that guaranteed free practice of
religion, untrammeled pursuit of livelihood, protection for houses of worship
and schools, and recognition of communal institutions--provided that able,
adult males paid an annual head-tax, accepted the hegemony of Islam, remained
loyal to the regime, and acknowledged the superiority of the Muslims.
There were deficits to being a dhimmi. The head-tax was often collected in a
humiliating manner to symbolize the superiority of Islam, and it was burdensome
for the poor. Special sartorial rules, originally intended to distinguish the
majority non-Muslims from the minority of Muslim conquerors, could spell danger
when exploited by hostile Muslims to identify and mistreat them. Protection,
moreover, could be rescinded if dhimmis exceeded their humble position. This
could happen, for instance, when a dhimmi rose to high office in Muslim government,
violating the hierarchy that placed Muslims on top.
On the plus side, Islamic society was a pluralistic mosaic of different
religions and ethnic groups and Jews were not the only marginal group.
Moreover, as the smallest of the minority groups, Jews were rarely singled out
for special attention. In Latin Europe, by contrast, Jews constituted the only
non-conforming religion (heretics were considered bad Christians), and
accordingly suffered more frequent and severe persecutions.
Jews enjoyed a vibrant cultural exchange with Islam. At its
beginnings, Islam drew some of its inspiration from Judaism. Later on, Judaism
was creatively enriched by contact with Islam, notably in the fields of law,
medicine, science, poetry, and philosophy. Jewish intellectuals, of whom the
illustrious Maimonides is but one example out of many, imbibed Arabic and
Islamic cultural values and exchanged knowledge with Muslims in friendly,
Where we have evidence of everyday life in the middle ages, most famously, the
first-hand documents discovered in a medieval synagogue in Old Cairo known as
the Cairo Geniza, we are able to observe the Jewish population-at-large going
about their daily lives, just as deeply embedded in Arab society as the great
intellectuals. Apart from the dhimmi tax, they suffered little of the
discrimination prescribed by Islamic legal theory. They bore Arabic honorific
names (forbidden in Islamic law) dressed any way they liked with impunity. In
violation of Islamic prohibition they read the Qur'an (in Hebrew
transcription). They owned and enjoyed reading other books from the Arabic
literary bookshelf (we have inventories of the books Jews owned). They
maintained synagogues that were obviously constructed after the rise of Islam
(in contravention of Islamic law). And, with rare exception, their communal
institutions functioned without unwanted government interference.
Jews often had recourse to Muslim religious courts to register contracts and
litigate business disputes, and even for matters of personal and family status.
They received fair treatment before Muslim judges, who honored their testimony
under oath (though Islamic legal theory disallowed it). Jews' confidence in the
Muslim judicial system continued down to modern times.
Jewish merchants operated freely in the Islamic marketplace, traveling between
places as far from each other as Spain and India, enduring no greater risk or
danger than the average Muslim trader. They formed bonds of trust and
friendship with Muslim colleagues and even established business partnerships
with Muslims, circumventing restrictions on mixed partnerships inscribed in
The infamous massacres and forced conversions in North Africa and Spain in the
mid-twelfth century by the Muslim Berber dynasty of the Almohads, regularly
cited by counter-mythologists as an example of Muslim anti-Semitism, were
directed not at Jews, but at dhimmis as a group--including Christians--and even
Anti-Semitism, understood properly as an irrational belief in the inferiority
and even nefariousness of Jews, arose in medieval Europe in the twelfth century
in the form of the myth of the diabolical, all-powerful Jew who murders
Christian children to reenact the crucifixion and uses the victim's blood for
ritual or medicinal purposes. This myth was embellished with racist hatred in
modern times (when it first came to be called "anti-Semitism").
Such irrational, anti-Semitic beliefs are not found in classical Islam. They
were imported into the Middle East in the nineteenth century on the heels of
European colonialism. An early example is the famous blood libel in Damascus in
1840, regularly, though wrongly, cited as proof of homegrown Muslim-Arab
Anti-Semitism increased in the Muslim world as Arab nationalism (itself
imported from the West) came into conflict with Jewish nationalism. Today, it
uses Islamic sources, from the Qur;an and the hadith, but this is only an
"Islamized" version of its western, Christian model, giving the
erroneous impression that it is rooted in classical Islam. This, in turn, helps
fuel the historical counter-myth of Islam as an intolerant, violent,
The great French sociologist Maurice Halbwachs wrote that collective memory is
fashioned by the social frameworks of human experience. Changing social
frameworks, especially the intensification of Arab-Israeli animosity, have caused
many Jews to reject the more favorable interpretation of Jewish-Muslim
relations and caused many Jews from Arab lands to replace memories of
friendships with Muslims with a selective, bitter memory of enmity, exclusion,
and persecution. In many ways this is a transplanted version of the bitter
memory of Christian Jew-hatred and of the Holocaust that haunts Israelis and
diaspora Jews when faced with the prospect of having to trust Muslims. Muslims
need to be aware of this; anti-Semitism in an Islamic mode is, simply stated,
An awareness by both Muslims and Jews that they were not born to hate one
another, and that there once was a time when Jews and Muslims actually
coexisted in a creative and mutually enriching manner, might promote confidence
on both sides of the seemingly unbridgeable gulf.
Mark R. Cohen is an emeritus professor of Jewish history in the Islamic world
at Princeton University and contributing editor of A History of Jewish-Muslim
You are not quoting
Cohen but interpreting what he said. Quote him if you want to attribute
anything to Cohen. We do not need Cohen to tell us whether or not non-Muslims
enjoyed dhimmi status or had to pay Jiziya. Does he say that these made the
non-Muslims second class citizens or was something that was resented?
In your eyes dhimmi is
second class citizen. In Islam he is "protected citizen" without an
obligation for military service for which he pays "Jizya". For you
jizya is humiliation, in Islam it is only a tax in lieu of obligatory military
service for only males capable of military service. There is no jizya for the
disabled, the old, the very poor, the females, the children and for the monks.
Why would monks and females be exempted if it was a tax for being non-Muslim?
Indeed, very few of the
historians have looked upon Jizya with distaste or as humiliation except the
revisionists after 1967. I agree however, that it was turned into something
distasteful in the 12th century or later, in a few places.
You say "it is accepted" - by whom?
You talk about your links - one is jewish and the other is wikipedia with the topic "Persecution of Jews". Wikipedia is open source. Who will contribute to an article with such a title except those motivated to contribute or the revisionists?
Cohen is right when he says "many people have used the myth that Jews were mistreated under Muslim rule to bolster their political standpoints". Ever wondered why would he call their mistreatment a myth?
You again talk about Muslim rulers driving out Jews when no Jew has ever said that they were driven out by the Muslims. You are more revisionist than the Jews themselves!
The Palestinians have to pay according to you for the collective guilt of the rest of the World although the Muslims or the Palestinians have done no wrong. Israel's intransigence for implementing an amicable single nation or two nation solution and its atrocities to prevent any solution also meets with your approval. The Palestinians are responsible for what is happening to them since they are resisting or fighting. The Jews also resisted the persecutions and there were more than 100 armed Jewish uprisings in Germany alone. Thank God, nobody blames them from bringing on the holocaust. The Palestinians be damned - they are Muslim and don't deserve the same consideration!
If the pagans had not fought, persecuted, driven out the Muslims, barred them from entry into kaba etc., they would never have met the same fate either. The Muslims were also Meccans and with equal rights. They were not foreigners. Might is right was OK for the pagans but the Muslims reclaiming their rights with full justice is not OK! It wasn't just the fighting that the pagans indulged in but treachery also.
When the Muslims tried to perform umrah in 628, they were stopped. A totally one sided treaty was executed for a period of 10 years. According to the treaty the Muslims had to return but could come back the following year to perform pilgrimage. The close companions of the prophet were livid with the humiliating terms of the treaty especially as they were strong enough to defeat the Meccans and perform the pilgrimage the same year. This would have been an aggressive war and the Prophet preferred an amicable treaty instead. The Muslims performed the pilgrimage the following year as per the terms of the treaty. When the Muslims were treacherously killed by the Meccans violating the treaty, war became permissible according to the terms of the treaty. The Muslims entered Mecca in battle gear and took the city without a fight. They could have done the same thing 18 months back when instead, they preferred a treaty.
If the pagans had respected the terms of the treaty, Mecca would never have been taken. The treaty was for 10 years and even beyond that, a war of aggression would have been avoided for the same reason it was avoided in the first place. The humiliating (to the Muslims) and one sided terms of the treaty emboldened the pagans to act recklessly thinking that the Muslims who could not even negotiate proper terms for themselves, were weak and could be trifled with. They brought about their own downfall and nothing was done without justice.
I can understand your sympathy with the Meccans. They were trying to protect their turf and could use all means - fair or unfair, right or wrong. I can also understand why they acted the way they did, but what the Muslims did was with right on their side and with justice.
Mark Cohen's book, and
what I quoted from it, covers the entire history of Jews under Muslim rule and
not just Palestine.
Before the Christian
crusades, Palestine had the highest concentration of Jews anywhere in the
World. If the Muslims rulers wanted to practice religious discrimination
against the Jews as state policy, what better place could they have found than
Palestine? If Palestine does not even find a mention in the two links that you
gave, then this is proof that Muslims rulers never practiced religious
discrimination as state policy.
There was persecution of
Jews in Yemen in the 12th century, but it never reached the levels of
persecution in the Christian lands. You will find such isolated incidents in
different places and different points in time. You may however search as much
as you wish, but you will find it difficult to get any story of Muslim
persecution in Palestine. Yes, it was under the Romans before the Muslims
captured it after a siege, when the Romans surrendered. Not a drop of blood was
shed and after the surrender, the administration was left untouched and the
erstwhile Jewish administrators continued to function as before. It is not
without reason, that what people call today "the myth of the
interfaith utopia" in which medieval Muslims and Jews peacefully cohabited
in Arab lands is of Jewish and not Muslim origin. The exacerbation of
Arab-Israeli conflict at the time of the Six-Day War in 1967 gave birth in some
quarters to a radical revision of Jewish-Arab history with a "countermyth of Islamic persecution, " suggesting
that Jews fared not much better socially and politically under Islamic rule
than they did under Christendom. The two links that you provided rely on the revisionist
contermyth spun after 1967 and yet could not find anything to report in
The question was, are the
Palestinians responsible for driving out the Jews from Palestine? The simple
answer is “no, not all”. The question really was about your sense of fairness
in holding the creation of Israel just by displacing and dispossessing
Palestinians, but holding unjust, the barring of pagans from Kaba after their
defeat in a war preceded by the persecution, driving out of the Muslims from
their homes and several battles meant to finish them off, acts of treachery, barring them from entering Kaba, killing them inside kaba etc.
How secular and how logical and how fair
Mark R. Cohen, professor of Near Eastern studies at Princeton University, specializing in Jews in the Muslim world, and a leading scholar of the history of Jews in the Middle Ages under Islam, and himself a Jew, writes in his book "The Neo-Lachrymose Conception of
Jews of Islam experienced less physical violence than Jews
under Western Christendom. Isolated events of persecution did occur but this
does not change the fact that Jewish people were treated adequately. Cohen
also notes that many people have used the myth that Jews were mistreated
under Muslim rule to bolster their political standpoints in response to
Observer sb. says, "The ideal state according to the Quran is also monogamy in very clear terms." . . .
This should be reflected in our shariat with a nonambiguous and unconditional simple laws such as, "Polygamy is not permitted," and, "Men and women are equal in the eyes of the law."
What does one do if there is a conflict between one's inner conviction and what the Quran says? This came up in a discussion of polygamy and two eminent writers were cited by Javed Anand as follows: . . .
"On the gender justice issue, I find the radical views of South African Islamic scholar and an Imam, Farid Esack the most attractive, both ethically and intellectually. Here in brief is Esack who makes a very strong argument for a radical redefinition of gender relations. It goes something like this: If someone tells me that my argument for gender equality does 'violence to the Text' (meaning Quran), I would reply that I would rather do violence to the text than accept violence against human beings (meaning unjust, unequal gender relations). If I am then asked how I could continue being a believing, practising Muslim, I would reply: I see no contradiction because I believe in an Allah who is Most Compassionate, most merciful. If some of the Quranic text today seems problematic, I will look for the context of the revelations and the hermeneutic keys to unlock and resolve the seeming contradiction between a Most Compassionate God and the contextual Quranic text.
Equally appealing is Aziza Hibri's simple formula: "If it is unjust, it has to be un-Islamic". Polygyny is not my idea of "just" unless we wish to look for specific contingencies in which polyandry and polygyny occupy the same moral plane.
Abu Hurairah RA is a famous narrator of Hadith
among the mainstream Muslims. Just as we cannot rule out the fact that some
Ahadith have been falsely attributed to the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him,
so too we cannot deny this possibility that there could be fabricated Ahadith
that are falsely attributed to Abu Hurairah RA.
Abu Hurairah learnt by heart 5,374 Hadiths
from the holy prophet in about 1,000 days. But only a total of 1,034 Hadiths
have been stated by Imam Bukhari in his Jame Al Saheeh, while Imam Muslim
mentioned only 391 Hadiths in his Saheeh Muslim from Abu Hurairah RA. However,
this does not mean that Imam Bukhari has narrated 1,034 different Ahadith from
Abu Hurairah. Many Ahadiths in Hadith books have been repeated with slightly
different differences in context or wordings. The example of which can be
noticed in earlier comments of mine where the message of Hadith was one but narrated
by Hazrat Abu Hurairah with slightly different wordings.
According to Fathul Bari written by Allama
Hajar Asqalani, there are no more than 446 Ahadiths from Abu Hurairah in Saheeh
Bukhari and the rest are just repetitions. The matter is not restricted only to
Saheeh Bukhari, but many of these Ahadith are repeated across various Hadith
books. For example according to a count in Syar Alam Annobala written by
Al-Dhahabi, if we count Ahadith from Abu Hurairah in Saheeh Muslim (ignoring
the repeated Ahadiths), we will come up with the total figure not more than 98
Ahadiths that are different from those narrated in Saheeh Bukhari. So, the
total number of Ahadiths from Abu Hurairah RA in Saheeh Bukhari and Saheeh Muslim
(ignoring the repeated Ahadiths) is no more than 544 Ahadiths (446+98).
What you say is interesting. What is your opinion on the moral justification for the creation of Israel displacing Palestinians, who never drove them out nor ever persecuted them?
It should be noted that Abu Hurayra RA is rarely recorded as saying “I heard the Messenger of Allah say...” more often
he simply narrated Ahadiths indirectly that “the prophet said….” The very simple
reason is that he never got all Ahadiths directly from the holy prophet Muhammad
peace be upon him, but rather most of Ahadiths he narrated were reported through
other companions who spent longer time with the prophet Muhammad peace be upon
him. So, Abu Hurairah RA learnt by heart Ahadiths not only directly from the
holy prophet peace be upon him but also indirectly through the eminent companions.
Secular Logic says:
there were a God, he would be an embodiment of perfection. He would understand
the need for idol worship, just as he would understand the reasons why idol
worship is eschewed. He would be equally benevolent towards all his creations,
and not single one out as a special pet and the rest as step-children, to be
called dirty and unclean and pigs and donkeys. That is not God. Unless one is
willing to admit that this assumed God can also sometimes say horrible things,
and we must learn to ignore him at such times.
God exists as a perfect entity and then to absolve him of the sin of the
islamic classification of human beings can only be done by an individual who in
his religious passion has lost all desire to see reason."
point. But God is impartial. God has sent Prophets for the guidance of people
to all nations. India appears to have enjoyed the most favoured status for a
millennium or more. I can clearly see Lord Krishna and Rama as prophets. Did
they worship idols or were they polytheists? Come to think of it, the Quran is
a subset of the Vedas. Every verse and Surah has something very similar in the
Vedas. The Vedas however contain a lot more that is antithetical to the Quran
and therefore itself.
religion including Sikhism Christianity and Islam has drifted into mild forms
of polytheism and idol worship going against their own scriptures. This tendency
is universal and mentioned in the Quran. Muhammad (pbuh) is mentioned as
the last prophet, and there is an assurance that the Muslims will remain true
to their faith in all important matters, meaning belief in a single God the
creator, and in the hereafter. This assurance comes through the manner
in which the importance of such a belief and the implications of polytheism are
covered in the Quran, to prevent Muslims also drifting into polytheism and idol
in a single God, the creator of all else, and the hereafter, is a necessary
condition for following a moral code, without compromise. Those who compromise
are lacking in belief and the Muslims are as numerous as non-Muslims as far as
disbelief is concerned. Born Muslims, with a Muslim name, and profession of
belief, does not make a believer.
It pays to be moral, and we are punished for being immoral by
the law of the land or by the society. A certain level of morality is therefore
ensured in civilized society. As humans, we have a threshold for breaking the
law, determined mainly by the likely gain, the risk of getting caught, and the
likely loss if caught. Without exception, all of us break the law and the rules,
if the conditions are favourable, except those who follow the law for its own
sake, or out of reverence for the moral code or for the love of God. There is a
very close link between achieving the highest level of morality and an
uncompromising belief in a single God the creator, who misses nothing, watches
over us, and will reward/punish us in the hereafter.
There was a time, when a Brahmin was by deeds and not by
birth. During this period, the Brahmins were high achievers, the like of which
even the Jews of today may pale in comparison, and achieved positions that may
have become the envy of Angels. Once birth and not deeds became the criteria,
we see corruption setting in, and the Brahmins using their knowledge for
exploitation, encouraging superstition, making the religion ritualistic so that
their services become indispensable. I would credit them for being the original
marketing gurus and for the super market concept where they created demand
through innovation and introduced products based on demand. No matter what the
consumers required, they had a ‘product’ to satisfy the demand. It is not
surprising that they absorbed Buddhism, were prepared to absorb Islam, treat
Sikhism as a part of Hinduism etc. etc.
God has not been unjust. On the other hand, I do not see
another nation that occupied a more favoured status than India and for a longer
period. If people, do not remain true to the guidance, God replaces them with
another people, and it is impossible to frustrate God and prevent the true
message of God from prevailing. Even among the Hindus, the followers of
Sanatana Dharma have maintained the purity of God’s message and such groups of people
are found in every religion because every religion is based on divine
inspiration and guidance. God has never been unjust.
As earlier in one of my comments I said
that the critics and accusers targeted Abu Hurairah RA, that too, by trusting Abu
Hurairah RA himself and Imam Bukhari. The source of their information that Abu
Hurairah told more narrations from the holy prophet Muhammad peace be upon him
was following hadees itself without having trust on which it was beyond their
imagination to know whether Abu Hurairah RA had more narrations from the prophet
peace be upon him.
During the era of the prophet Muhammad
peace be upon him and the eminent companions, Abu Hurairah was well known for
his memorizing more hadeeses. No one criticized him nor did anyone accuse him
of fabrication. Only emigrants and Ansar wondered at the memorizing ability of
Hazrat Abu Hurairah RA. However, we also know that Abu hurairah RA already explained
causes of this wonderful act of memorizing and telling more narrations as
mentioned in the following Ahadiths:
Narated by Abu Huraira: You people say
that Abu Huraira tells many narrations from Allah's Apostle and you also wonder
why the emigrants and Ansar do not narrate from Allah's Apostle as Abu Huraira
does. My emigrant brothers were busy in the market while I used to stick to
Allah's Apostle content with what fills my stomach; so I used to be present
when they were absent and I used to remember when they used to forget, and my
Ansari brothers used to be busy with their properties and I was one of the poor
men of Suffa. I used to remember the narrations when they used to forget. No
doubt, Allah's Apostle once said, "Whoever spreads his garment till I have
finished my present speech and then gathers it to himself, will remember
whatever I will say." So, I spread my coloured garment which I was wearing
till Allah's Apostle had finished his saying, and then I gathered it to my
chest. So, I did not forget any of those narrations. (Saheeh Bukhari- Volume 003,
Book 034, Hadith Number 263)
The same Hadith has been narrated by Abu
Hurairah with slightly different wordings in another chain of transmission (SANAD):
Narated By Abu Huraira: People say that I
have narrated many Hadiths (The Prophet's narrations). Had it not been for two
verses in the Qur'an, I would not have narrated a single Hadith, and the verses
"Verily those who conceal the clear
sign and the guidance which We have sent down . . . (up to) Most
Merciful." (2:159-160). And no doubt our Muhajir (emigrant) brothers used
to be busy in the market with their business (bargains) and our Ansari brothers
used to be busy with their property (agriculture). But I (Abu Huraira) used to
stick to Allah's Apostle contented with what will fill my stomach and I used to
attend that which they used not to attend and I used to memorize that which
they used not to memorize” (Saheeh Bukhari)
About the unforgettable memory of Abu
Hurairah RA one more hadees is mentioned in Saheeh Bukhari with a slight difference:
Narated By Abu Huraira: I said, "O
Allah's Apostle! I hear many narrations from you but I forget them." He
said, "Spread your covering sheet." I spread my sheet and he moved
both his hands as if scooping something and emptied them in the sheet and said,
"Wrap it." I wrapped it round my body, and since then I have never
forgotten a single Hadith. (Saheeh Bukhari Volume 004, Book 056, Hadith Number
Now there is no doubt that Abu Hurairah RA
had already told causes of his narrating more hadeeses much before the accusers
and critics were born.
Rational says, "hope you are reading the comments of Mr Ghulam Ghaus on Hadith and miracles associated with memory of Sahaba and collection of hadith." . . .
He has a right to his opinions. I can only express my opinion, which I did, as follows: "Upholding the Hadiths and the Sunnah is a form of Muhammed worship which the Prophet himself discouraged. Our need for authoritative guidance seems to be insatiable. Man should find his own solutions to most problems."
Bringing rationality and inclusiveness into any religion is a slow process which should be measured in centuries, not in months or years.
the part "this year" without other end makes the verses universal and
this is the way these verses have been understood and implemented by Muslims.
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِنَّمَا
الْمُشْرِكُونَ نَجَسٌ فَلَا يَقْرَبُوا الْمَسْجِدَ الْحَرَامَ بَعْدَ
عَامِهِمْ هَٰذَا وَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ عَيْلَةً فَسَوْفَ يُغْنِيكُمُ اللَّهُ مِن
فَضْلِهِ إِن شَاءَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ
Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo
innama almushrikoona najasun fala yaqraboo almasjida alharama
baAAda AAamihim hatha wa-in khiftum AAaylatan fasawfa
yughneekumu Allahu min fadlihi in shaa inna Allaha
Accepted Translations of the Meaning
O YOU who have
attained to faith! Those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God are nothing
but impure: and so they shall not approach the Inviolable House of Worship
from this year onwards And should you fear poverty, then [know that] in time
God will enrich you out of His bounty, if He so wills: for, verily, God is
M. M. Pickthall
O ye who believe!
The idolaters only are unclean. So let them not come near the Inviolable
Place of Worship after this their year. If ye fear poverty (from the loss of
their merchandise) Allah shall preserve you of His bounty if He will. Lo!
Allah is Knower, Wise.
O you who believe!
the idolaters are nothing but unclean, so they shall not approach the Sacred
Mosque after this year; and if you fear poverty then Allah will enrich you
out of His grace if He please; surely Allah is Knowing Wise.
Yusuf Ali (Saudi Rev. 1985)
O ye who believe!
Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs,
approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich
you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.
O ye who believe!
Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs,
approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will God enrich you,
if He wills, out of His bounty, for God is All-knowing, All-wise.
O those who
believed! Truly, the ones who are polytheists are unclean, so let them come
not near the Masjid al-Haram after this year. And if you feared being
poverty-stricken, God will enrich you out of His grace if He willed. Truly,
God is Knowing, Wise.
Believers, know that
the polytheists are impure, so they should not approach the Sacred Mosque
after this year onwards. If you should fear destitution, God will enrich you
out of His bounty, if He so wishes. God is aware and wise.
You who believe,
associators are nothing but filthy, so they should not approach the Hallowed
Mosque after this year that they still have. If you should fear destitution,
God will enrich you out of His bounty if He so wishes. God is Aware, Wise.
O you who have
conformed to Islam; the idolaters are impure spiritually and physically.
Accordingly, they must not be allowed near the Sacrosanct Mosque after this
year*. Should you fear scarcity as a result of breakage of commercial
relations; Allah shall make His grace abound in you, if He will; He is indeed
'Alimun and Hakimun.
[The Monotheist Group] (2011 Edition)
O you who believe,
those who have set up partners are impure, so let them not approach the
Restricted Temple after this calendar year of theirs; and if you fear
poverty, then God will enrich you from His blessings if He wills. God is
Believers, those who
ascribe partners to God are truly unclean: do not let them come near the
Sacred Mosque after this year. If you are afraid you may become poor, [bear
in mind that] God will enrich you out of His bounty if He pleases: God is all
knowing and wise.
Abdul Majid Daryabadi
O Ye who believe!
the associators are simply filthy; so let them not approach the Sacred Mosque
after this their year; and if ye fear poverty, Allah shall presently enrich
you out of His grace, if He will. Verily Allah is grace. Knowing, Wise.
O believers, the
idolaters are unclean. So they should not approach the Holy Mosque after this
year. In case you fear indigence (from the stoppage of business with them),
then God will enrich you of His bounty if He will, for God is all-knowing and
You who have iman!
the idolaters are unclean, so after this year they should not come near the
Masjid al-Haram. If you fear impoverishment, Allah will enrich you from His
bounty if He wills. Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
O you who believe!
Those who associate partners with God are (nothing) but impure. So, after the
expiry of this year, let them not approach the Sacred Mosque. And should you
fear poverty (because of the possible reduction in your income due to their
not coming to Makkah in the season of the Hajj), God will enrich you out of
His bounty if He so wills. Surely, God is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
Ali Quli Qara'i
O you who have
faith! The polytheists are indeed unclean: so let them not approach the Holy
Mosque after this year. Should you fear poverty, Allah will enrich you out of
His grace, if He wishes. Indeed Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.
Hamid S. Aziz
O you who believe!
It is only the idolaters who are unclean; they shall not then approach the
Sacred Mosque after this year. But if you fear poverty (from the loss of
trade with them) then (know that) Allah will enrich you from His grace if He
Muhammad Mahmoud Ghali
O you who have
believed, surely the associators (Those who associate others with Allah) are
only an impurity; so they should not come near the Inviolable Mosque after
this season (Literally: after this duration = (this year) of theirs. And if
you fear want, then Allah will eventually enrich you of His Grace, in case He
(so) decides; surely Allah is Ever-Knowing, Ever-Wise..
pagans are filthy. Do not let them come near to the Sacred Mosque after this
year. If you are afraid of poverty, He will make you rich if He wishes, by
His favor. God is All-knowing and All-wise.
O you who believe,
the Mushriks are impure indeed, so let them not approach Al-Masjid-ul-Haram
after this year. And if you apprehend poverty, then, Allah shall, if He
wills, make you self-sufficient with His grace. Surely, Allah is All-Knowing,
O You who have
chosen to be graced with belief! The idolaters have made their hearts unclean
(and the Sacred Masjid of Makkah is the House of Pure Monotheism. Only those
who believe in the Divine System can administer this Sacred House (9:18)). So
let not the Idolaters come close to it after this year. If you fear scarcity
of trade, Allah will enrich you with His Bounty. This is the Promise of Allah
who is Knower, Wise.
Syed Vickar Ahamed
O you who believe!
Truly, the pagans are unclean (people); So after this year of theirs, do not
let them come to the Sacred Mosque. And if you fear poverty (due to reduced
trade), Allah will soon make you rich, if He wills, from His bounty; Indeed,
Allah is All Knowing (Aleem), All Wise (Hakeem).
Umm Muhammad (Sahih International)
O you who have
believed, indeed the polytheists are unclean, so let them not approach
al-Masjid al-iaram after this, their [final] year. And if you fear privation,
Allah will enrich you from His bounty if He wills. Indeed, Allah is Knowing
O believers! Know
that pagans are unclean; therefore, do not let them come near the
Masjid-al-Haram after this year's pilgrimage. If you fear poverty, soon Allah
- if He so wills - will enrich you out of His bounty. Allah is
Oh you believers,
(remember)! those who ascribe partners to Allah are really unclean.
Therefore, after (the pilgrimage) this year let them not come (anywhere) near
the sacred mosque (in Makkah). If you fear poverty, Allah may soon enrich you
as He wills. Indeed, Allah is the most Aware, the Wisest.
O believers! The
polytheists are an embodiment of impurity, so let them not come closer to the
Sacred Mosque after this year of theirs (i.e., after victory over Mecca in 9
AH). If you fear poverty (due to a decline in your trade), then (do not
worry). Allah will soon enrich you from His bounty if He so wills. Surely,
Allah is All-Knowing, Most Wise.
O you people who
have Believed! Certainly it is that Mushrikun are Najasun. So
they must not approach Al-Masjid-al-Haram after this year (i.e., this
lunar year which is having this Hajj congregation in its closing month; and
the year comes to a close three weeks after the Greater Day of Al-Hajj. Also
see Ayaat 1st to 5th of this Surah to understand the end of the
Al-Ashhurul-Hurum or the Protected Months). And if you apprehended
decrease in revenue, then very soon Allah will make you rich out of His
bounty if He thought proper. Surely, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
Itani (new translation)
O you who believe!
The polytheists are polluted, so let them not approach the Sacred Mosque
after this year of theirs. And if you fear poverty, God will enrich you from
His grace, if He wills. God is Aware and Wise.
O you who believe,
truly the pagans are corrupt, so do not let them, after this year of theirs,
approach the Sacred Masjid. And if you fear poverty, soon God will enrich
you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for God is All Knowing, All Wise.
Believers, those who
associate others with Allah in His Divinity are unclean. So, after the expiry
of this year, let them not even go near the Sacred Mosque. And should you
fear poverty, Allah will enrich you out of His bounty, if He wills. Surely
Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
[The Monotheist Group] (2013 Edition)
O you who believe,
the polytheists are impure, so let them not approach the Restricted Temple
after this year of theirs; and if you fear poverty, then God will enrich you
from His blessings if He wills. God is Knowledgeable, Wise.
O’ you who have
chosen to believe, know that the disbelievers have a dirty nature. Therefore,
from now on, do not let them to come close to Masjid-Al-Haram [the house that
Abraham and Ishmael built for the purpose of worshiping the One and only One
God.] If you are afraid of loosing your income [spent by disbelieving
pilgrims], God promises to compensate you with His generosity, in accordance
with His will. God is the Most Knowledgeable, the Most Wise.
O People who
Believe! The polytheists are utterly filthy *; so after this year do not let
them come near the Sacred Mosque; and if you fear poverty **, then Allah will
soon make you wealthy with His grace, if He wills; indeed Allah is All
Knowing, Wise. (* Filthy in body and soul. **Due to loss of trade.)
idolaters are unclean. Do not let them approach the Sacred Mosque after this
year. If you fear poverty, Allah, if He wills, will enrich you through His
bounty. He is Knowing, Wise.
Maulana Muhammad Ali
O you who believe,
the idolaters are surely unclean, so they shall not approach the Sacred
Mosque after this year of theirs. And if you fear poverty, then Allah will
enrich you out of His grace, if He please. Surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.
Ahmed - Samira
You, you those who
believed but/truly the sharers/takers of partners (with God are)
impurity/contamination , so they do not approach/near the Mosque the
Forbidden/Sacred after this their year, and if you feared
need/necessity/poverty, so God will/shall enrich/suffice you from His
grace/favour , if He willed/wanted, that God (is) knowledgeable,
O ye who believe !
surely, the idolaters are unclean. So they shall not approach the Sacred
Mosque after this year of theirs. And if you fear poverty, ALLAH will enrich
you out of HIS bounty, if HE pleases. Surely, ALLAH is All-Knowing, Wise.
O you who believe,
the idol worshipers are polluted; they shall not be permitted to approach the
Sacred Masjid after this year. If you fear loss of income, GOD will shower
you with His provisions, in accordance with His will. GOD is Omniscient, Most
Raza Khan (Barelvi)
'O believers! The
associators are altogether unclean, then let them not approach the sacred
Mosque after this year. And if you fear poverty, then soon Allah shall enrich
you of His bounty if He pleases. Verily, Allah is Knowing, Wise.
O you who believe!
the polytheists are (spiritually) altogether unclean, so they shall not come
near the Holy Mosque after this year of theirs. And if you fear (this will
spell) poverty (for you) then (rest contented) Allah will soon make you rich
out of His bounty if He will. Verily, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
& Muhammad al-Hilali
O you who believe
(in Allahs Oneness and in His Messenger (Muhammad SAW)! Verily, the
Mushrikoon (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of
Allah, and in the Message of Muhammad SAW) are Najasun (impure). So let them
not come near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah) after this year, and if you fear
poverty, Allah will enrich you if He will, out of His Bounty. Surely, Allah
is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
Non-Muslim and/or Orientalist works
Arthur John Arberry
O believers, the
idolaters are indeed unclean; so let them not come near the Holy Mosque after
this year of theirs. If you fear poverty, God shall surely enrich you of His
bounty, if He will; God is All-knowing; All-wise.
O ye who believe! it
is only the idolaters who are unclean; they shall not then approach the
Sacred Mosque after this year. But if ye fear want then God will enrich you
from His grace if He will; verily, God is knowing, wise!
O true believers,
verily the idolaters are unclean; let them not therefore come near unto the
holy temple after this year. And if ye fear want, by the cutting off trade
and communication with them, God will enrich you of his abundance, if He
pleaseth; for God is knowing and wise.
O Believers! only
they who join gods with God are unclean! Let them not, therefore, after this
their year, come near the sacred Temple. And if ye fear want, God, if He
please, will enrich you of His abundance: for God is Knowing, Wise.
J Dawood (draft)
Believers, know that
the idolaters are unclean. Let them not approach the Sacred Mosque after this
year is ended. If you fear poverty, God, if He pleases, will enrich you
through His own bounty. God is all–knowing and wise.
New and/or Partial Translations, and works in
Believers, know that
the idolaters are certainly impure. So, let them not come near to the Sacred
Mosque after this year is ended. If you fear poverty, then in time God will
enrich you with His own bounty, if He so wills. Truly, God is All-knowing,
O� you who have Faith! The polytheists are
indeed unclean, so they shall not approach the Sacred Mosque after this year,
and if you fear poverty, then Allah will enrich you out of His grace if He
pleases; verily Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
O you who believe!
The polytheists are nothing but pollution. So they shall not approach the
Sacred Place of Worship after this year. And if you fear poverty then Allah
will enrich you out of His grace if He wills. Indeed, Allah is Knowledgeable,
It is widely known among the scholars of
Ahadith that Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) was very keen to seek
knowledge. He was not literate, that was why all his knowledge depended on oral
transmission and memorization. Once he told the Prophet: "I hear many
Hadiths from you but I forget them." The Prophet said, "Spread your
covering sheet." Abu Hurairah spread the sheet and the Prophet moved both
his hands (as if scooping something) and emptied them in the sheet and said,
"Wrap it." Abu Hurairah wrapped it around his body, and since then he
never forgot a single Hadith." This was a miracle. And he retained more
than 5,000 Hadiths word for word, throughout his life.
Once upon a time Marwaan Ibn Al-Hakam tested
Abu Hurairah's memorizing capacity. He invited him to sit with him and asked
him to narrate Hadiths while a scribe who had already been told to write whatever
Abu Hurairah RA said sat behind a screen. After a year, Marwaan invited Abu
Hurairah again and asked him to narrate the same Hadiths that the scribe had
written. It was confirmed that Abu Hurairah narrated the same hadiths and did
not forget or miss a single word!
Learning by heart 5,000 Hadiths during 3 years
or about 1095 days is not a big issue. Per day only 5 Hadiths are required to
be memorized. Our children in Madarsas learn by heart the whole Quran word to
word during two to three years. They are easily able to retain it till the last
breath of their life. Everyone can witness it during the Ramadhan Taraweeh. So,
this was more possible for a great companion whose unforgettable and sharp
memory was the result of the holy prophet’s prayers. His work was only to learn
by heart and retained whatever the prophet peace be upon him would say. He was
unlike many of the prominent companions who used to be busy in different pieces
The question is as to how can Abu Hurairah
(May Allah be please with him) who lived in the company of the prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him) just for three years (according to a narration by Abu
Hurairah RA) learnt by heart more than 5000 Ahadith.
Before answering this I need to draw the
attention of readers towards the very fact that Abu Hurairah RA himself had
told that he lived three years in the company of the holy prophet Muhammad
peace be upon him. There is a hadith in Saheeh Bukhari:
Abu Huraira (May Allah be please with him)
narrates: “I enjoyed the company of Allah’s Apostle for three years, and during
the other years of my life, never was I so anxious to understand the
(Prophet’s) traditions as I was during those three years”.
How have those who criticise and accuse
Abu Hurairah RA of fabrication of Hadith got to know that Abu Hurairah lived
with the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) just for three years? Have they
applied their mind on their own or fabricated their own sayings? None of them
can prove that they have come to know about it on their own or from other
sources until they trust Imam Bukhari or Hazrat Abu Hurairah RA.
The critics and accusers have known the
years that Abu Hurairah RA lived in the company of Allah’s apostle by the
narration of Abu Hurairah RA himself. It means even the critics and accusers
trust the Hadeeses narrated by Abu Hurairah RA. But this they unfortunately
realize not. Should I call them blind disbelievers or remain silent at their
blind disbelief? No, I should not call them this way.
But right now I cannot help requesting all
those who do not trust Saheeh Bukhari and Abu Hurairah RA to leave this debate
as they cannot make any question until they trust Imam Bukhari or Abu Hurairah
(question as Abu Hurairah RA live in the company of the holy prophet Muhammad
peace be upon him just for three years)
After all I have to remove all doubts
point by point.
were some companions who used to pass their whole time, so to say, at the feet
of the Holy Prophet Muhmmad peace be upon him. There was a raised platform
namely “Suffa” near the Holy Prophet’s residential room and the mosque. I don’t know whether
this “Suffa” still exists in Arab or has been demolished by Saudi government. A group of students used to occupy this raised
platform permanently. They are called people of Suffa (Ashabe Suffa). Their
work was nothing but to learn by heart whatever they heard from the Holy
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. Abu Hurairah was one of those “people of
Suffa”. He was endowed with a powerful memory by the prayer of the holy prophet
Muhammad peace be upon him, remembered more than 5000
Ahadith and reported them.
holy companions (Sahaba-e-Karam) preserved Hadeeses and Sunna of the prophet
Muhammad peace be upon him, passing most of their time in the company of the holy
prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. Their love for the beloved prophet Muhammad
peace be upon him was so much that they used to memorise every reported speech,
action or tacit approval (Taqreer- what was said or done by a companion in
front of the prophet Muhammad peace be upon and the latter did not condemn it).
The purpose of their life was only to achieve the pleasure of Allah Almighty
and his blessed prophet Muhammad peace be upon him.
holy companions were given different status in respect of guiding people in
matters of religion and law. “The holy prophet peace be upon him called Abu
Bakr as “the greatest person outside the category of prophets”. He said about
Umar RA “If there had been a prophet after me, Umar had been that prophet”. He
described Usman RA as “the most perfect in piety”. He said about Ali RA: “I am
the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate”. Similarly the distinguished were:
Hazrat Aisha, the beloved wife of the holy prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, Abdullah
bin Umar, Abdullah bin Abbas and Abdullah bin Abbas etc. Obeying the divine
advice: “Ask those who possesses the Message” If ye do not know” (the holy
Quran 21:7), even the prominent preservers of Hadees (Huffaze Hadees) among the
companions used to come to these distinguished personalities to resolve the
religious and legal problems and thus would subject their own understanding and
interpretation to the interpretation of the holy Quran and the Hadees given by
Huraira (May Allah be pleased with him) was one of those eminent Companions who
were distinguished in the line of preserving and reporting the Holy Prophet's
Traditions, and this is borne out by the large number of Traditions reported by
him and included in the books of Hadith. But it is a fact well-known to the
students of the history of Companions, that whenever someone was confronted
with any religious or legal problem, he would not approach Companions like Abu
Huraira but those who were considered Fuqaha (i.e., men of grasp and
understanding). It was this latter class whose verdict (fatwa) was relied upon
and whatever interpretation they gave to the Sayings and Actions of the Holy
Prophet (peace be with him) was accepted”. (“The history of the Codification of
Islamic Law- chapter 4, “the preservers of Hadith and Scholars of Law Among the
Companions” by Allama Abdul Aleem Siddiqui Al-Qadri RA)
accepting authoritativeness of Hadees, we should apply our minds whether the
Hadees is authentic (Saheeh) or Weak (dhaif) or Fabricated.
should also be noted that whether Hadees is Saheeh (authentic) or weak (dhaif)
is hadees in either case. No scholar (I can challenge everyone) during 1400
years has expelled weak narration out of hadees. The only difference between
them is of preference only when both Saheeh and Weak narrations talk about the
same thing in a binary way. At the time of practice we have to adopt Saheeh
hadees and leave the weak narration.
should also know what legal values come out of saheeh hadees or weak hadees. The
legal values coming out of saheeh hadees may be Mandatory (Farz) or Imperative
(Wajib) or Mandatory Recommendation (Sunnat-e-Muakkadah). But the legal values
coming out of weak hadees may not be like the mentioned ones but either directory
recommendation (Sunnat-e- Ghair Muakkdah) or commendable (Mustahab) or improper
(Mubah) where you have a choice either to follow or leave it.
far as fabricated hadees (Mauzu Hadees) is concerned, it is not a hadees in
actual sense. The scholars of hadees say it only metaphorically. No scholar
during 1400 years has believed it to be hadees. The scholars of hadees majorly divide
hadees into two; Saheeh and Dhaif. They believe that fabricated one is not
hadees. No one can show me any proof where our scholars of hadees during 1400
years have believed fabricated ones in the category of hadees. When we say hadees
we mean the sayings of our beloved prophet and not the fabricated sayings made
by enemies of Islam in order to create doubts into the hearts of believers regarding
authoritativeness of Hadees. Thanks Allah Almighty for creating great Imams,
Jurists, Scholars of Hadees who scrutinised hadeeses on the basis of Jarah
wa Tadeel and expelled out fabricated sayings.
me clear it out to everyone that I was discussing and defending the authoritativeness (Hujjiyat) of
Hadees, nor the authenticity of a particular hadees. Negation of authoritativeness
of Hadees is negation of that Quran itself. There are scores of Quranic verses
that unequivocally give authority to Hadeeses. If needed, I may quote them to
prove the point.
depth study of the holy Quran tells us that Allah Almighty has ultimate sovereignty
(Haqeeqi Hakmiyat) and He Almighty has given the prophet manifestative
sovereignty (Niyabati Hakmiyat) in Islam. In other words, the holy Quran should
be the first and Hadees second to deal with Islamic legal values.
Sultan Shahin sahib,
agree that we Muslims should add saying “maybe the Prophet (saw) said something
like this” (او كما قال رسول الله) after quoting or narrating any hadith from the
Sihah-e-Sitta or any other books of hadith. This is what almost all our holy
Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) used to do to exhibit utmost
caution and meticulous narration of the hadiths.
For instance, Imam Dhahabi
writes in his book “Siyaru A'lam al-Nubala” (4:263) that Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi
Layla met 500 Companions. When he visited a place, people would say: "The
man who met 500 Companions has come to our town." He had a great influence
on Abu Hanifa and Imam Abu Yusuf. He reports: "I was personally familiar
with 120 Companions. Sometimes all of them were in the same mosque. When they
were asked about something, each would wait for the other to answer. If they
were asked to narrate a Tradition, no one would dare to. Finally, one of them
would place his trust in God and begin to narrate. He would always add: 'The
Messenger said this, or something like this, or something more or less like
this. (او كما قال رسول الله)'".
But I can’t understand why
should we discredit all the authentic hadiths that have been scrutinised by the
rigorous and strict rules of hadith verification (jarh wa tadeel). I think you
should elaborate it further.
narrated that al-Mugheerah ibn Shu’bah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: I
heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Telling a
lie against me is not like telling a lie against anyone else. Whoever tells a
lie against me deliberately let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by
al-Bukhaari, 1229; Muslim, 4.
mentioned hadees is the most narrated hadees. This hadees is Mutawatira
Mashhurah. This was known to all companions of the holy prophet including Abu
Hurairah RA, Tabieen and all great Imams like Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim. As they
were great lovers of Allah Almighty, the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him,
the biographical sketches of their life tell us so. (sometimes we should also
highlight their lives)
is no doubt that whatever a man can do in this push button age can never go
over the position of holy companions. The holy companions were greater lover of
the holy prophet Muhammad peace be upon than even one man like us can imagine
Muslims apply our minds we find that those holy companions and great Imams are
more the matter of trust than others including those who have written against even
authentic hadeeses in the 21st centuries. Who is a blind believer? The
one who is taking hadees from a holy companion Abu Hurairah RA or the one who
has written a book against Abu Hurairah RA in the 21st century or
1400 years after the demise of our holy prophet Muhammad peace be upon him?
That is why Shahul Hameed, you should not trust ahadees. They mean nothing. They promote vile customs. They promote violence. They promote lewdness. They engage in character assassination of the Prophet (peace be upon him).
Ahadees also give you good lessons. So choose what you like and say: maybe the Prophet (saw) said something like this. Never say these are the sayings of the Prophet. This cannot be said about any one hadees.
Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) was not
(Maazallah) fabricator of Hadees. He was a companion of the prophet Muhammad
peace be upon him. Every companion has a great reverence in Islam as even Muslims
(Thank Allah Almighty) pay great respect to all companions.
I left this debate just due to some commentators who
use derogatory words sometimes for the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and
sometimes for our holy companions.
Now I am again ready to remove all false accusations
and allegations regarding Islam, our holy prophets and even the pious
companions of the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. But I request all the commentators
to be the part of this debate in a just manner and not the manner based on
hatred and prejudice.
I hope this debate will continue in a very peaceful
Ahmad, pray with me that New Age Islam is able to
manage this. At the moment we are on the verge of closure. No financial
support is coming despite all efforts. I am determined to keep it going even on
a smaller scale for some months. Unfortunately translations into Arabic,
French, Hindi will have to stop. Urdu may continue to a certain extent.
However, given the resources, we would certainly want to get the Hadees books
translated into English and other languages, if indeed, present translations
are deliberate distortions. We also have several other projects lined up but
nothing moves without funding. This is partly my fault. I do not find it easy
to beg. Borrow I cannot do, as you have to return, and must know that you will
be able to. Steal, of course is out of question. Not my cup of tea.
No Muslim puts the institution of
the holy Hadeeses higher than even Quran. Every Muslim simply believes that
hadees is Islamic scripture and must be followed by himself.
Some years ago, I read an article on
this site by Mr. Sohail Arshad, New Age Islam titled as “Halala: The Most Vile
Custom in Islam”.
He rightly points out this vile custom
prevailing among Muslims:
“If a man divorces his loving wife in a
fit of rage someday and then after coming to his senses he realises his mistake
and wants to take her back in his life, the mullah of his town tells him of the
only option that is Halala that can make her ex-wife lawful for him. He explains to the young man that to remarry his
wife, first he will have to allow her to get married to another man who will
consummate the marriage as her lawful husband. If the man divorces her only
then he can remarry her after she spends the three-month iddat period.”
He says that the custom is the result of
the misinterpretation of the Quranic verse: (2:230).
Whatever the case may be, I have found an authentic (sahih)
hadith in the book of Bukhari that provides legality to this custom. Here it
Volume 7, Book 63, Number 190:
A man divorced his wife and she married another man who proved to
be impotent and divorced her. She could not get her satisfaction from him, and
after a while he divorced her. Then she came to the Prophet and said, "O
Allah's Apostle! My first husband divorced me and then I married another man
who entered upon me to consummate his marriage but he proved to be impotent and
did not approach me except once during which he benefited nothing from me. Can
I remarry my first husband in this case?" Allah's Apostle said, "It
is unlawful to marry your first husband till the other husband consummates his
marriage with you."
Dear Shahul Hameed, There is no need to bring back the lewd hadees again.
We have found that this hadees exists. A little discrepancy in the translation
does not matter. We are not researching hadeeses here and discrepancies in different translations. I don't see why Wahhabis
will distort the hadees in translation knowingly. Of course, in translations
some inconsistency, some difference always occurs. But that is not our subject.
Our job is merely to fight blind faith in
ahadees. The well-known compilers of Hadees like Imam Bukhari, Muslim, Abu
Dawood, Tirmidhi, Nasa'i, ibn Majah, Imam Malik, etc. have already rescued us
from something like six hundred thousand ahadees. They have left around four or
five thousand ahadees from which we have to rescue ourselves.
ahadees that appear to be quite in consonance with the Prophet's character and
spirit of Quran and Islam may be concocted. We already know some very pious
Muslims too, including a judge of impeccable character otherwise, concocted ahadees. Their intention was to do
good and serve Islam but they did not see anything wrong in attributing their own good
thoughts to the Prophet. Imam Bukhari and Muslim also discovered these good
ahadees and eliminated them from their collections.
However, these imams had their own criteria and worked
accordingly. Judging the content was not part of their criteria, so they have
left many ahadees which simply cannot be characterised as sayings of the
From all that we know about the Prophet and the most reliable of this
knowledge comes from Quran, he was not stupid, irrational or sex-crazed, as the
remaining ahadees in these compilations portray him in many places.
Bukhari, Muslims and others will be pleased with us if we carry their work
forward. These were great people who spent a lifetime in their mission at great
cost to themselves, even starving if they had to, travelling long distances in
the Arab heat, some with meagre resources, some spent all their worldly wealth
in this pursuit. We should be grateful to them and carry their work forward.
We are trying to demonstrate that many hadeeses do not
confirm to our idea of the pious Prophet's character and the spirit of Islam. We need
not present hadeeses of pornographic nature to prove this.
As I wrote before, while ahadees with lewd or lustful content may
abound, there is no need to focus on them while seeking to make a point on the
irrationality or stupidity of statements attributed to the Prophet (saw).
of the ahadees were veritable character assassination attempts of the Prophet, and apparently deliberate, for reasons that are not difficult to see.
There are so many ahadees, several can be found in the over 5,000 narrations of
just one person, the famous fabricator Abu Huraira himself, that can prove the
Also, ahadees that were concocted in the pursuit of particular political
and other worldly goals can also be cited to make the point. It's important to
cite these examples to tell Muslims that blind faith in ahadees as a divine
scripture is not tenable.
Dear Shahul Hameed,
Although I have found the hadiths on fasting quoted by Mr. rational in the
original book of Bukhari Shareef too, by and large in the similar fashion, they are
out of context. Once they are put into their proper place, the issue will be
resolved. I need a little time to explain the matter.
Thank you for your comment.
GRD, do you also find this discrepancy between the hadits on fasting
quoted by Mr. rational and what is in the original book of Bukhari?
Since Mr. Rational has already given the
reference, I think the Editor will allow me to quote the full hadith texts,
again after they were deleted from the comment section when posted without
Ok Mr. Ghulam
Rasool Dehlvi, if you think the Wahabi English translations of the hadith
books are not reliable. Then obviously the moderate and even the mainstream
Muslims of the world are misled following the wahabi extremist ideologies by
reading their translations. I concluded it because you have said that “No English translation of even Sahih Bukhari, let
alone other books of hadith (from among Sihah-e-Sitta) by any moderate Islamic
scholar has yet been produced. In the face of this dilemma, How can we rely
upon the English translations of the hadith books?”
When talking of moderate or enlightened Islam we should not forget two important writers on the subject, Gamal al-Banna and Mahmoud Taha.
The liberal Muslim scholar Gamal al-Banna was the antithesis of his older brother Hassan, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. For Gamal anything that contradicted justice, freedom, and tolerance was not Islamic. He argued that the Quran neither obliges women to wear the hijab nor denies them the right to run for the highest posts, including the presidency. He disagreed with mainstream scholars who hold that the Sword verses about jihad and war against non-Muslims overrule others promoting tolerance. He perceived the apparent contradiction as a sign of the Quran’s flexibility and adaptability to different situations. He wrote: “The circumstances in one society may differ from those in another, and one epoch may differ from a previous one ...”While his brother spent his life seeking to establish a utopian religious state, Banna’s book “Islam is a Religion and an Ummah, not a Religion and a State,” refutes classical Islamist claims about the indispensability of an Islamic state. For Islamists, Muslims have a religious obligation to establish an Islamic state where God’s Sharia shall be implemented.
Banna challenged such an obligation by arguing that Islam could spread in Mecca during the Prophet’s time while there was still no Islamic state and when the majority of Muslims were persecuted by non-believers.
He went on to contend that mixing religion with power threatens the faith itself. Sudanese scholar Mahmoud Taha had very similar views. He greatly favored the Mecca Qur'an as opposed to Sharia laws which are the essence of Medina Qur'an. While the Medina Qur'an was appropriate at its time to be the essence of Sharia, it is now time to bring the Mecca Quran to legislate. Taha opposed Sharia law as applied in Sudan as non-Islamic and preached that the Sudanese constitution needed to be reformed to reconcile "the individual's need for absolute freedom with the community's need for total social justice."
He believed that Islam "in its original, uncorrupted form", which is in the Mecca Qur'an, accorded women and non-Muslims equal status. As can be expected, he was executed by the government of Sudan.
However, if the woman commits a bigger crime, the husband can
beat her not in vengeance but with the intention of reforming
her and as a warning. While beating, he should take care that
she should not be hurt seriously. The Books of Fiqhah have
mentioned that the husband can punish his wife for four things:
is it a wahabi teaching or Sufi teaching?
Mohd Younus Rational,
demand for the Islamicity url was just to illustrate that ahadees of all sorts
are acceptable and available everywhere. Wahhabism is considered by many in the
Muslim world and the West, a puritan sect of Islam. But clearly the most
lascivious of ahadees are reproduced by them too, and not to question their
authenticity but approvingly.
told by a friend that though these ahadees exist, Muslims are not supposed to
read or discuss them and they are not taught in madrasas. Maybe so. But clearly
they can be and, I suppose they have to be, reproduced on even a 'puritan' Wahhabi
website, if they are found in Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 31: Fasting. However,
many fasting people do not like reading Hadees on Fasting in Bukhari Shareef, which
they also consider, next to, if not superior to Quran at the same time.
However, what I have been trying to tell you is that
while ahadees with lewd or lustful content may abound, there is no need to
focus on them while seeking to make a point on the irrationality or stupidity
of statements attributed to the Prophet (saw). Many of the ahadees were
veritable character assassination attempts of the Prophet. There are so many
ahadees, several can be found in the over 5,000 narrations of just one person,
the famous Abu Huraira himself, that can prove the point. Also, ahadees that
were concocted in the pursuit of particular political and other worldly goals can
also be cited to make the point. It's important to cite these examples to tell
Muslims that blind faith in ahadees as a divine scripture is not tenable.
Volume 3, Book 31, Number 151:
if i didn't give url, it doesn't mean it is not there.[There is no need to go into details. Interested people can check this site. Some readers who are on fast now are ashamed of and will get provoked by some ahadees in the chapter on Fasting in Bukhari Shareef, though some others will explain and justify them in elaborate detail. So I have deleted the details-- Editor]
Volume 3, Book 31, Number 151:
if i didn't give url, it doesn't mean it is not there.
[There is no need to go into details. Interested people can check this site. Some readers who are on fast now are ashamed of and will get provoked by some ahadees in the chapter on Fasting in Bukhari Shareef, though some others will explain and justify them in elaborate detail. So I have deleted the details-- Editor]
My Dear Fellow Muslims,
My first question to all of you “The Readers” is, “Did any one of you know how
many people are reading blogs?” Another question that comes to my mind is,
“Does anyone have any idea as to how many posts are being published every
single month?”The correct answers as provided by “WordPress.com” are as
Over 409 million people view more than 14.4
billion pages each month.
42.6 million new posts approximately 51.6 million comments are posted each
My second question is, “How many Muslims
are reading out of these posts and/or comments out of 409 million people?” Of
course, the preference of the Muslims is to read more of the negative news,
suffer irritation and indulge into verbal abuses. Such a trend in our thinking
process has now become more of a routine with those who willingly participate
in any debate in the Islamic forums out in the cyberspace. It is truly sad, but
such is the state of affairs due to our minds being always inclined to
entertain negative thoughts most of the time which has crippled our ability to
focus upon the positive and spiritual message of Islam.
My third question is, “Did any one of you
bother to realize how we the Muslims have converted our religion into a “Ritualistic Mode”
and turned far away from the “Spiritual
Message” of our Holy Quran?” Why
should we care, as we have long surrendered our “Right
of Intellectual Thinking” to our
so-called Ulamas who are busy interpreting the verses of Holy Quran in a flat,
literalist, isolationist, manner disregarding its holistic message and
mitigating verses. This has contributed to their teaching notions such as
religious bigotry, supremacism, sectarianism, triumphalism, violence and
intolerance which are antithetical to the Quranic message. Furthermore, their
Friday sermons and religious narratives, draw on Islam’s medieval discourses and
fail to activate the Muslim youth to any forward-thinking, intellect-building
or excelling in their respective lawful pursuits such as attainment of
knowledge or accomplishment in the various areas of life as implicit in the
To be brutally honest, I have long been
forewarning that if the “Moderate Muslims”
do not engage in any honest and healthy debate about our current crisis
in the Islamic countries, then there is no hope for the Islamic civilization to
survive for long. Thinking that our fellow
humans will sit ideal and accept the immoral and ruthless behavior of our
deadly “Jihadists” is nothing but a wishful thinking. I have always
maintained that the “Islamophobe” industry is the sole creation of our
negligence in not portraying the true message of the Quranic verses to the
world at large. Why lay the blame on those who do not follow Islam?
In my blog “www.whythesilence.com” I have dedicated
one section “The Wisdom of our Holy Quran” to the writings of
one Hashim Amir Ali (May Almighty Allah rest his soul in peace). In this blog “http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com” I have not only
allocated Maulana Abul Kalam
of the greatest Islamic scholars (May Almighty Allah rest his soul in peace)
pragmatic thoughts on four most important subjects, which are: “Forgiveness,” “Righteousness,” “The Straight Path”
Unity of Man,” but I went even further and requested Muhammad
Yunus, a dedicated Islamic scholar to generously share his inner thoughts into
the Quranic message, as expounded in a recently published authenticated work, “Essential Message of Islam” which he
co-authored with a distinguished Islamic scholar, Ashfaque Ullah Syed.
On reading Yunus Saheb’s articles, I was
very much impressed with his vast knowledge of Islam, and more so about his
in-depth study of the Holy Quran. On appreciating the tag line which I chose
for the blog, that is, “QAD A'FLAHA MAN TAZAKKA ~
But he will prosper – Who purifies himself,” Yunus Saheb went one step ahead and honestly
elaborated his wholehearted belief in the following Quranic verses:
wa nafsin wa ma sawwaha
fa alhamahuma fujuraha wa
"God has intricately balanced (sawwaha)
human ego (nafs) and imbued it with both moral depravity and moral
Surah: Al-Shams (The Sun) ~
Chapter: 91 – Verse: 7 & 8
Enlightened minds of Muslims, though far
and few, must take serious note of such Quranic verses and try to comprehend
its impact on the human minds. Unfortunately, our Ulamas concentration has been
far more on the ritual deeds and far less on the spiritual bliss which our Holy
Quran continuously and persistently reminds Muslims to acquire. Sadly today,
the Islamic world is in the state of turmoil owing mainly to Muslims who have
stopped practicing the art of “Reading” and understanding our own “Divine
Book – Alif, Laam Mim – Za_likal kita_bu la_ raiba fihi hudal lilmuttaqin.” as revealed to
our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) during
the blessed month of Ramadhan. Simply put, WE
THE MODERATE MUSLIMS must wake up before it is too late.
“This is the book; there is no doubt in it.
It is a guide for those who are mindful of God.”
Surah: Al-Baqarah (The
Heifer) ~ Chapter: 2 – Verse: 2
Yunus Saheb and I do not need any
compliments. Our earnest request to all of you during this Holy Month of
Ramadhan is to take out some of your valuable time from your busy schedule to
glance at the blog. Surely, all “The Readers” will agree that any “Moderate
Muslims” belonging to a decent
family will not appreciate negative comments. Therefore, while passing on your
comments to the email which we have assigned:
try your best to convey positive as well as
enlightening messages only. From our personal experience, Yunus Saheb and I
have come to learn that there are quite a number of our fellow Muslims turned “Ex-Muslim,” who
enjoy assaulting our religion of Islam in any way they can.
Truthfully speaking, being caught in the
midst of “Illiterate Brutes” who are on the killing spree, it is high time
that we the Muslims from all walks of life make serious efforts to understand
the humanistic and pluralistic dimensions of the Quranic message and its emphasis
on, among other things, peace, justice, forgiveness and positive interaction
with the ‘others’ so that we can prevent our children from radicalization by terrorist ideologues, and from apostasy,
blasphemy and retrogressive arguments. No doubt, we are acutely aware that
there are indeed a handful of “Intellectual Bigots,” who are always fully prepared to scorn the
real, spiritual message of our Holy Quran. Knowing such a ground reality, we
must now seriously think of putting forth our concerted and wholehearted
efforts to spread the “Spiritual Message” of Islam coupled with the correct translations of
the Quranic verses. In short, the sole purpose of this blog is to rectify the
distorted image of Islam, and as such, every sane and educated Muslim is
encouraged to participate in this mission.
All in all, it is imperative that we speak
with one voice against all the mayhem caused by the “Muslim
Terrorists” in the name of Islam
as the Quran does not allow any retaliatory killing of innocent people or any
other form of terrorism against common civilians. With this, I do humbly
welcome you to my just inaugurated blog/website which is devoted to appeal to
the minds of “Moderate Muslims” who seem to stay aloof and have lost sight of the
vital Qur’anic doctrine which explicitly states, “al-amr bi 'l-maʿruf wa 'n-nahy ʿan al-munkar - Enjoin the good (ma’aruf); forbid the evil (munkar.)”
therefore, invite you to browse through the blog, read its articles and better
yet, listen attentively to the recitation of some of the most spiritually enriching
Suras of the Quran by the world’s most famous reciter of the Holy
Abdul Basit 'Abd
Almighty Allah rest his soul in peace).
Wishing all of our Muslim brothers and
sisters to have a blessed remaining days of Ramadhan. May Almighty Allah
bless each and every Muslim family around the world during these difficult
times for all of us.
Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia
Lodhia the .......- 7/17/2014 3:45:27 AM
[Mr. Mohd Younus Rational, since you have still not given
the url of the page in Islamicity that you claimed had ahadees that you quoted,
nor have apologised to Islamicity for having dragged their name unnecessarily, we
are unable to post ahadees given by you. In any case your posts do not appear
to be meant to promote discussion, but just to provoke readers. There are
plenty of ahadees in the sahih books that can be cited as examples of oversight
by the authorities who collected and authorised them as authentic. But your
purpose clearly is just to make fun of Muslims who believe in all ahadees
blindly and even give baseless sources. -- Editor]
are one perfect example of a “Madrassa Educated Muslim.” One should expect such answers
fact, I am not at all surprised. I know your kind in and out. Western teachers were
not responsible for messing up your brains. It was the “Bearded Buffoons” who were entirely responsible.
have nothing else to add. You can spit out your hatred against Islam as that is
all you can do. The reason being that while you were learning all the hatred
from the Mullahs, now you are spreading your hate towards those readers who are
on, Ex-Tablighi. You have all the freedom and so does your counterpart who is
another die-hard “Tablighi.” You are nothing but a sore loser.
here is a hadith.
say me thanks as it can multiply your thawab
for reference, take some pain. keeping fast means not to sit idle.
“Western education is therefore looked upon with
suspicion with good reason and the Muslims to blame for it are the educated
ones who are ‘lost’ to Muslim society.”
Naseer Ahmed Saheb goes on by writing:
I would recommend them to read books by the team of ……
let’s say western authors ……
what perfect example of “A First Class Muslim Hypocrite” can one show to the world?
to the “Dark Age Islam” folks.
Shahin Saheb wrote on July 17, 2014 as follows:
“It would help if we brought a notch down our
self-righteousness, arrogance and our show of sentimentality about our love for
the Prophet, at least for the month of Ramazan.”
Rafiq Lodhia wrote on July 1, 2014 as follows:
Shahin – Editor & Moderator of New
personally plead with you to put a full stop to THE RAMBLINGS OF AN INSANE ISLAMIC SCHOLAR.
Naseer Ahmed Saheb realize that Muslim women are also reading his comments? Why
do you continue to think that the readers on your forum are learning from this
Such a preposterous assumption about the life of Prophet of Islam is not
appreciated at all, Sultan Saheb.
Almighty Allah’s sake and for the sake of our beloved Prophet Mohammed (Peace
Be Upon Him), do us all a big favor by censoring the discussion
of this very topic during this Holy Month of Ramadhan.
Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 7/1/2014 7:12:10
Mr Shahin, I had written this comment several days ago but did not post it. I am posting it now in view of Rational’s preceding comment. Let me first put the record straight. I have chided Rational in very clear words for the dirty manner in which he asked the questions with intention to offend. Pornography is very much in intent, manner and frame of mind and his allusions were pornographic and continue to be so.
Having said that, I also invite attention to the comment of Mr Yunus (By muhammad yunus - 7/9/2014 3:35:18 AM) addressed to a lady which is equally disgusting and dirty which he ends with “unless your sexual morality is no different from stray dogs who play their sexual act on public places”. Maybe it is his age factor and he is losing control over his senses but he is addressing the lady while telling her that! This comment also deserves to be deleted as dirty and offensive to not only the lady, but for quoting Dante to tell Rational in the most graphic and disgusting detail, what fate awaits him in the hereafter. A Muslim is always fearful of warning another person of what God will do to them as such presumption is disliked by God and the chances are that God may make the same, the fate of the one who dares to presume for God.
I have shown that the hadiths that were cited can be discussed in a matter of fact and mature way and it had its effect and Rational was quiet until Mr Yunus and you joined issue. While people do show excellent knowledge of pornography, they do not appear to have read any serious stuff on the subject. I would recommend them to read books by the team of Masters and Johnson. The Masters and Johnson research team, composed of William H. Masters and Virginia E. Johnson, pioneered research into the nature of human sexual response and the diagnosis and treatment of sexual disorders and dysfunctions from 1957 until the 1990s. Keeping in mind the negative effects of treating the subject as dirty and unmentionable, and the debilitating effects of the Christian Sexual Ethics (which permeated all cultures thanks to colonialism) which considered the act as sinful except for procreation in missionary position only, and required their clergy to be celibates, the value of some of the hadiths stand out, as far ahead of their time in promoting a healthy attitude towards sex. Daniel Kahneman gives a simple formula for the success of marriages as (Frequency of Lovemaking minus frequency of quarrels). If this number is negative, then the couple is heading for divorce and if it is positive, the marriage is going well. To keep the frequency of love making high, the couple must find the act enjoyable. The importance of foreplay and after play, passionate kissing, grooming, being made to feel wanted and desired etc. are well documented by serious academic research. If the Muslims have by and large maintained a healthy attitude towards sex unlike the Christians for example, who have swung from one extreme to another, from guilt laden frigidity to gay abandon, it may in no small measure be to the ahadith.
What is dirty is the manner in which Dr Shabbir Ahmed discusses these in his book/articles and the manner in which others have used the same in their several comments. What needs to be removed therefore are:
1. Remove the link to the book “The Criminals of Islam” by Dr Shabbir Ahmed.
2. Remove the article Wrongs From The “Right” Bukhari By Dr. Shabbir Ahmed
3. Remove the comments of several commentators who have extensively quoted the hadiths to run down the imams and their collection of hadiths not only recently, but also in the past in a manner that is pornographic.
People like Rational can only denigrate Islam because of the way certain people respond to him. They are two sides of the same coin.
a statement from Naseer Ahmed / Observer can only come from the one who is a
anti-religious slant in western education affects all those who pursue it and
therefore we find even Muslims who have received western education drifting
away from religion. These strata of educated Muslim society and its
intelligentsia should have become the leaders of the Muslim masses but because
of their alienation from Islam, they have distanced themselves from the people.
Western education is therefore looked upon with suspicion
with good reason and the Muslims to blame for it are the educated ones who are
‘lost’ to Muslim society.”
anyone ask “The
Anointed One” what the hell is he talking about? Hell, what about
this particular “Tablighi”? What kind of education did he acquired to write most
of the rubbish?
guess is as good as mine!
We do not tax and
overload our thinking on each every matter. If we were to do that, we would
never be able to do anything worthwhile. Most of what we do and how we react is
a conditioned response. The conditioning is the way we were brought up, the way
our environment shapes us etc. Most of it is therefore unthinking imitation
which serves us very well. As social beings, we conform to be accepted by the
rest. Our table manners therefore conform to the ways of the people we eat
with, the use of common facilities to the expectation of others on how to keep
them clean and in order, the use of the road to the traffic rules etc. Much of
our life or more than 90% of what we do is an automatic response based on our
conditioning and if this was not so and if we tried to think out everything, we
would not be able to accomplish anything useful and fret over small matters.
Showing our individuality in matters that matter very little would be a waste
of our talents.
The use of the left hand
for cleaning/washing/wiping after defecating and the right hand for eating is
not without meaning either. The ahadiths cover many important matters such as
treatment of guests, neighbours, domestic help, wives, children, wayfarers,
strangers etc. What makes conformance to such excellent values easier is that
we are following the sunnat of the prophet. Any amount of exhortations without
associating these with the practice of the Prophet would not have the same
effect. The ahadiths teach us the right values in a far more effective way than
any other form of teaching.
As a matter of fact, the
Muslim way of living is influenced by the ahadiths and we follow these without
even knowing that we are following the ahadith. If you google on the hadith regarding the
urine of an infant, you will find many discussions and comments and opinions of
scholars but none of them have given the reasons I have given. I was also
surprised that Ghaus Sb initially feigned ignorance about the hadith. The fact
is that every Muslim I know is aware of the difference whether rich or poor
without knowing that there is a hadith on the subject. I also wasn’t aware that
there was a hadith on the subject until Alam brought it up. If a male infant
soils the clothes, they will say "don't worry too much, after all it is a
breast fed boy". If it is a girl, they will advise you to wash it off. I
have heard even servants say this.
If you check on the
reasons that I gave, you can easily confirm that each of them is true but you
will not get the reasons by inquiring on what the difference between a
male/female urine is. So how did I get the reasons? I vaguely remembered my
wife talking about it some 30 years ago based on what she learned from her
mother. The precise medical reasons are therefore also known to people like my
mother in law, my wife and many others. Perhaps the women know the exact
reasons better than the men but don’t talk about it and therefore the men are
mostly unaware of the reasons. Muslims are therefore not exactly unthinking when
they follow the ahadith nor unaware of the underlying reasons.
The fact therefore is
that most of what we do is by way of imitation and while imitating peers and people
in our immediate environment or our colleagues in our offices is not
questioned, I find it surprising that taking instruction from the ahadith on
matters that have very much to do with our practice of Islam in the matter of maintaining
the minimum standard for being considered clean for performing our prayers is
being discouraged! Yes, most of us maintain a standard higher than the minimum
required but we should be aware of the minimum standard just in case there are
constraints which prevent us on some occasion from maintaining our normal
This discomfort with religion is clearly the
effect of western education which has a very pronounced slant against all
religions which may be mainly attributed to the antagonistic attitude the Church
took to science, the persecution of many scientists for holding their scientific
views and its inflexible stand on many issues as listed below which is changing
including mutations by natural selection
2. Age of
living things taken as a few thousand years when fossils show that life has
existed hundreds of thousand years ago.
in 6 days whereas the big bang theory talks of a much longer periods.
geocentric view of the universe with the earth at absolute rest
5. A flat
Inhuman punishments in the medieval period (burning at the stakes, execution
after torture including emasculation) in which the Church played a key role.
The Church clearly took up positions in the past
based on its world view which may not even be justifiable in the light of its
The anti-religious slant in western education affects
all those who pursue it and therefore we find even Muslims who have received
western education drifting away from religion. These strata of educated Muslim
society and its intelligentsia should have become the leaders of the Muslim
masses but because of their alienation from Islam, they have distanced
themselves from the people. Western education is therefore looked upon with
suspicion with good reason and the Muslims to blame for it are the educated
ones who are ‘lost’ to Muslim society.
The anti-religion slant in western education is a
reaction to the excesses of the Church and understandable but the same rubs off
on all those who pursue it even though their religion may be free from the same
excesses. This is precisely because we are unthinking imitators and those who
have received western education conform to the values and viewpoints of others
who have received a similar education which means that they are by and large
against religion. This unthinking imitation while opposing religion is not different from the unthinking
acceptance which you accuse Ghaus Sb of. The unthinking opposition is reflected
in the way this debate is framed as a wholesale attack on all ahadith rather than as an exhortation to use reason and reject the many ahadith that are clearly concocted and unreasonable. What we need is cleaning up on what is antithetical to the message of the Quran and not in keeping with what we know of the Prophet (pbuh) and many others that contradict each other. There are many good ahadith and selections of these are available keeping out the doubtful ones which serve a very useful purpose.
What this debate has clearly demonstrated is that no one is willing to consider the hadith on scientific facts including Ghaus Sb. The politics of the question is more important to the people than the merits of the case. In order to wean people away from their unthinking acceptance of the many doubtful ahadith, what do we have to propose to them as an alternative? If we cannot reject/accept even a single hadith based on scientific facts, we have really nothing to offer as an alternative except empty rhetoric!
Dear Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia Saheb, thanks for your kind comment. But, unfortunately, it's not possible for me to ban Quran and Hadees from being published in an Islamic website.
However, any one fabricates verses from Quran and quotes from Hadees, he or she is surely going to be banned from the site and the fabrication deleted. You may have noticed that I have deleted Mohammad Younus Rational's quotes from Quran - though they are most likely not newly forged by him - because he could not furnish the url of Islamicity page from where he had claimed to have found them.
Now if you discover that the references of Sunan Abu Daud that he gave recently are wrong, I will not only delete them but ban him from the website.
But, I am sorry, I cannot ban Sunan Abu Daud. Abu Daud was a great muhaddis, spent a lifetime researching and collecting ahadees. We may disagree with some of his ahadees, ask Muslims to disregard them, not consider them sayings of the Prophet (saw), but we cannot ban him.
It would help if we brought a notch down our self-righteousness, arrogance and our show of sentimentality about our love for the Prophet, at least for the month of Ramazan.
Good Morning Sultan Shahin Saheb,
Three days lapsed by and you are back again
responding to two notorious commentators who are always busy trying to share
their out of the ordinary comments as usual. I can now perfectly relate as to
why they are considered as the vital contributors to “New Age Islam” forum. In
the sales arena, it is called “Sizzle Sells,” and on the Islamic forums, it
should be rightly named as “Insults Pays.”
You wrote, “Intellectual and philosophers, even
self-styled ones, should feel ashamed of themselves advocating that Muslims
remain abound to such medieval norms.” What is more shocking is that the
selected commentators on the “Islamic Forum,” do not feel ashamed at all
during this holy month of Ramadhan discussing about one “Hadith”
that has been taken out of context. Sadly, even as a “Moderator” of the forum, you are further elaborating and
encouraging for more answers. You know what the reaction will be, but I guess
that does not matter as long as the readers are enjoying the forum.
Sultan Saheb, you can be rest assured that the two,
that is, “Tablighi
& Ex-Tablighi” are going to shamelessly
continue with their assaults and will not even spare the Prophet of Islam. I am
afraid there is nothing one reader like me can do, given that it is your forum
and free for all to indulge in assassinating the character of our beloved
Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him).
Carry on, Sultan Shahin Saheb. Bear in mind that
now with the addition of readership from the country of Pakistan, you might
just want to reconsider some of your very liberal rules and regulations of your
very forum. For a conservative Muslim like me and many others, I sense that the
“New Age Islam” is not truly helping the crucial discussions, but rather the
forum itself is getting way too polluted with vulgar words and snotty remarks
from a handful of commentators.
Have a blessed remaining ten days of Ramadhan to
you, your beloved family members and all the dedicated team of NAI.
Very respectfully yours,
Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia
Sultan Shahin sb. says, "That Muslims should even be looking for answers to many such questions is scandalous. Use your mind and let others too use theirs." . . .
Very true! It seems we have fallen into the habit of needing and seeking answers for everything from "authoritative" sources, as if we can't think for ourselves. We do not have to do everything "by the rule." I am sure God never intended us to be be robots. What the Prophet said to a mother about why he did not have to wash his garment soiled by her male baby's urine did not need to be noted or analyzed.
Naseer Saheb (Observer), Sorry about the delay in my response. As I have
written before, "when Syed Manzoor Alam Saheb brought
out the urine-related hadees, to challenge Mr. Ghulam Ghouse's blind faith in
hadees, he was not focusing on that particular hadees but the unreliability,
absurdness of many so-called authentic (sahih) hadeeses. When some people
arguing against blind belief in hadees quote pornographic material, their
intention is not to either discuss that particular pornographic content, or
even to disabuse us of the very institution of hadees but to attack the blind
faith in hadees, putting it on a pedestal even above the holy Quran, as
Tablighi Jamaat and ahl-e-hadees people and generally nearly all Muslims do."
You probably got entangled in this hadees as this was the first
hadees you had come across. The only book you read is Quran. But your approach
is correct. Many of us may not agree with the outcome of that research, or may
not consider that relevant any more, but the methodology of looking at the
content of hadees and deciding for oneself whether it appeals to us as
authentic is the right one. However, what is authentic for you may not be
authentic for me, and this status should be acceptable to both of us.
What should not be acceptable, and I expect your support in
this, is not only to accept all ahadees blindly, without thinking, as authentic,
but also to be determined never to think, never to change one's opinion in
life. Ghulam Ghaus Saheb says: "As
for me I have faith in Quran and Hadees. Some of you may disagree with me on my
having faith in hadees. I will never go against this faith; rather, I will
support, favour, and base my points on both Quran and Hadith. In any case, if
you have problem with my idea, you can prevent me from writing comments,
articles on this website."
was this determination to never think in life, which is, to be fair to Ghaus Saheb,
representative of general Muslim mindset, that Mr. Alam had found disturbing
and I had found shocking.
all your exertions Naseer Saheb, Ghulam Ghaus Saheb is still not saying that he
accepts this urine-related hadees because he goes by your well-researched
thesis, and accepts your science. He apparently sees no point in all this
research. He accepts it because it is hadees and therefore not open to
a word about the pornographic or near-pornographic portrayal of the Prophet as
a sex maniac by Mohd Younus Rational, quoting hadeeses as he first claimed from
a Wahhabi website Islamicity, then when he could not give the url, and his
quotes were deleted, again quoting from Sunan Abu Dawood something similar, though
still without a url. But since classical Islamic scholars have not questioned
these ahadees being a part of Sunan Abu Dawood, I have left them on the site for now.
I cannot possibly censor Quran and Hadees on
this Islamic website and I cannot blame anyone for quoting authentic ahadees,
as long he is not making them up himself and gives correct references from
Islamic sources. Your view has been that since we are all products of a sexual
process, it's okay for the prophet (saw) to have been a sex maniac, having sexual intercourse with all his 13 wives at row without
having a bath or sucking the tongue of his wives, etc. You say that ugliness is in the eyes of the beholder, not in the
sexual acts of the prophet themselves as narrated copiously, repeatedly and
with relish in Hadees books.
Fine, I can still accept that, as, after all, you
are thinking about the content and then accepting them. You are not a blind
follower of Hadees as common unthinking Muslims represented by Ghulam Ghaus
Saheb in this thread. I may not agree with you but that is another matter. My
assessment of the prophet's personality is not that of a lascivious sex-maniac as
represented in ahadees. But that is another matter. I still accept you as a
thinking Muslim. The only thing I do not understand is why did you come up in
defence of Ghulam Ghaus Saheb when Syed Manzoor Alam expressed his horror at
his expression of determination to remain a blind believer all his life, before
I could, as I was still in shock.
no useful purpose is served in telling people how to take bath or how to give
bath to a dead body or which foot to use first while entering a toilet. Can't
you do all this and more yourself and how does it matter. Don't you know how to
take bath? This is just shackling Muslim mind into a medieval Mullah prison.
Intellectuals and philosophers, even self-styled ones, should feel ashamed of
themselves advocating that Muslims remain bound to such medieval norms. That
Muslims should even be looking for answers to many such questions is scandalous.
Use your mind and let others too use theirs.
So Rational Saheb, Wahhabi
sites are not using fake pornographic ahadees. In that case we should not worry
too much about them. Most Sunnis have developed a Wahhabi mindset anyway.
Who visits Sufi-Barailvi
websites, even if such rubbish ahadees are there. So they can't do much damage.
We must however check from our sources if this is true and Wahhabi sites do not
carry such ahadees, we cannot completely trust Md.Yunus Rational in the matter.
He is known to be a Wahhabi-supporter.
As for most Sunnis
developing a Wahhabi mindset, Note the way Sunnis accept ISIS as a
Sunni organisation. No one says it is a purely Wahhabi organisation. Sunnis
have no problem in this Wahhabi outfit being considered a Sunni sectarian
war-machine and khilafat by the entire world media. No protest from any one we
could consider non-Wahhabi Sunni. Perhaps ther aren't any left. .
So we should not worry
about these ahadees anymore, I suppose, as they are not being used by Wahhabi
websites, as Rational Md Yunus Sb had claimed earlier.
However, we do need to
worry about claims made by Md Yunus Sb Rational. Should always take them with a
pinch of salt. He should at least apologise to Islamicity for pointing fingers
at them without any basis for carrying forged pornographic ahadees .
1. Haqeeqi – which can be seen
a. Ghaliza – heavy type
b. Khafifa – light type
2. Hukmi – which cannot be seen e.g. breaking of Wudhu or a need of
Najaasat Haqeeqi: Uncleanliness or filth that can be seen e.g. urine,
stool, blood and wine.
Najaasat Ghaliza: Dense (heavy) types of Najaasat e.g. Urine and stool
of human beings.
Najaasat Khafifa: Lighter types of Najaasat e.g. Urine of Halaal animals.
Makruh: Disliked or something which is against the conduct of Islam.
Makruhe Tahreemee: Close to Haraam.
Haraam: Illegal or forbidden.
Mr Sultan Shahin,
You have initiated this debate and made certain comments
which require a response:
<I I have not taken any position on the hadith.
Since the allegation of Alam against Ghaus Sb is of blind belief, I have only shown a way to
settle the issue on the basis of facts that can be established by science. It
is for the readers of NAI and Alam to take the discussion forward and conclude
it. From the looks of it, the discussion is going nowhere. The conclusion by
default would therefore be that the readers of NAI are unable to either
validate or invalidate the hadith based on scientific facts and therefore Ghaus
Sb cannot be accused of blind belief without accusing those who reject it also of
YYou do not appear to have read the hadith and
therefore opined on it based on your presumptions. The hadith has nothing to do
with Hazrat Khadija (RA) and it pertains to the Medinian period. It may perhaps
have a connection with the Prophet’s (pbuh) grandsons as Hazrat Ali is one of
the narrators the other being his wife Umm Qays bint Mihsan who apparently had
an infant from her previous marriage when she married the Prophet.
<!While you are right in saying that I am against
blind belief, I am equally against presumptions and blind disbelief. I have no
political stake in either supporting or attacking the hadiths wholesale and can
only deal with one hadith at a time on merits.
<!There are countless hadiths which have served a
useful purpose and continue to do so and provide us with practical guidance in
our day to day affairs. I am sure, if the matter was about how to give ghusl to
a dead person, you would go by the book rather than debate on the subject.
Following the book also gives people the mental satisfaction that they did everything
complete idiot that you are who can describe the raison d'etre of the hadith as
a non-sequitur deserves to be ignored as a fool beyond redemption.
You are a complete idiot
to get into a discussion about a hadith you have apparently not read or unable
to comprehend even if you have read it. Why do you think sprinkling water for
male infant's urine and washing off completely for a female infant's urine
is advised? And why no distinction is made for babies who are weaned? Also
there is nothing new that I have brought in now that has not already been
About the Aploogy
Non Muslim made an issue of a simple non-offensive sentence
of mine as follows:
Read the following sentences.
One written by you with a condescending, almost
arrogant tone: "The non believers should be happy with the God of the
Quran. He promises them everything in this world itself!"
Now learn from me how you could have phrased it
logically and with more meaning: "YOU should be happy with the God of the
Quran. He promises NON BELIEVERS everything in this world itself!"”
Technically he is right. I should
have addressed Hats Off to whom I was responding with ‘You’ rather than `non-believers’.
Even so, what I said was hardly offensive to the non-believers. Since Non-Muslim
was apparently taking offense, I apologized if my sentence offended him which
he should have had the grace to acknowledge and perhaps show equal good behavior
by apologizing for his own rudeness in the exchange. Non Muslim however lacks
grace. On the contrary, the lout and the boor that he is, he is using the
apology as a weapon! The churlishness of this low bred mongrel!
1. Urine tests can confirm gender of the person (presence of hormones)
2. Females are more prone to UTI
3. A baby girl has vaginal discharge for a few days to several months.
Any of these reasons may render her urine more napak than that of a boy's.
I think GM Sb is a medical doctor and he can tell us more.
If there is no significant difference, then you can tell Ghaus Sb that Hadeeths are unreliable. There is no point badgering the gentleman unnecessarily without full knowledge that the hadith is actually ridiculous or not
By Observer - 6/24/2014 11:05:00 AM
What is offered are 3 reasons to establish that there is a difference asking Alam to enquire further whether the differences pointed out makes a material difference or not and if that does not make a material difference then say that the hadith is without any scientific/medical basis. There are doctors among the readers of NAI who are asked to take it further.
I doubt whether Sadaf has read the complete hadith or not. This hadith applies only to babies who are breast fed. After the babies are weaned, their urine requires complete washing off irrespective of whether it is a boy or a girl.
Any of these reasons may render her urine more napak than that of a boy's. - Hazrat Naseer Saheb
What Huzoor-e-ala Hazrat Naseer Saheb says ki katbahsi (tongue wrestling) as one can always question why these reasons may render a girls urine 'more napak' than that of boys. Presence of harmores or being prone to UTI or vaginal discharge, why should these be considered 'more napak' than the urine itself?
This was the man jo ek zamane mein khoob Kanitian Philosophy bhaanj raha tha. I suspected his intelligence then and there only when I noticed that he can stoop down to any level to prove that only his dash is red.
"Mr Sultan Shahin is
responsible for the security of the commentators on this site."
By rational mohammed yunus - 7/8/2014 11:59:09 PM
No Mr. Rational, I am not
responsible for the security of the commentators on this site. Any commentators.
I don't run a security system and my commentators are global, some of whom not
only hide their identities but also give false email IDs, which means even I
cannot reach them when my own or website's security is endangered due to their
But you in particular. You endanger
yourself, me and the site in particular, by playing with the sentiments of a
very sentimental people. And unnecessarily. You want to prove that Hadees is
rubbish. I agree, to the extent, that some of the hadees is rubbish. But why do
you have to go to pornographic rubbish, which some of my friends who have read
hadees thoroughly tell me does not exist in hadees books and is a concoction of
islamophobes like you and are only found on islamophobic sites.
Let me explain why I said
unnecessarily. It is unnecessary because there is so much irrationality
attributed in the hadeeses to the prophet, that if you want to give examples of
rubbish in hadees for the sake of argument, there is no dearth of it. But you
concoct pornographic statements and Naseer Saheb then explains why the hadees
can be correct and why it may be considered authentic.
You recently wrote:
in my entire span
of association with this site nobody has proved my quotations wrong. i give
references. when mr observer charged me for quoting from islamophobic sites, i
gave references from the Islamic site for the same Ahadith. Before the advent
of INTERNET in knew all. Internet made easy to quote.
I challenge you to prove me wrong.
By rational mohammed yunus - 7/9/2014 4:16:11 AM
However, as far as I can recall
(correct me, if I am wrong) you have not given references. When challenged, you
just said they are from islamicity.com, a pucca
Wahhabi website, so of course, unchallengeable. But how does one find that when
you don't give the url. Apparently, these things you are saying, no chain of
narration, no isnad, no url, are taken as figments of your imagination. How can
anyone prove you wrong if you don't give the url. Islamicity has thousands of
pages. Where are these hadeeses you are quoting. And, of course, every one
would believe, that you can go to any extent to defame Islam, its prophet and
scriptures. And then you want me to be responsible for your security! What
about my security and that of the website.
Dear Rational Muhammad Yunus.
On one hand you describe the Prophet
in a pornographic scene with his wife obviously by quoting from an Islamophobic
site and on the other you table this question:
“Is guidance a blessing of God or it must be acquired
by an individual?
By rational mohammed yunus - 7/9/2014 3:26:06 AM
Do you not think you are acting as a die-hard hypocrite. And that is
how I assessed you for long and advised you several times. Now that you have crossed
all limits and put the Prophet (whom as Muslims we are supposed to love more
than our fathers) and his wives (our mothers) in pornographic postures, I find
you mentally sick. I only hope you do not discuss what you write with your adult
children (son, daughter), adult sister, father or mother unless pornography
means nothing offensive or objectionable to them.
Put what you wrote side by side with my above comment and be assured
that my love for my Prophet and his wives is no lesser than your love for your
parents – you will certainly be very happy that that you are still one-up on
Bottom Line: If you apologize for what you wrote that got deleted and
commit to desist from any attempt to demonize the Prophet and ridicule the Qur’anic
diction without having any knowledge of Arabic, I can cleanse your filth with a
Dear Sheetal Sonika,
I think you wrote this comment (but
name is not important any way):
Rational muhammad yunus, u r liar, apostate, abuser,
hate-monger. people like you are the worst of its kind i have ever seen on any
Since he bears a Muslim name, in my
article referenced in Comment-3 below, I have established a parallel between
the likes of Rational Yunus who are bent on guttering the Qur’an and the
hypocrites and desert Arabs among the Prophet’s followers who were intense in
kufr. Muhammad, if he were the author of the Qur’an has outclassed you in
exposing their mind. Thus, the Qur’an refers
to the hypocrites as rijz (spiritually unclean) (9:95), hurls divine
curse on them (9:68, 33:73), calls them liars (9:42, 9:107, 58:18, 63:1] and
deviants (fasiqun) (9:96, 9:67). It charges some of the believing nomadic Arabs to being
intense in kufr and hypocrisy (9:97,
9:101), condemns them as the most despised among the Prophet’s followers, singles
them out as the comrades of Satan (58:19/20) and relegates them to the lowest
depths of the hellfire (4:145).
The Qur’an does not give any graphic detail of the punishment that is possibly
(God knows) inflicted in the lowest pit of hell. Here is an imagery of such
punishment drawn by the famous 14th century poet Dante Alghieri:
“A cask by losing centre-piece or cant (old
unintelligible expression probably implying a criminal who lost his head or bearing)
Was never shattered so, as I saw one
Torn from the chin to where one breaks the wind.
Between their legs were hanging down their entrails;
Their hearts were visible, and the dismal holes
That make excrement of what is eaten.
While I was all absorbed in seeing them,
They looked at me, and opened with their hands
Their bosoms, saying: "See now how ugly we look;
How mutilated, see, are we;
In front of them do their leaders weeping go,
Cleft in the face from forelock unto chin;
And all the others whom thou here behold,
Disseminators of hatred and of schism
In their lifetimes, and therefore are cleft thus
Torn by wild pigs and dragons, stung by snakes and
scorpions- In the lowest pit of hell.”
- Dante's Inferno, Canto 28, slightly
paraphrased and modified for easy reading
If you are
a lady, you are lucky that the Editor has deleted the pornographic comments
Rational had posted possibly on account of spending long hours on hard pornographic
site. But he made it more ugly by putting the Prophet and his wives as the characters.
He reminded me of people he can force their opposite sex sibling or parents to act
with them in XX/XXX films to make some money or satiate their unfulfilled sexual
urge. It is good that Editor took heed of my warning and removed that most
obnoxious stuff that would have rendered your fast (makrooh) if you are Muslim
or made you leave your site unless your sexual morality is no different from
stray dogs who play their sexual act on public places.
Yunus sb., . . .
Thanks for your balanced comment. You wisely summed it up with, "As for those who the Qur’an confuses, they should probe the verses that are clear and unambiguous, approach it with a pure heart, probe into its verses, and seek the best meaning in it." That is excellent advice.
Com-6 continued from my previous
comments.. What about various confusing aspects of the Qur’an that the Radical
Intellectuals cherry pick from time to time in a repetitive manner.
Many of such questions are answered as follows in my article
and Shed of Its Literary Glory in Translation, the Qur'an Offers Clear Clues to
Exploring Its Core Commandments - Now Obscured, Corrupted and Distorted By
Secondary Theological Sources
Commentary extracted from
above in blue:
Islamic scholarship is virtually dedicated to a
category of issues that virtually sidetrack the core message of the Qur’an. The
most commonplace issues are:
Speculations about entities that are beyond the
categories of human mind, such as angels, jin, hur, ruh (divine spirit), nafs
(soul), paradise, hell, ‘lohe mahfuz,’ the true nature of the Prophet’s ‘Night
Journey’ to the ‘distant mosque’ and subsequent ascension (mi‘raj) to heaven –
whether it was of a physical or mystical nature (17:1), the polarity between
freewill and predestination (qadr) for example. The Qur’an forbids any attempt
to probe their essence.
Interpretation of the Qur’anic verse 2:106 that
clarifies the doubts of the contemporaneous Christians and Jews as to why God
should send a succession of revelations. The verse declares: “We never abrogate
or consign to oblivion any message (ayat) unless We bring one better than it,
or similar to it.” Many early theologians took a restrictive meaning of the
word ‘ayah’ (plural, ayat) as a “verse of the Qur’an” to suggest that a few
verses of the Qur’an have been abrogated. This is simply untenable  as it
will purport to imply that God Almighty, like a human being, changed his mind
with the changing context of the revelation.
The identification of the addressee of a given command
– whether it is addressed to the present day reader or to the immediate
audience of the Prophet.
interpretation of a Qur’anic verse. Thus the verse 3:85, “If anyone seeks other than Islam as a din
(religion/moral law), it will not be accepted of him...” is interpreted
in isolation from its preceding verses (3:83/84) to claim the exclusivity of
Islamic faith. The verse 9:5, “But when the sacred months  are past, kill
the pagans wherever you find them, and capture them, surround them, and watch
for them in every lookout;...” is interpreted in isolation from its preceding
and succeeding verses (9:4, 9:6) that grant peace and security to all
traditional literalist translation of Qur’anic idioms and similes can be
confusing, as typified by these examples (in bold) showing the conceivable
textual meanings in brackets: Seal up
the heart (block the mind) (2:7); Sickness
in the heart (to waver in faith) (2:10); Deaf, dumb and blind (Stubbornly defiant) (2:18), kill (mortify) yourselves...’” (2:54),
‘Be apes despised (disgraced)’” (2:65),
‘We (God) raised Mount Sinai high above
you’ (had Mount Sinai towering behind you)…” (2:63), throw behind one’s back (to disregard
or renounce) (2:101), Face of God
(Presence of God) (2:114), throne of
God (Almightiness of God) (2:255), ‘swallow
a fire into bellies’ (commit grave sin) (4:10), obliterate faces and turn them about their backs (to inflict severe torment); camel passing through the eye of a needle
(an impossibility) (7:40).
of its rhetoric, the Qur’an
occasionally personifies non-living objects:
are rocks that fall down for fear of God” (2:74), “all that are in the
heavens and the earth submit to God willingly or unwillingly” (3:83),
“prostrate before God willingly or unwillingly, as do their shadows mornings
and evenings” (13:15).
verses relating to the physical paradigms of the contemporaneous civilization,
such as the physical mode of punishment, travelling, hunting of birds for food,
weighing of goods etc. must be regarded as era specific and not of literal
eternal applicability as the Qur’anic message espouses the principle of minhaj
(dynamism in the code of life within the limits of divine guidelines - 5:48).
Fighting Verses: In addition to offering guidance and illustrations,
the Qur’an also guided the Prophet in defending against his powerful Arab
enemies… Therefore, all those verses that relate to defending against the
pagans were specific to the era. Recorded in full light of history they also
attest to the defensive character of the Prophetic mission, the agony and
trauma that he and his followers lived in on a day to day, and at times moment
to moment basis fearing annihilation at hands of their attackers, and under the
ominous shadow of the conspiracies of the hypocrites of Medina and the native
Jewish tribes who eagerly awaited their destruction.
Com-5 continued from my previous
comments. What is the Qur’an’s final take on the rewards of paradise that it
graphically describes across it text – albeit in a gender neutral:
what the Qur’an says:
“A likeness of the garden which the heedful (muttaqun) are promised (is that)
streams run below it, its food and its shade are everlasting...” (13:35).
“No soul knows what delights* are kept secret for them as a
reward for what they did” (32:17). *[Lit.,
‘delights of the eye’.]
“A likeness of the garden which the heedful (muttaqun) are promised (is that) in
it there are streams of water never brackish, and streams of milk, whose taste
never changes, and streams of wine – delicious to those who drink, and streams
of honey, pure and clear...” (47:15).
[Ch. 6.4. Essential Message of Islam]
Com-4, continued from my previous comments….seemingly
sexually provocative material in barely few verses of the translated Qur’an??
rendition of a few Qur’anic words/ expressions in a sexually tainted diction only
reflects the imagination of the translator and does not represent the correct
gender neutral rendition. This is clarified in my jt. authenticated
publications as follows:
a. hurun aynun: appears in 44:54 and 52:20: Since the epithet ayn means ‘large eyed ones”, the Classical interpreters associate this term with a
female being - a woman, of fair complexion and large eyes and add sexual charm
to it. Such an interpretation has no Qur’anic basis, and is merely speculative,
as the Qur’an promises paradise to the members of both the sexes (9:72).
Besides, if there were any grain of sexual provocation in the Qur’an, its
immediate audience would have never turned away from it like frightened donkeys fleeing a lion (74:49-51). As the
Qur’an testifies, the Arabs brought all kinds of charges against the Qur’an and
the Prophet but there is not a word or hint of the Prophet or the Qur’an attracting
the Arabs by a sexually provocative diction.
b. qasirat at tarf in 37:48, 38:52, 55:56; literally, ‘such as restrain their gaze.’
c. atrab in 38:52,
56:37, 78:33; most commentators have connoted it with ‘well matched’ or ‘equal in
d. khayratun hisan in 55:70. The expression combines two Qur’anic words on
shades or categories of goodness: khayrah
and hasanah (Note 24/Preface) and is
thus suggestive of the noblest form of goodness.
As in the case of hur, the classical
commentators have given the body of a woman to these allegorical expressions
Traditionally, some Muslim
scholars have supported feminist personification of Qur’anic expressions on the
ground that Qur’an refers to them in the feminine gender form. But this is not
tenable. As with French, Arabic is grammatically gendered, and the Qur’an
employs this grammatical nuance to create an evocative personification that
leaves even the Arab readers puzzled, and simply cannot be captured in a
foreign rendition; example: ‘the earth grammatically feminine giving birth to
its secrets.’ Those interested may consult Michael Sells work referred to and
Com-3. Continued from previous comment
Article: The Radical Intelligentsia of Islam
and Its Orthodox Ulema Are the ‘Hypocrites’ and ‘Nomadic Arabs Intense In Kufr’
Of This Era: They Are Its Twin Internal Enemies, and Must Be Resisted
Finally, a parting message is due to the Muslim
intellectual front of the modern counterparts of the hypocrites and believing
nomadic Arabs, intense in Kufr, of the Prophet’s era. They must understand, it
is too late in history to dislodge Islam from its spiritual bastion. As there
is no compulsion in religion all those sceptical of the divinity of the Qur’an
must feel free to exit Islam, rather than create division and disorder within
its ranks or conspire against it with the non-Muslims bent on trivializing the
Qur’an and maligning the Prophet. No wonder the Qur’an referred to them as Rijz
(abomination) (9:95) like the pagan Arabs (9:28), and the Prophet readily
agreed to exempt them from taking part in both the Uhud battle (3:167) and
Tabuk expedition (9:47).
heard Naseeruddin Shah’s dialogue in the movie “Wednesday”?
“Aap Ka Ghar Ma
Cockaroach Aata Hai To Aap Kiya Karta Hain, Rathor Saheb?
Aap Us Ko Paalta
Nahin Marta Hain
Ya Charo Cockaroach
Mera Ghar Ghanda Kar Raha Tha
Aur Aaj Main Apna
Ghar Saaf Karna Chahta Hoon.”
think about it and pass on your comments.
Com-2. Continued from last comment
on defense of the Qur’an against the charges brought by radical Muslims keen to
and Shed of Its Literary Glory in Translation, the Qur'an Offers Clear Clues to
Exploring Its Core Commandments - Now Obscured, Corrupted and Distorted By
Secondary Theological Sources
forward to this era, a section of educated youth – mostly the rich elite,
business tycoons and those seeking to free
themselves from religious bondage, as well as the atavistic among the Ulama and
radicalized elements (a small minority though) ready to blow themselves up in
public place and terrorize humanity or condone such acts have unwittingly joined ranks to propagate the weakest accounts
(ahadith) and the most grotesque rulings of the Classical Sharia to justify
their blatantly anti-Qur’anic views. These insiders
(the liberal, rationalist hypocrites and the fanatic and misguided Ulama) thus
demonize their Prophet, scandalise his wives (their own mothers in the spirit of the Qur’anic verse
33:6), poison interfaith relations and reduce Islam into a voluptuous and
barbaric cult. In historical perspective this is the most dangerous development
in Islam, even more dangerous than the recent anti-terror wars on the Muslim
lands or the Crusades and the Mongol attacks some eight hundred years ago.
These inside demonizers of Islam are unwittingly projecting their faith and
fellow Muslims as a heavy and unbearable burden on human civilization and
setting the stage for a deadly backlash from the powerful enemies of Islam –
the Islamophobic think-tank and military industrial complex - than what the
world has seen in the past decade. Therefore, it is absolutely imperative to
install the Qur’an in its rightful place as an independent, completed and
perfected fount of guidance as it claims and this article aims at.
of Caution to Islamic Scholarship: The Islamic scholarship may do better to allocating
minimal time on probing what the Qur’an forbids it to probe – its ambiguous
(mutashabihat) verses, and to actively probe and appropriate its definitive
(muhkamat) commandments (3:7) – its social, moral and ethical paradigms, its
functional and interpersonal tenets – good deeds, sharing of wealth with the
poor, good neighborly and inter-faith relations, charity, generosity, justice
and equity; mercy,
compassion, patience and tolerance; peaceful conflict resolution, vying with
each other in goodness and lawful pursuits, use of reason and discernment,
repelling all negative thoughts, unremitting effort for improvement - to cite a
broad cross section of the Qur’an’s definitive tenets.
who discuss those aspects of the Qur’an that it commands the believers not to
probe and supplement their discussions with the Islamic theological sources
have virtually swapped the definitive commandments of the Qur’an – the core of
its book (ummul kitab) for the obscurantist aspects of its message. As the
Qur’an put it, “there is perversity in their
hearts and they only seek fitna (confusion, sedition, chaos)” (3:7), and they
keep Muslims and Islam stagnated in the track of civilization and its
scholarship imprisoned in a closed medieval domain.
Dear Gholam Mohiuddin Sahab,This is in response to your following comment:
The two apostates in this forum, Rational and Hats-off, are having a
field day trashing the Quran, something that is very easy to do with the
scriptures of any religion. The ferocity and hatefulness of their
attacks smacks paradoxically of a Wahhabi kind of fanaticism... By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 7/8/2014 1:02:44 PMMy Comments:Since some radical Muslims come back with the same set of objections to the Qur'an and the Prophet (though I have not read their recent comments) I have done a number of articles objectively defending the position of the Qur'an as a divine book and also attempting to expose the mindset of those radical Muslims who want to trash it - unless their questions or doubts were aimed at provoking or broadening Islamic thoughts - God knows best: Here are the extracts (in blue) followed by Article References - which stand on their own and reassure me and may be equally convincing to the other Muslim readers (God Willing) that the Qur'an is indeed divine speech. This is not in response to any of the comments that anyone may have posted against the Qur'an for I already spent some two years on the site responding to comments charging the integrity of the Qur'an and the Prophet and don't want to block myself in a circular debate. So I copy paste from my articles to respond to your above comment. I have divided my comments under 8 separate units to avoid loading a reader with a very long comment covering diverse aspects of a very challenging theme under debate. Here is my first comment: The
Qur’an Was Never Edited And Any Effort To Edit The Qur’an Will Be Self
the foregoing tiers of arguments demonstrate, any editing of the Qur’an post
the revelation would have inevitably:
the acclaimed infallibility of its text as a Divine Speech (1 above), and led
to massive exit from the faith of Islam as Muhammad’s companions and the common
Arabs with their mastery in Arabic language would have seen Muhammad as a mere
imposter, a charlatan.
its claim of textual integrity (2 above) with the same consequences as in i)
confusion among the huffaz (memorizers) and scribes who preserved the text in
their breast and available writing materials (3 above) and created many
versions of the Qur’an, and raised serious questions about its infallibility /
the whole Arab community and warned them of an imminent doom given the awe and
dread the Qur’an inspired among them (4 above).
Muhammad as an astute politician, a military genius, a chivalrous warrior, an
invincible conqueror, a liquidator of the Jews and the pagans, a merciless
avenger, an admirer of the opposite sex, a seeker of worldly treasures,
pleasure, glory and fame to set an ominously promising precedence for later
dynastic rulers (5.1).
Muhammad for the greatest achievements of his mission or for being the greatest
among the Prophets (5.2above),
the names of the Prophet’s close relatives and companions in the Qur’an(5.2 above)
the Qur’an with and references to the traumatic and most melancholy moments of
his mission. (5.3)
the passages venerating of the Prophets Jesus and Virgin Mary.
is simply impossible to explain why none of these listed alterations occurred –
that any cursory reader of the Qur’an can readily verify. It was probably this
complete absence of self falsification of the Qur’an that led such illustrious
scholars as Geoffrey Parrinder and John Burton to make the following observations:
of prophesy, inspiration and revelation must be re-examined in view of the
undoubted revelation of God in Muhammad and the Qur’an.” 
text which has come down to us in the form in which it was organized and
approved by the Prophet ….What we have today in our hands, is the mushaf
(manuscript) of Muhammad.” .
the seekers of truth, the debate should end here. The Qur’an as we have in our
hands is the exact copy of the mashaf (manuscript) that the Prophet approved
and that during its advent (610-632) was simply impossible to edit, and once
Uthman’s authenticated version was issued some 20 years after the Prophet’s
death, any scope for any alteration / editing was closed for ever. Any
possibility of tampering during those 20 years was ruled out by the fact that
as a lyrically harmonious litany that was recited every day as the most sacred
reading, any attempt at tampering would have been immediately spotted and
quashed. Only those half baked in the knowledge regarding its collection and
preservation can suspect of it being edited in that transitional period or
suggest to editing it. The truth is any attempt at editing will falsify the
Qur’an and open a floodgate of editing options and create thousands if not
hundreds of its version throwing Islam into a sacramental morass from which
there will be no coming out and the Word of God will be gone with the wind –
and that cannot happen – for indeed the Qur’an is a Word of God. As for those
who the Qur’an confuses, they should probe the verses that are clear and
unambiguous (3:7) approach it with a pure heart (56:79), probe into its verses
(38:29, 47:24), and seek the best meaning in it (39:18, 39:55).
are just a cyber space “Jihadist” who keeps busy with verbal assaults
of all kinds. You could care less if you words are being read by men or women.
It makes no difference to you.
take cover under your fake name, whereas, the bloody “Jihadists” cover their faces in
what is common between you and the deadly ones. Both of your groups are “Madrassa”
educated and lost have all of your senses. Need I say more?
how many of your kind are roaming around in the Islamic world. Look at you!
What have you contributed so far on this forum? Nothing at all, except that you
find it a joy to smear the name of Islam and the Prophet every single day. You
are one mentally sick man, Ex-Tablighi.
what? One should not dwell in demolishing the spirit of humans. Hats Off with
all his gift coupled with your witty remarks can sometimes spoil the show.
kept telling you and Hats Off that we Muslims got major issue, but even after
hearing all the pleas, you both simply come out and keep slashing away with your
that many things pointed are worthy to be comprehended by the readers.
Nonetheless, going overboard is not advisable, period.
not fair. The only comment I have made today has been a positive one.
May be it is not
fair. Just one positive comments! You ought to do better next time around whenever
you come across this so-called Islamic forum.
off is a stylish writer and his observations and comments are cuttingly
accurate. His sense of irony, sarcasm, wit and the polite demolition of the
other party are all very British in flavour, and make him a pleasure to read. I
have been at the receiving end sometimes, but still it is fun to cross swords
with one so skilled.
Yes, I agree with
you 110%. It is a sheer delight reading his comments. He is a brilliant man and
so is his dual personality, “Non (?)”. The man is so brilliant that he manages
to keep a perfect balance between the two identities. After all, his name is
Mr. S. Jeelani. Hats Off to a Muslim who truly knows how to use the British
your problem with a compliment?
Nothing wrong with extending
a warm compliment. I am sure Mr. S. Jeelani appreciate your kind and touching
hats off, I know you are squirming due to an unwelcome and unsolicited
certificate of appreciation. But this Lodhia guy is unbelievable...
Why is that you
find me to be unbelievable? You sure do recollect that many times you have
skilfully dodged my questions. You know one cannot continue to act like “Intellectual Bigots” and think that Muslims are
all stupid. No, we are not, Sir!
secularlogic - 7/8/2014 11:07:20 PM
That’s one tough statement. Yes, the respected editor knows all too well, but
his own rules is very simple, that is, “Chalta Hai, Chalna Do.”
Shahin Saheb’s firm belief is that most of the readers on his forum are
learning from those who are insulting Islam and the Prophet every single day.
insanity so to speak. What can I say? Trust me, the “Ex-Tablighi” will be around for
a long long time to come. He thrives on insulting his ex-religion. He is a near
perfect example of what happens to young minds that gets brainwashed by the
and Tablighis are out to destabilize the entire human civilization. Yet, we
will continue to allow them space to insult our Holy Quran and Prophet of
Logic & Hats Off,
two gentlemen are just great human personalities. Are you sure you wake up and
eat two eggs with sunny side up?
seems like no matter what, you both come on this forum eating two eggs with
sunny side down.
is one thing, but over doing is another. What amazes me is that there is an on-going
assault as if you all are conducting your own “Jihad” which no one cares to
they like to read all the negative stuff, but what else can they do? I even
hardly read anything positive from either of you. Same old,
same old. It’s just another day of negativity out on this forum.
know something! At times it gets to be despicable the way you all continue with
mocking everything. Shame on you, gentlemen (?). Now that is a question mark so
The two apostates in this forum, Rational and Hats-off, are having a field day trashing the Quran, something that is very easy to do with the scriptures of any religion. The ferocity and hatefulness of their attacks smacks paradoxically of a Wahhabi kind of fanaticism. The task of reforming and modernizing any religion is difficult enough and it is made even more difficult by these thoughtless purveyors of hate.
Observeryou can verify following references on http://www.islamicity.com -- [Which Page? URL?]
[ I am deleting the pornographic "ahadees" you have quoted as you have not given the url of the page from which you have quoted the following. In any case what is the point of quoting such pornographic material from ahadees, even if true. There is a lot of other incredible rubbish in Hadees that you can quote and please always give Islamicity's page url.. -- Editor]
Volume 3, Book 31, Number 149:
--[Of Which Book?
The Prophet used to ....
The Prophet used to ....
Narrated Hisham's father:
Aisha said, "Allah's Apostle used to .....
Narrated Hisham's father:
Aisha said, "Allah's Apostle used to .....
(daughter of Um Salama) that her mother said, "While I was....If you still insist, i will give more. i hope you don't consider islamicity.com an islamophobic site. [Which Page? URL?]
(daughter of Um Salama) that her mother said, "While I was....
If you still insist, i will give more. i hope you don't consider islamicity.com an islamophobic site. [Which Page? URL?]
Muhammad used to . [What is the point of quoting pornographic specimens from Hadees? There is a lot of other incredible rubbish in Hadees that you can quote and please always give Islamicity's page url so it can be verified. -- Editor]
- .....(Sunaan Abu Dawud 13.2380)Sunaan Abu Dawud, Book 13, Number 2380:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
[What is the point of quoting pornographic specimens from Hadees? There is a lot of other incredible rubbish in Hadees that you can quote and please always give Islamicity's page url.. Editor] (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 1,
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
[What is the point of quoting pornographic specimens from Hadees? There is a lot of other incredible rubbish in Hadees that you can quote and please always give Islamicity's page url.. Editor]
(Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 1,
your religion and your parents taught you to be “Disrespectful” of others? You
know, whenever I go on any sales trip with my north Indian and south Indian friends
who visit America, I do not even dare think of eating beef in front of them.
what does this example tell you about a Muslim character? You on the other hand
simply want to insult everything about my religion. What makes your mind think
should know that there are bad people in all religions of the world. No, you
and your comrade, “Ex-Tablighi” and
few others on this forum are all in the same boat. Well then, show some human decency,
the “Observer.” He
will take all the readers into a slippery slope where he wants to continue to
argue his point until hell freezes over.
Mr yunus says:
“To me what he wrote was so
immensely vulgar about our Prophet that it stands out as a glaring proof that
it was concocted by a most sexually perverted and morally profane mind and
could never come from God. Period.”
I agree with the above.
He also says:
“Kindly retain what
you have deleted to show those who claim that the hadith are divinely revealed”.
My question is simply, how can what is concocted by a most
sexually perverted and morally profane mind become acceptable as proof? Is Mr
Yunus unconcerned about the standard for proof or is he a firm believer in ‘the
end justifies the means’? This simply points to a lack of concern for facts, truth and authenticity when trying to prove a point.
this particular thread, you wrote, “Indeed, he is making good points.”
Now wait till you find out what kind to good points Naseer Ahmed Saheb (aka Observer)
will be making.
have two notorious commentator on the loose and you keep on insisting that there
is plenty to learn from the two.
then, we shall soon find out, Sultan Shahin.
How does what is obviously and demonstrably false become acceptable as proof for you?
the right screen name for you. The reason being that you are in fact an “Ex-Muslim.”
You are “Irrational,” therefore, there is no point in addressing you as “Rational.”
don’t you join the “Ex-Muslim” forum and have all the fun out
Age Islam” is dominated by you
and another “Tablighi
Maulvi” who simply love to throw tantrums whenever he feels like it.
are a living proof that “Madrassa” education
is bad. Look what the “Mullahs” have done to your brains? They scrambled it so
bad that you have completely lose your human senses.
Dear Sultan Shahin Sahab,
Thanks for deleting the openly erotic stuff posted by a
commentator with a Muslim name on this Ramadan day.
Anyone can say most sexually provocative things even about their
mother (the Prophet's wives are like our mothers) without quoting any site and
if you publish that, no lady or decent person will enter your site.
Kindly retain what you have deleted to show those who claim that the hadith are
divinely revealed. I don't know the fellow who quoted (XX/XXX rating stuff)
just tried to bring his own fancies into religion or is himself a sexual
pervert or browses hard porn sites on the ramathan rendering makruh the fast of
those who read it. As the comment was immensly objectionable, no less sexually
erotic, I am constrained to put this rejoinder. In my wildest imagination I
could not think of a Muslim or any descent person posting openly erotic
material into the website without being sued or at least strongly reprimanded.
This is no freedom of speech that one graphically describes the
most animal form of sexual act that you see among the stray dogs involving his
own mother (assuming the commentator is a Muslim) in the name of Islam - I
suggest you ask him to quote sources or else give him a notice and suspend him
from the website (for its is not a porno site) until he clarifies where he got
the most vulgar stuff that you discreetly deleted.
Dear Yunus Saheb, Thanks for directing my attention to this offensive comment. I have deleted the offending comment with the following remark:
[Pornographic material ostensibly from Hadees and Quran has been deleted as it does not give references. We cannot ban or censor from an Islamic website Qur'anic verses and statements of the Prophet from Hadees (particularly Bukhari and Muslim) that most Muslims consider another form of revelation (wahi), but cannot publish any controversial statement without proper references. - Editor]
of a word changes when it is used in relation with God and when used in relation with
man. For example Allah is ash-Shakoor, which we can translate as the Most
Appreciative since God rewards any virtuous deed many-fold. The one who rewards
a good deed many-fold is said to be grateful for that deed. If you
consider the multiplication factor in reward, only God—great and glorious—is
absolutely grateful because His multiplication of the reward is unrestricted
and unlimited; for there is no end to the happiness of Paradise.”
does Shukran Allah which means thanks Allah for the favours of Allah. Can man
ever match Allah in His Qulaity of ash-shakoor? The degree in difference makes for
a difference in the meaning itself. Man is merely a thanks giver whereas God is
the most appreciative who shows His appreciation by rewarding multifold.
yusalli in 33:43 means “sends his blessings” whereas salat used for the created
becomes `prayer’ which may perhaps be also translated as fulfilling of our
obligation to God. Looking at it another way, God is fulfilling His obligation
by sending his blessings and man his obligations by performing salat. The form
of salat and tasbeeh of the birds would obviously differ from that of man and
even the streams, and mountains are said to perform tasbeeh.
of salat used for man is beyond debate as Mr Yunus has said. There are more
than a hundred verses on the subject. I have covered the subject of what is
salat in a previous comment citing relevant verses from which it should be absolutely clear what salat means.
My explanation is a little speculative as my knowledge of Arabic is limited.
[Pornographic material ostensibly from Hadees and Quran has been
deleted as it does not give references. We cannot ban or censor from an Islamic
website Qur'anic verses and statements of the Prophet from Hadees (particularly
Bukhari and Muslim) that most Muslims consider another form of revelation
(wahi), but cannot publish any controversial statement without proper
references. - Editor]
I was waiting for Akbar Ali to respond to the comment @ 7/6/2014 6:59:15 AM.
Knowing that he is a busy person, it might go unanswered for a long time and
lose its impact.
So just the quote from the comment “…..the exact meaning
of which is known to God alone” is interesting and often used to indicate false
So I ask---If God alone knows the exact meaning of whatever
instructions He has given to His Messenger to transmit further down, then whose
fault it is in He not being able to “communicate” the intent and
substance of the instruction?
The multilayered “liturgical” meanings, throws the whole
authority of the Instructor in jeopardy and so His qualification to be in that position
becomes suspect; which to say the least, must be frightening to those who are being
Is it therefore a case of “attitude” taken by the
recruits to the instructions?
Dear Mubashir Saheb,
I am impressed that for the past 39 years you have successfully managed a
convincing “Checkmate” while doing your comparative studies between Holy Quran
to know that searching for appropriate “Hadiths” made your job easier. Though,
I am not a “Hadith” student, therefore, I politely request you to give an
honest answer on the following Hadiths:
Verse from Holy Quran
Quran 4:89 They
would have you become Kafirs like them so you will all be the same. Therefore,
do not take any of them as friends until they have abandoned their homes to
fight for Allah's cause [jihad]. But if they turn back, find them and kill them
wherever they are.
compiled by Sahih Bukhari & Sahih Muslim
"The last hour
would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims
would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree
and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a
Jew behind me; come and kill him." (Sahih Muslim, 41:6985; see also
41:6981-84 and Sahih Bukhari, 4:52:176,177 and 4:56:791)”
Mohammed: "To battle kafirs in jihad for even one day is greater than the
entire earth and everything on it."
have been ordered to wage war against mankind until they accept that there is
no god but Allah and that they believe that I am His prophet and accept all
revelations spoken through me. When they do these things I will protect their
lives and property unless otherwise justified by Sharia, in which case their
fate lies in Allah's hands." (Muslim 001, 0031)”
Mohammed: "I have been ordered to wage war against mankind until they
accept that there is no god but Allah."
the reason I am asking you is that your comment gave me a clue that you are
probably a right person to give me a clear-cut explanation. The truth of the
matter is, someone has to confront those who throw such “Hadiths” at us. Those
who have mastered the “Science of Hadiths” should be able to provide an
intelligent answer. Agreed!
Observer sb. says, "There is the very clear message of the Quran regarding Salat, Zakat etc." . . .
People who resent too many rules and regulations and too much ritualization and regimentation would prefer that both prayers and charity come from the heart and be spontaneous. Hence I appreciated your remark, "God also gives man autonomy to make his choices freely."
Observer sb., . . .
While supplementation and clarification of what is in the Quran are necessary, are the Hadiths and Sunnah the only ways to achieve them? What about our God-given common sense and group consensus? The latter method would assure contemporaneity, consonance with modern thought and ethos and weeding out of what is obsolete.
You would say that the Quran mandates the first method. Since the way the Quran was compiled leaves the question of possible overinclusiveness unresolved, it is incumbent upon us to ask whether the way we interpret a particular verse is the only way to interpret it.
“God is the One Who blesses (yusal’li) you (O
believers*) as do His angels, that He may bring you from darkness into Light;
and He is full of Mercy to the believers (mu’minin)” (33:43). *[The
bracketed qualification draws on the preceding verses 33:41/42.].
“Indeed God and His angels bless
the Prophet. You who believe, invoke blessings (sal’lu) on him and submit (to his guidance)
The literal interpretation of these verses can raise complex
doctrinal questions, and the best thing is to regard them as part of the divine
liturgy, the exact meaning of which is known to God alone.
GM Sb says: “When we question the
value of the Hadiths or the Sunnah what we are really saying is that Man
must take the responsibility and assume the authority to keep Islam
the progressive and cutting-edge religion that it once was”
The discussion was confined to
whether the Quran directs Muslims to follow the Prophet’s (pbuh) sunnat
(practice), which are part of his hadith (what was transmitted on the authority of the
Prophet, his deeds, sayings, tacit approval). The answer is clearly yes since the
Quran asks us to follow the Prophet, it is incumbent upon us to follow what
constitute his instruction. The instructions are regarding matters that are
made obligatory in the Quran such as Salat and Zakat. These are therefore
binding. In every other case, since they do not concern what is made obligatory
by the Quran, we may take these as the preferred thing to do and not as
obligatory. Not every sunnat is part of his hadith either; for example, his
preferences regarding food, but these also find a place in the books of hadith.
We should therefore distinguish what are merely biographical details from what
is his hadith.
There are hadiths that are clearly
fabricated, antithetical to the message of the Quran, not in conformity with the
way the early Muslims behaved and promote strife. These must be excised.
When you speak about the outrageous
fatwas, these have little to do with the Quran or the hadiths. These outrageous
fatwas by single muftis were not supported by others either. I fail to see why
such examples are even cited since they prove nothing. Do we cite outrageous judgments
to discredit the entire judicial system or even the frequent atrocities to
discredit the police or the rampant corruption to discredit democracy?
Most of the hadiths expound on the
Quran to promote good behavior. Rather than attack all hadiths, specific
hadiths that are antithetical to the message of the Quran should be highlighted
and excised using criteria that is transparent. For example, `fighting until
there is no more disbelief in the world’. This flies in the face of the Prophet’s
own behavior, the clear message of the Quran and the clear conduct of the early
Muslims. The fighting was only against those `who fight you, or those who have
driven you out of your homes, or against those who oppress others’. It is therefore
clearly a later date addition which gave birth to political Islam. This is
clearly rejected by most Muslims. It is easier to deal with specific hadiths
and declare such hadiths as false. A person who follows them therefore follows
Observer sb, . . .
In any case, wouldn't prayers in one's own home be better than running to the mosque five times a day which would be disruptive to family life or to office work. Instead of prayers being obligatory, shouldn't all prayers be voluntary, freely offered from one's heart. After all we pray to make us feel good in ourselves, not to please God who is too great to want our praise or to see us bow to Him. Don't you think we are too rules-driven?
· How much is the Jizyah that the People of the Book have to pay?
There is no such thing as jizya payments by the People of the Book in the Quran. The word jizya is mentioned in the Quran but it refers war reparations. The Geneva Convention on the conduct of war has details on war reparations. Germany paid jizya or war reparations after the 1st and 2nd World Wars. Iraq also paid jizya or war reparations ater the Gulf War. There is no such thing as a permanent jizya tax on non Muslims. There is no such thing in the Quran.
· Is it permissible for a man to look at a naked man?
I cannot answer your personal fantasies and fetishes. But just curious, before they became Sunnah wal Jamaah, did your ancestors find it worthwhile to look at naked men?
· Can I pray Salaah naked?
· Hadn't the Quran been reached to us from the same sources we received our authentic hadith?
No this is a fake teaching. The hadith came hundreds of years after the Prophet. There is no evidence that Bukhari even wrote the Sahih Bukhari. We dont know who was Zayd bin Thabit (the sahaba who is supposed to have collected the Quran). The reports are contradictory. The shiahs do not accept the sunni hadith and vice versa. So we dont know. What we know is that there are completed copies of the Quran in museums in Cairo, Istanbul, Baghdad etc that go back 1000 years or more. There is no change to the Quran script. The Quran was written by the prophet himself.
Surah 25:5 They also said, "Tales from the past that he has written down; they were dictated to him day and night."
"Waqaloo asateeru al-awwaleena iktatabaha fahiya tumla alayhi bukratan wa'aseelan"
The disbelievers say that the rasul wrote down the Quran. However they refused to believe what he was writing down. They said he was writing down fairy tales.
So the Quran was writen down by the rasul.
· Why would Allah preserve the Quran and not preserve the meaning?
This is a fairy tale. No mullah can tell you which verse of the Quran CANNOT be understood at all without the hadith. Please ask the mullah nearst to you. Can you show us one verse in the Quran that cannot be understood without a hadith? Also please refer Sahih Bukhari Volume 6 Tafseer Quran. There are 28 surahs of the Quran where Sahih Bukhari book says 'There are no hadith to explain the verses here'. So there are not enough hadith to explain the Quran.
Syed Akbar Ali
There is absolutely no such thing as prayer in the Quran. Salat does not mean prayer. Please ask your nearest mullah. The Quran has absolutely no mention about the adhaan or call to prayer. The Quran has no mention about how many rakaat in Fajar, Zuhur, Asr prayer etc. The mullah will confirm this for you. You cannot find even one verse in the Quran where Allah says 'Pray Salat to me'. None whatsoever.
There is only "fasolli lirabbika" which means 'uphold your salat / obligations FOR Allah'. It does not say 'salat TO Allah'.
So there is no such thing as salat as prayer in the Quran. This is 100% truth from the Quran. Namaz can only be performed refering to non Quranic hadith.
· How do you know how much Zakaah to pay using the Quran alone?
You dont PAY zakat. Zakat means to purify. This is the literal meaning of zakah not only in the Quran but in the arabic language. Please confirm this with your nearest mullah. There is no such thing as 2 1/2 % zakat in the Quran.
The Quran asks us to pay sadaqah and nafkah which are both detailed in the Quran. How much charity to give? From your surplus, says the Quran. You decide. 2 1/2 % cannot even buy one chapatti for the poor. Who gets charity? Parents, family, near of kin, orphans, transients are all mentioned in the Quran. When? Anytime. Give openly or give secretly. There is no such thing as obligatory zakat in the Quran.
Like the "Asalamu Alaikum" that is a christian and jewish teaching the obligatory zakat is also a christian teaching. It is not from the Rasul and Allah.
The verses that say “bow down with those who bow down” do
not even remotely have the context of the battlefield.
(2:43) And be
steadfast in prayer; practise regular charity; and bow down your heads with
those who bow down (in worship).
(3:43) "O Mary!
worship Thy Lord devoutly: Prostrate thyself, and bow down (in prayer) with
those who bow down."
Besides, there are verses relating to Friday and the prayer is clearly meant to be in congregation.
Regarding the requirement of adherence to prayer and their
Guard strictly your (habit of) prayers, especially the Middle Prayer; and stand
before Allah in a devout (frame of mind).
And establish regular prayers at the two ends of the day and at the approaches
of the night: For those things, that are good remove those that are evil: Be
that the word of remembrance to those who remember (their Lord):
Establish regular prayers - at the sun´s decline till the darkness of the
night, and the morning prayer and reading: for the prayer and reading in the
morning carry their testimony.
(give) glory to Allah, when ye reach eventide and when ye rise in the morning;
to Him be praise, in the heavens and on earth; and in the late afternoon and
when the day begins to decline.
The Tahajud prayer is non-obligatory but the best time for
prayer. Although the Quran recognizes that during the day we are preoccupied with
ordinary duties, and therefore distracted, the times for obligatory prayers are
during these hours also (zuhar, asr and perhaps maghrib). Prayer is to remind
us even while we are preoccupied with ordinary duties that the goal of all our endeavors
is to gain the approval of Allah. This should make us better perform our ordinary
duties with diligence and honesty.
(73:6) Truly the rising by night is most potent for
governing (the soul), and most suitable for (framing) the Word (of Prayer and
Praise). (7) True, there is for thee by day prolonged occupation with ordinary
Regarding the modern day constraints that you speak of, the
Quran speaks of those who are constrained but does not exempt them from regular
knoweth that there may be (some) among you in ill-health; others travelling
through the land, seeking of Allah´s bounty; yet others fighting in Allah´s
Cause, read ye, therefore, as much of the Qur´an as may be easy (for you); and
establish regular Prayer and give regular Charity; and loan to Allah a
Beautiful Loan. And whatever good ye send forth for your souls ye shall find it
in Allah´s Presence,- yea, better and greater, in Reward and seek ye the Grace
of Allah: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
It would appear that the absence of prayer and charity will
lead a person to hell fire.
(74:41) And (ask) of the Sinners:
"What led you into Hell Fire?"
will say: "We were not of those who prayed;
"Nor were we of those who fed the indigent;
"But we used to talk vanities with vain talkers;
"And we used to deny the Day of Judgment,
"Until there came to us (the Hour) that is certain."
will no intercession of (any) intercessors profit them.
what is the matter with them that they turn away from admonition?-
(50) As if
they were affrighted asses,
Fleeing from a lion!
Forsooth, each one of them wants to be given scrolls (of revelation) spread
(53) By no
means! But they fear not the Hereafter,
this surely is an admonition:
any who will, keep it in remembrance!
none will keep it in remembrance except as Allah wills: He is the Lord of
Righteousness, and the Lord of Forgiveness.
Requirement for assuredly inheriting Paradise
is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah;(3)
Who believe in the Unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We
have provided for them;(4) And who believe in the Revelation sent to thee, and
sent before thy time, and (in their hearts) have the assurance of the
Hereafter.(5) They are on (true) guidance, from their Lord, and it is these who
believers must (eventually) win through,-(2) Those who humble themselves in
their prayers;(3) Who avoid vain talk;(4) Who are active in deeds of charity;(5&6)
Who abstain from illicit sex (8) Those who faithfully observe their trusts and
their covenants;(9) And who (strictly) guard their prayers;-(10) These will be
the heirs,(11) Who will inherit Paradise: they will dwell therein (for ever).
Truly man was created very impatient;-(20) Fretful when evil touches him;(21)
And niggardly when good reaches him;-(22) Not so those devoted to Prayer;-(23)
Those who remain steadfast to their prayer; (24) And those in whose wealth is a
recognised right.(25) For the (needy) who asks and him who is prevented (for
some reason from asking);(26) And those who hold to the truth of the Day of
Judgment;(27) And those who fear the displeasure of their Lord,-(28) For their
Lord´s displeasure is the opposite of Peace and Tranquillity;-(29) And those
who guard their chastity,(30) Except with their wives and the (captives) whom their
right hands possess,- for (then) they are not to be blamed,(31) But those who
trespass beyond this are transgressors;-(32) And those who respect their trusts
and covenants;(33) And those who stand firm in their testimonies;(34) And those
who guard (the sacredness) of their worship;-(35) Such will be the honoured
ones in the Gardens (of Bliss).
What does Prayer achieve among other things?
Recite what is sent of the Book by inspiration to thee, and establish regular
Prayer: for Prayer restrains from shameful and unjust deeds; and remembrance of
Allah is the greatest (thing in life) without doubt. And Allah knows the
(deeds) that ye do.
What are the characteristics of a person who performs regular
men whom neither traffic nor merchandise can divert from the Remembrance of
Allah, nor from regular Prayer, nor from the practice of regular Charity: Their
(only) fear is for the Day when hearts and eyes will be transformed (in a world
seek (Allah´s) help with patient perseverance and prayer: It is indeed hard,
except to those who bring a lowly spirit,-
Under what circumstances can we neglect regular prayer? None!
When ye travel through the earth, there is no blame on you if ye shorten your
prayers, for fear the Unbelievers May attack you: For the Unbelievers are unto
you open enemies.
ye fear (an enemy), pray on foot, or riding, (as may be most convenient), but
when ye are in security, celebrate Allah´s praises in the manner He has taught
you, which ye knew not (before).
When thou (O Messenger) art with them, and standest to lead them in prayer, Let
one party of them stand up (in prayer) with thee, Taking their arms with them:
When they finish their prostrations, let them Take their position in the rear.
And let the other party come up which hath not yet prayed - and let them pray
with thee, Taking all precaution, and bearing arms: the Unbelievers wish, if ye
were negligent of your arms and your baggage, to assault you in a single rush.
But there is no blame on you if ye put away your arms because of the
inconvenience of rain or because ye are ill; but take (every) precaution for
yourselves. For the Unbelievers Allah hath prepared a humiliating punishment.
When ye pass (Congregational) prayers, celebrate Allah´s praises, standing,
sitting down, or lying down on your sides; but when ye are free from danger,
set up Regular Prayers: For such prayers are enjoined on believers at stated
What will happen to the community of Muslims if they abandon
after them there followed a posterity who missed prayers and followed after
lusts soon, then, will they face Destruction,-
Some Questions to Ask the Quran Only People
· How do you know how to pray using the Quran alone?
· Why would Allah preserve the Quran and not preserve the meaning?
First of all there is no such thing as Quran only people. Allah swt has named us Muslims. The Quran says 'huwa samma kumu muslimeen' which means 'He has named you Muslims'.
Allah does not recognise shiah, sunnah wal jamaah, tablighi, soofy, hanafi, shafiee, maliki etc. Either you are a Muslim or you are not. The people who believe and uphold Allah's revelations ie the Quran should be Muslims. Insya Allah.
I will answer the other questions soon.
the writer, Mr Shahin,
Khalid al-Khazraji, Muhammad Ghoniem & M S M Saifullah
wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu:
the years, Christian missionaries have solidified their reputation for
embracing zealous new recruits. One fresh addition to this delegation of holy
servicemen is the neophyte, Andrew Vargo. More often than not, the missionaries
have overlooked the academic backgrounds of these fresh recruits, apparently
intoxicated by their impassioned hatred for Islam. Mr. Vargo has recently tried
his hand as a student of comparative religion, introducing some of the most
fantastic ideas yet to the discourse. Among these ideas is a rather boastful
claim concerning the collection of ahadith by the great Muslim scholar, Imam
al-Bukhari (d. 256 AH). The highlight of Vargo's claim lies in the following:
fact, it is difficult, in spite of the Muslim "science" of Hadith to
know which traditions are strong or weak! For example, Bukhari collected over
600,000 reports, but kept only 7,397 as true!
is one of the most popular claims concerning the vast collection of ahadith of
al-Bukhari in the Christian missionary literature and comes with fanciful
explanations. For example, Anis Shorrosh, a well-known Arab missionary, says:
Bukhari, collected twenty thousand of them, of which he rejected ten thousand,
accounting them untrue. Of the remaining ten thousand he accepted only 7,275,
declaring the rest to be untrustworthy. Abu Da'ud accepted as authentic only
4,800 rules out 50,000.
we find Norman Geisler and Abdul Saleeb claiming that:
considered to be the most reliable collector, admitted that of the 300,000
hadith he collected, he considered only 100,000 might be true. He then narrowed
this number down to 7,275, many of which are repetitions so that the total
number is in fact near 3,000. That means that even he admitted there were
errors in over 295,000 of them!
a similar statement is repeated by Geisler in his Baker Encyclopedia Of
Christian Apologetics to cast doubts on the miracles performed by the Prophet
Muhammad. Abdiyah Akbar Abdul-Haqq, on the other hand, labels what
al-Bukhari did not include in his collection as "apocryphal".
to the abundance of the apocryphal traditions, we learn that the famous
authority al-Bukhari choose only 7,000 out of a host of 600,000 traditions that
were current in his on time.
statements were made by John Ankerberg and John Weldon, who quoted a
surprising is the case of Rand Corporation, who have published an interesting
report on Islam entitled "Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and
Strategies". The report has two fold agenda: firstly, to try to create a
version of Islam that suits the post-9/11 Western agenda and secondly
encouraging creation of divisions in the Muslim society at home and abroad. The
Rand Report's recipe to achieve this aim is to encourage and promote the
so-called modernist Muslims and play one section of the society against another
to split the Muslim society. A small example of it can be seen when the report
uses the material from the hadith-rejectors (not surprisingly!) to claim
if that were not the case, objectively speaking, there is little doubt that
hadith is at best a dubious, flawed instrument. Consider that Al-Bukhari is the
compiler of what is generally considered to be the most authoritative and
reliable collections of hadith. He collected 600,000 hadith, examined them for
their authenticity, eliminated all but 7,600 of them, deleted some for
redundancy, and was left with a collection of about 4,000.
we shall see, feisty statements such as the above only prove to be
self-defeating in the end. This article intends to examine missionaries' thesis
in light of the scholarship of Imam al-Bukhari, and thereby ascertain the
actual worth of their claim.
appreciate the broader perspective, we will also include a discussion of Imam
Muslim's ahadith collection, insha'allah.
Imam Bukhari & The Nature Of His Collection
Shorrosh, Geisler, Abdul Saleeb, Abdul-Haqq and Benard have practically begged
the question for us already - where exactly did Imam al-Bukhari mention that
among the 600,000 ahadith in his collection, only 7,397 are to be accepted as
'true'? They maintains the missionary tradition of conveniently omitting any
references that would not support their thesis; the mark of a true
academicians, indeed! Once again, it is left to the Muslims to enlighten the
ill-informed missionaries on this matter.
al-Bukhari's actual words have been reproduced below:
The two sahih collections did not gather the totality of the authentic ahadith
as proved by al-Bukhari's testimony: "I have not included in my book
al-Jami` but what is authentic, and I left out among the authentic for fear of
[excessive] length.(Footnote 2)"
[al-Bukhari] meant that he did not mention all the turuq [parallel chains of
transmission] for each and every hadith.
reiterate this in elementary English, Imam al-Bukhari selected only a few
authentic ahadith from his vast collection. However, he left out certain
traditions, despite their authenticity, simply to avoid excessive length and
repetition in his Al-Jami` (a discussion about which is given below). If
anything, the privilege to make such a gesture is highly complimentary to the
authenticity of the Islamic traditions. In another tradition, Imam al-Bukhari is
also reported to have said:
said, I heard as-Sa`dani say, I heard some of our companions say, Muhammad Ibn
Isma`il said: I selected/published [the content of] this book - meaning the
Sahih book - from about 600,000 hadiths/reports. Abu Sa`d al-Malini informed us
that `Abdullah Ibn `Udayy informed us: I heard al-Hasan Ibn al-Husayn
al-Bukhari say: "I have not included in my book al-Jami` but what is
authentic, and I left out among the authentic what I could not get hold
above quotation reflects Imam al-Bukhari's gallant honesty to admit that he was
not able to collect each and every authentic tradition that existed in his day.
Rather, his Al-Jami` is only a partial collection of authentic traditions,
despite its massive volume. Furthermore, it should be clarified for the
missionaries that the notion of a partial collection of authentic material is
quite different from the notion of a partially authentic collection of
material. However, it is not our aim to offer a course on propositional reasoning.
Thus, we leave the point with the hope that they will eventually comprehend
this piece of preschool logic.
Mustafa al-Azami, who offered a devastating critique of Joseph Schacht's work,
again clarifies the misunderstanding of many orientalists on this issue:
did not claim that what he left out were the spurious, nor that there were no
authentic traditions outside his collection. On the contrary he said, "I
only included in my book al-Jami` those that were authentic, and I left out
many more authentic traditions than this to avoid unnecessary length." He
had no intention of collecting all the authentic traditions. He only wanted to
compile a manual of hadith, according to the wishes of his Shaikh Ishaq b.
Rahwaih, and his function is quite clear from the title of his book al-Jami`
al-Musnad al-Sahih al-Mukhtasar min umur Rasul Allah wa Sunanhi wa ayyamih. The
word al-Mukhtasar, 'epitome', itself explains that al-Bukhari did not make any
attempt at a comprehensive collection.
the missionaries seem to be living under the delusion that the 600,000 ahadith
of Imam al-Bukhari's collection somehow means 600,000 separate narrations or
bodies of text. His sloppy study of this issue becomes clear when one learns
that a hadith is comprised of both a text (matn) and a chain of transmission
(isnad). In the science of hadith, the same text with ten chains of
transmission is regarded not as one hadith but rather as ten hadiths, despite
the fact that the text attached to each chain is the same in every case.
Mustafa al-Azami adds:
it is clear that when traditionalists give enormous numbers for the traditions,
they mean channels and sources of their transmission, and do not mean real
numbers of hadith.
Abbott, a prominent orientalist who conducted an extensive study on hadith
literature, observed that the phenomenal growth of the corpus of this
literature is not due to growth in content but due to progressive increase in
the parallel and multiple chains of transmission, i.e., isnads:
the traditions of Muhammad as transmitted by his Companions and their
Successors were, as a rule, scrupulously scrutinised at each step of the
transmission, and that the so called phenomenal growth of Tradition in the
second and third centuries of Islam was not primarily growth of content, so far
as the hadith of Muhammad and the hadith of the Companions are concerned, but
represents largely the progressive increase in parallel and multiple chains of
a highly simplified example of one Companion narrating a single hadith from the
Prophet to two students: these students themselves teaching that narration
again to two pupils each and so on until we reach the time of al-Bukhari and
his contemporaries. We will find that in al-Bukhari's generation at least 16
individuals will be hearing the hadith from their respective teachers. Because
each individual chain of transmission counts as a separate hadith, what started
out as a single narration transmitted by one Companion only, has evolved within
a short period of time to 16 ahadith; an increase of 1600%. The true nature of
affairs, however, being far greater, with a far greater number of Companions
transmitting a far greater number of narrations to a far greater number of
students. This then is the form in which proliferation took place, the
dispersion of narrators and chains of transmission. Using the mathematical
application of geometric progression, Nabia Abbott concludes:
using geometric progression, we find that one to two thousand Companions and
senior Successors transmitting two to five traditions each would bring us well
within the range of the total number of traditions credited to the exhaustive
collections of the third century. Once it is realised that the isnad did,
indeed, initiate a chain reaction that resulted in an explosive increase in the
number of traditions, the huge numbers that are credited to Ibn Hanbal, Muslim
and Bukhari seem not so fantastic after all.
implications of explosive increase in of the isnad is dealt with here.
Imam Muslim & The Nature Of His Collection
Muslim along the similar lines to that of Imam al-Bukhari , is reported to have
translation of which is:
Imam Muslim said: "I have not included in my present book any thing but
with proof [regarding authenticity] , and I have not left out anything but with
proof". He also said: I did not include everything that I judge
authentic/Sahih, I only included what received a unanimous agreement, i.e.,
what fulfilled all the criteria of authenticity agreed upon [by the scholars].
Muslim has presented [his collection] to the scholars of his time, like Imam
Abu Zar`ah, and retained what was void of defect, and left out what had some
the above quotation, it is clear that Imam Muslim's collection is also a
partial collection of authentic material and not a partially authentic
collection of material. He followed a certain set of criteria that demanded a
proof for the inclusion of each and every hadith in his collection.
al-Bukhari's collection of ahadith was maintained to be authentic on account of
his authority, and it has been maintained as authentic ever since. The
missionaries' assertion, that Imam al-Bukhari regarded almost 99% of his own
collection as spurious, is among the most rash and foolhardy statements ever
dared by Christian missionaries. On the contrary, the 7,397 refers to the
number of hadiths that Imam al-Bukhari chose to include in his Al-Jami` and
left out many authentic narrations from his vast collection for the fear of
according to the Vargo:
fact, it is difficult, in spite of the Muslim "science" of Hadith to
know which traditions are strong or weak!
should wonder whether the neophyte is as quick to demonstrate the same puerile
enthusiasm over the question of his own religious texts. Regardless, we will
quote the famous trial of Imam al-Bukhari to show how maqlub (changed,
reversed) ahadith can be identified with ease by a scholar of hadith:
famous trial of al-Bukhari by the scholars of Baghdad provides a good example
of a Maqlub isnad. The traditionists, in order to test their visitor,
al-Bukhari, appointed ten men, each with ten ahadith. Now, each hadith (text)
of these ten people was prefixed with the isnad of another. Imam al-Bukhari
listened to each of the ten men as they narrated their ahadith and denied the
correctness of every hadith. When they had finished narrating these ahadith, he
addressed each person in turn and recounted to him each of his ahadith with its
correct isnad. This trial earned him great honour among the scholars of
it is worth citing a significant trend in modern Western scholarship of the
Prophetic traditions of Islam. For the past several decades, criticism of these
traditions has been the Orientalist's whipping post, an opportunity to
invalidate the traditions of Islam, which culminated in the work of Joseph
Schacht, mentioned earlier. However, this position has practically been
reversed in recent times, with the advent of academic honesty on the part of
Western scholars. Professor John Esposito of Georgetown University has made the
following counter-criticism of Schacht's traditional position:
Schacht's conclusion regarding the many traditions he did examine does not
warrant its automatic extension to all the traditions. To consider all
Prophetic traditions apocryphal until proven otherwise is to reverse the burden
of proof. Moreover, even where differences of opinion exist regarding the
authenticity of the chain of narrators, they need not detract from the
authenticity of a tradition's content and common acceptance of the importance
of tradition literature as a record of the early history and development of
Islamic belief and practice.
position of Esposito perhaps reflects the growing attitude among Western
educational institutions that entertain any study of Islam and its traditions.
This is simply evidenced by the fact that Professor Esposito has become one of
the reigning authorities on Islam in the West, whose textbooks are considered
university standards for courses on Islam.
the missionaries' abuse of hadiths to denigrate the Prophet(P) of Islam, it
would be too generous to assume that Vargo, Shorrosh, Geisler and Abdul Saleeb
"misunderstood" the nature of the collection of Imam al-Bukhari. As
for the Rand Corporation's report, their "objectivity" lies in the
unverified use of source material. An honest misunderstanding entails at least
some understanding of the issue, which doesn't even seem to be their case.
Perhaps the Christian missionaries might consider beginning a genuine study of
the science of hadith before they embarrasses themselves further.
would like to thank Abu Hudhayfah for providing us necessary help and allowing
us to use his material.
Allah knows best!
Dr. A. A. Shorrosh, Islam Revealed: A Christian Arab's View Of Islam, 1988,
Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville, p. 22.
N. L. Geisler & A. Saleeb, Answering Islam: The Crescent In The Light Of
The Cross, 1993, Baker Books: Grand Rapids (MI), p. 165.
"Muhammad, Alleged Miracles Of", in N. L. Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia
Of Christian Apologetics, 2002, Baker Books: Grand Rapids (MI), p. 512.
A. A. Abdul-Haqq, Sharing Your Faith With A Muslim, 1980, Bethany House
Publications: Minneapolis, p. 45.
J. Ankerberg & J. Weldon, Fast Facts On Islam, 2001, Harvest House
Publishers: Eugene (OR), pp. 50-51.
C. Benard, "Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and
Strategies", 2003, Rand Corporation, p. 67.
Muhammad Ajaj al-Khatib, Al-Mukhtasar al-Wajiz fi `Ulum al-Hadith, 1991,
Mu'assasat al-Risalah, p. 135.
Abi Bakr Ahmad Ibn `Ali al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Tarikh Baghdad Aw Madinah
as-Salam, 1931 (1349 AH), Volume II, Maktabat al-Khanji, Cairo &
Al-Maktabah al-`Arabiyyah, Baghdad and Matba'at as-S'adah near the State
Department, Cairo, pp. 8-9.
M. M. al-Azami, Studies In Early Hadith Literature, 1992, American Trust
Publications: Indianapolis (USA), pp. 305-306.
ibid., p. 306.
N. Abbott, Studies In Arabic Literary Papyri, Volume II [Qur'anic Commentary
& Tradition], 1967, University Of Chicago Press: Chicago (USA), p. 2.
ibid., p. 72.
Al-Imam Muhyee ad-Din Abi Zakariyya Yahya bin Sharaf al-Nawawi, Sahih Muslim Bi
Sharh al-Imam al-Nawawi, Volume I, 1994/1414, Dar al-Khair, p. 1.
A hadith is known as maqlub (changed, reversed) when its isnad is grafted to a
different text or vice versa, or if a reporter happens to reverse the order of
a sentence in the text.
S. Hasan, An Introduction To The Science Of Hadith, 1995, Darussalam
Publishers: Riyadh (Saudi Arabia) available online, quote taken from here.
J. Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path, 1998, Oxford University Press, p. 81.
What is meant by "ghusl after intercourse""? You have mentioned this in one of your posts.
also helpful for the writer, Mr Shahin
By M S
M Saifullah & Imtiaz Damiel
frequently claimed by the Christian missionaries that there are no hadith
collections from the first century of hijra. According to them the first hadith
collections were written around 250 years after hijra.
will show the evidence of existence of hadith collections from first century of
Examples Of First Century Hadith Collections
Sahifa Of Hammam bin Munabbih: This is perhaps one of the earliest known hadith
collections. Hammam bin Munabbih was a student of Abu Hurrairah and well-known
among the scholars of the hadith to be trustworthy. According to the book
Arabic Literature To The End of Ummayyad Periodt:
example is the Sahifah of Hammam bin Munabbih, (d. 110/719), a Yemenite
follower and a disciple of companion Abu Hurrayrah, (d. 58/677), from whom
Hammam wrote this Sahifah, which comprises 138 hadith and is believed to have
been written around the mid-first AH/seventh century.
author went on to say:
significant that Hammam introduces his text with the words: "Abu Hurrayrah
told us in the course of what he related from the Prophet", thus giving
the source of his information in the manner which became known as
"sanad" or "isnad", i.e., the teacher of chain of teachers
through whom an author reaches the Prophet, a practice invariably and
systematically followed in Hadith compilations.
see that of the 138 narrations in the Sahifa, 98 of them are faithfully
witnessed in the later collections of al-Bukhari and Muslim, both through
narrations of Abu Hurrairah and witnessing narrations from other Companions.
also see that all but two of the narrations are found in one section of the
Musnad of Imam Ahmad, again witnessing the preservation of hadith and that
earlier works were faithfully rendered in later documents.
the first century Sahifa of Hammam bin Munabbih as a "control group"
Marston Speight compared it (i.e., the Sahifa) with about the 1500 variant
readings of the same ahadith found in the collections of Ibn Hanbal (Musnad),
al-Bukhari (Sahih) and Muslim (Sahih); the last three collections date from
3rd/9th century. Speight says:
the texts in Hammam and those recorded in Ibn Hanbal, Bukhari and Muslim with
the same isnad show almost complete identity, except for a few omissions and
interpolations which do not affect the sense of the reports. On the other hand,
the same ahadith as told by other transmitters in the three collections studied
show a rich variety of wording, again without changing the meaning of the
he comments about the reports of Hammam found in the later compilations of Ibn
Hanbal, al-Bukhari and Muslim by saying that:
have found practically no sign of careless or deceptive practices in the
variant texts common to the Sahifa of Hammam bin Munabbih.
other words, it shows the meticuluous nature of hadith transmission as well as
high moral and upright characters of the transmitters as well as collectors of
the hadith; a fact that Islamic traditions had always asserted and now the
western scholarship endorses it.
Musannaf of `Abd al-Razzaq al-San`ani: An article by Harald Motzki appeared
in the Journal of Near Eastern Studies that mentioned about the the Musannaf of
`Abd al-Razzaq al-San`ani as a source of authentic ahadith of the first century
AH. Since the article is quite huge (21 pages), we will deal with only the
conclusions of the author.
studying the Musannaf of `Abd al-Razzaq, I came to the conclusion that the
theory championed by Goldziher, Schacht, and in their footsteps, many others -
myself included - which in general, reject hadith literature as a historically
reliable sources for the first century AH, deprives the historical study of
early Islam of an important and a useful type of source.
important hadith collections from second century of hijra are the following:
Muwatta' of Malik bin Anas: Malik bin Anas (d. 179/795) was the founder of
Maliki school of jurisprudence. The Muwatta' of Malik was compiled in
mid-second century AH. It is not a corpus of hadith in a true sense but a
collection of practices of people of Madinah.
of Ibn Jurayj (d. 150 AH)
of Ma`mar bin Rashid (d. 153 AH)
detailed report on hadith can be seen at `Abdur Rahim Green's Debate Material.
F. L. Beeston, T. M. Johnstone, R. B. Serjeant and G. R. Smith (Ed.), Arabic
Literature To The End of Ummayyad Period, 1983, Cambridge University Press, p.
More information can be obtained from the book Sahifa Hammam bin Munabbih: The
Earliest Extant Work On The Hadith, 1979, M. Hamidullah, Centre Cultural
M. Speight, "A Look At Variant Readings In The Hadith", Der Islam,
2000, Band 77, Heft 1, p. 170.
ibid., p. 175.
`Abd al-Razzaq b. Hammam al-San`ani (ed. Habib al-Rahman al-A`zami),
Al-Musannaf, 1970-72, 11 Volumes, Beirut.
Motzki, "The Musannaf Of `Abd al-Razzaq Al-San`ani As A Source of
Authentic Ahadith of The First Century A.H.", Journal Of Near Eastern
Studies, 1991, Volume 50, p. 21.
Beeston et al., Arabic Literature To The End of Ummayyad Period, op.cit, pp.
Dear Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia Saheb, Maybe my mind is
not working well this Ramazan but I do not see anything wrong in what you quote
here. Indeed, he is making good points:
Naseer Saheb (aka Observer) goes out
and opines as follows:
- I don't even claim to know what is in the hadiths of Bukhari etc . I
therefore deal with only one hadith at a time based on the specifics and avoid
No. 2 –
Without knowledge of hadiths and without any fondness for the hadiths, you can
see how I can deal with any hadith based on the specifics. I can very
rationally either accept or reject any hadith without a problem.
No. 3 -
A Muslim is free to pick and choose or discard using the Quran as furqan and
his own good sense. There is no sin in discarding what he finds unacceptable
based on criteria that he can defend.
As for you request that I ask him not
to ignore your questions and reply to them, as I understand, you must realise
that it is entirely a reader's choice whether or not to entertain any one's
queries. Plus you know how arrogant Naseer Saheb is. In fact I have never known
a knowledgeable person also being arrogant to this degree. Indeed, I have only
known genuine scholars who are humble. In my mind, knowledge and humility go
This is also my first experience of
seeing genuine scholarship, original ideas and arrogance go together.
As you know, like everybody else, he considers me too a liar, cheat, fraud, and
all that. You get the picture. So you should not expect my appeal or
recommendation to make any difference to Naseer Saheb's decision to ignore your
However, do keep posting your
questions and observations. I always learn from them, and I imagine, some other
readers do so too.
of Quranic verses that Could Be Helpful
(this shows that Allah taught the Muslims how to pray),
3:31; 3:32; 3:132, 3:31-32
(messengers are sent to teach the scripture and al hikma could be the Sunna as
(shows that Allah and Muhammad are separate to obey)
4:64; 4:69; 4:80
God sent the wisdom
(the Prophet has to deliver the message clearly, what is the point if he just
shows it to them)
(the Prophet will make things halal and haram for the people, why if they can
just read the Quran?)
(messenger should make Quran clear)
16:64, these verses show that Muhammad was sent to explain the Quran. It
doesn’t just mean to proclaim. To proclaim is to ‘baligh’ like in 5:67.
(the Prophet has to deliver the message clearly, what is the point if he just
shows it to them)
(why keep obeying the Prophet? What else does the Prophet have to say for us to
obey him? Why can’t God just say to obey him?)
(he is an example for us to follow, eg. how to pray etc.)
(if Allah OR Muhammad made an order it should be obeyed. Clear distinction)
(why not just say obey Allah, isn’t that enough?)
(messengers are sent to teach the scripture as well)
(the Prophet has to deliver the message clearly, what is the point if he just
shows it to them)
Mr. Sultan shaheen, Mr yunus, Mr Ghulam Mohiyuddin, Mr observer
is very unfortunate that the Muslim Ummah has split. You have one side that
says that the hadith are on the same exact level of the Quran and you have
people who say that you shouldn't follow any hadith at all! It is indeed very
sad and illogical for someone to reject the hadith of the Glorious Prophet. I
am not intending to write a lengthy article on the subject. I have done
extensive research throughout the internet and visited several websites to
gather the best arguments against the Quran Only Muslims and combined them
together. What I am simply presenting
are the links to those sites and some little additional information from my
self. This is for Muslims who are debating with the Quran Only sect. You would
find the information provided in this article to be very helpful and useful
might be some arguments that Quran Only Muslims give that you might not be able
to answer. However, if you have any trouble what so ever in dealing with them
then email me at firstname.lastname@example.org
Some Questions to Ask
the Quran Only People
How do you know how to pray using the Quran alone?
How do you know how much Zakaah to pay using the
Hadn't the Quran been reached to us from the same
sources we received our authentic hadith?
Why would Allah preserve the Quran and not
preserve the meaning?
How much is the Jizyah that the People of the Book
have to pay?
Is it permissible for a man to look at a naked
Can I pray Salaah naked?
do we know the order of the alcohol revelations? Maybe the first of the Quranic
revelations said it was haram and then the later ones came saying that is was
okay except during prayer times. How do you know the order of its revelations
by using the Quran alone?
says in the Quran to shorten the prayer when you travel. How long do you have
to travel? How short to cut the prayer?
Surah 66:3, the Prophet told his wives that he knew because Allah had informed
him about it. Show me a Quranic verse where Allah had informed the Prophet
about it. You cannot. Does this not prove that there are revelations to Prophet
Muhammad besides the Quran?
2:173 shows that Allah (swt) gave an order for the Muslims to change their
Qibla from (Bayt Al Maqdis in Jerusalem) to the Kabah in Mecca. However, there
is no Quranic verse that shows the first order that Allah gave to make the
Qibla towards Jerusalem. Does this not prove that there are revelations to
Prophet Muhammad besides the Quran?
Quran is passed on to us by Mutawattir narrations. Mutawattir narrations are
narrations by so many people that it is just impossible for all of them to get
together and plot and lie. However, we have so many Mutawattir hadith List of
Mutawatir hadith http://hadith.al-islam.com/bayan/Index.asp?Lang=ENG&Type=3
that teach things that are not in the Quran. How can you reject their
authenticity with no objective evidence?
Mr. Sultan Shaheeen, Muhammad yunus, Observer, Ghulam Mohiyuddin,
anyone disobeys Allah and His Messenger he is indeed on a clearly wrong
path." [Al-Ahzab, 33:36]
that obeys Allah and His Messenger has already attained the great
victory." [Al-Ahzab, 33:71].
the past fourteen centuries Qur'an and Sunnah have been the twin undisputed
sources of Guidance for Muslims. In every generation, the Muslims devoted the
best of their minds and talents to their study. They learned both the words and
meanings of the Qur'an through the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and
made an unprecedented effort in preserving them for the next generation. The
result: The development of the marvelous -- and unparalleled -- science of
hadith, one of the brightest aspects of Muslim history.
does it mean to believe in a Prophet except to pledge to follow him? And so the
teachings of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, have always guided
this Ummah. No body, in his right mind, could or did question this practice.
Then something happened. During the colonial period, when most of the Muslim
world came under the subjugation of the West, some "scholars" arose
in places like Egypt (Taha Hussein), India (Abdullah Chakralawi and Ghulam
Ahmed Pervaiz), and Turkey (Zia Gogelup), who began questioning the
authenticity and relevance of hadith. It was not that some genius had found
flaws in the hadith study that had eluded the entire ummah for thirteen
centuries. It was simply that the pressures from the dominant Western
civilization to conform were too strong for them to withstand. They buckled. Prophetic
teachings and life example -- Hadith -- was the obstacle in this process and so
it became the target.
factor helped them. Today most Muslims, including the vast majority of the
western-educated Muslims, have meager knowledge of hadith, having spent no time
in studying even the fundamentals of this vast subject. How many know the
difference between Sahih and Hasan, or between Maudau and Dhaif? The
certification process used in hadith transmission? Names of any hadith book
produced in the first century of Hijrah, or the number of such books? A
majority probably would not be able to name even the six principal hadith books
(Sihah Sitta) or know anything about the history of their compilation.
Obviously such atmosphere provides a fertile ground for sowing suspicions and
call themselves as ahle-Qur'an or Quranists. This is misleading. For their
distinction is not in affirming the Qur'an, but in rejecting the Hadith. The
ideas of munkareen-e-hadith evolve into three mutually contradictory strains.
The first holds that the job of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was
only to deliver the Qur'an. We are to follow only the Qur'an and nothing else,
as were the Companions. Further, hadith is not needed to understand the Qur'an,
which is sufficient for providing guidance. The second group holds that the
Companions were required to follow the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam,
but we are not. The third holds that, in theory, we also have to follow the
hadith but we did not receive ahadith through authentic sources and therefore
we have to reject all ahadith collections!
contradictions are a hallmark of false ideologies. How can anyone hold the
first position yet profess belief in Qur'an while it says: "And We have
sent down unto You the Message so that you may explain clearly to men what is
sent for them." [An-Nahal, 16:44]. And this: "Allah did confer a
great favor on the Believers when He sent among them a Messenger from among
themselves, rehearsing unto them the Signs (Verses) of Allah, purifying them,
instructing them in Scripture, and teaching them Wisdom. While before that they
were in manifest error." [A'ale Imran 3:164].
can anyone hold the second position (limiting the Prophethood to 23 years) yet
profess belief in Qur'an, while it says: "We did not send you except as
Mercy for all creatures." [Al-Anbia, 21:107] And, "We have not sent
you except as a Messenger to all mankind, giving them glad tidings and warning
them against sin." [Saba, 34:28]
third position seems to have avoided these obvious pitfalls, yet in reality it
is no different. Consider statements 1, 4, and 7 in the summary of hadith
rejecters' claims. So hadith undermines Qur'an's exclusivity, yet would have
been followed blindly at the time of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa
sallam. Ahadith cannot be followed because they are not reliable, yet can be
followed for ritual prayers.
Salah And Hadith
we don't need a favor for hadith about salah (coming from the same books and
the same narrators who are declared as unreliable). We need an answer to this
question: If the Qur'an is the only authentic source of Guidance, why did it
never explain how to offer salah, although it repeatedly talks about its
importance, associating it with eternal success and failure? What would we
think of a communication that repeatedly emphasizes a certain act but never
explains how to perform it? There are only two possibilities. Either it is a
terrible omission (and in that case it cannot be from God) or another source
for the how-to information is provided and it is a terrible mistake for any
recipient to ignore that.
some hadith rejecters have realized the difficulty of their position on salah.
But they have made a claim that is even more ludicrous, namely that the Qur'an
gives details on how to offer salah. "A careful reading of the Koran
reveals that we are to get our Salaah from the Masjid-el Haraam [the continuous
practice at Mecca since the time of Abraham]," says one proponent,
"specifically the 'place of Abraham (moqaam e Ibraheem).'" Let us
leave aside all the practical questions about such a fluid answer. Whose Salah?
When? Are we to follow anyone and everyone we find praying at Muqame Ibrahim?
How are those offering salah there are to determine proper way of offering
Salah? How do you resolve their differences? In his enthusiasm in proposing
this innovative solution, this proponent even forgot that the Qur'an says the
following about the salah of mushrikeen at the Masjid-el Haraam: "Their
prayer at the House of Allah is nothing but whistling and clapping of hands.
(Its only answer can be), 'Taste the chastisement because you blasphemed.'"
[Al-Anfal 8:35] )
The Reliability of
accept one and reject the other source on the basis of reliability (statement
#2) also defies reason, unless we received the Qur'an directly from Allah. But
we have received both Qur'an and Hadith through the same channels. Same people
transmitted this as the Word of Allah, that as the word of the Prophet,
Salla-Allahu alayhi was sallam. Even the verse claiming that Qur'an will be
protected came to us through the same people. Through what logic can anyone
declare that the channels are reliable for Qur'an and unreliable for Hadith? On
the contrary the Quranic promise of protection must apply to Hadith as well for
there is no point in protecting the words but not the meanings of the Qur'an.
Protection of Qur'an
say that Allah promised to protect only Qur'an but not Islam (#6) is being as
ridiculous as one can get. Let's ignore the obvious question regarding the
point of this Heavenly act. The question is if Islam has been corrupted and its
true teachings have been lost, how can anyone claim to be its follower?
Moreover, Qur'an says "If anyone desires a religion other than Islam,
never will it be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks
of those who have lost" [A'al-e-Imran, 3:85]. How are we to follow the
religion acceptable to Allah if it was not to be protected?
Were Ahadith Written
Down for the First Time in the Third Century of Hijra?
above proves that ahadith must have been protected. Were they? The very
existence of a huge library of hadith -- the only one of its kind among the
religions of the world -- answers the question in the affirmative. To dismiss
all that as later day fabrication (#1A, #2) requires lots of guts -- and equal
parts ignorance. Were ahadith written down for the first time in the third
century of Hijra? Not at all. Actually hadith recording and collection started
at the time of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. Abd-Allah ibn Amr
ibn al-'As, Radi-Allahu unhu, sought and was given the permission to write
everything he heard from the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa Sallam, who said:
"By the One in Whose Hands is my life! Whatever proceeds from here
[pointing to his mouth] is the truth." He produced Sahifa Sadiqa, which
contained more than six thousand ahadith. Anas ibn Malik, Radi-Allahu unhu, who
spent ten years in Prophet's household, not only recorded the ahadith but also
presented them to the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and got
corrections. Abu Hurairah, Radi-Allahu unhu, had many volumes of his
collections and even produced smaller compilations for his students. Prominent
Hadith scholar Dr. Mustafa Azami has shown in his doctoral thesis that in the
first century of Hijra many hundred booklets of hadith were in circulation. By the
end of the second century, "by the most conservative estimate there were
course most of these books do not exist today. They were simply absorbed into
the encyclopedic collections that emerged in the third century. One manuscript
from the first century was discovered in this century and published by Dr.
Hamidullah. It is Sahifa Hammam ibn Munabbah, who was a disciple of Abu
Hurairah, Radi-Allahu unhu. It contains 138 ahadith. Muhaddithin knew that the
ahadith of this Sahifa had been absorbed into Musnad Ahmed and Muslim
collections, which have been published continuously since their third century
debut. After the discovery of the original manuscript it was naturally compared
with the ahadith in Muslim and Musnad Ahmed that were thought to have come from
that Sahifa. And what did they find? There was not an iota of difference
between the two. Similarly Mussanaf of Abd al-Razzaq is extant and has been
published. As has been Mu'ammar ibn Rashid's al-Jami. These recently discovered
original manuscripts bear out the Sihah Sitta. The recent appearance of these
original manuscripts should bring the most skeptical into the fold of
Saheeh and the
comparison of Saheeh with Gospels (#2), let's listen to Dr. Hamidullah.
"The compilation of the Gospels, their preservation and transmission from
one generation to the other, has not taken place in the way which governed the
books of Hadith... We do not know who wrote them, who translated them, and who
transmitted them. How were they transferred from the original Aramaic to Greek?
Did the scribes make arrangements for a faithful reproduction of the original?
The four Gospels are mentioned, for the first time, three hundred years after
Christ. Should we rely on such an unauthentic book in preference to that of
Bukhari who prefaces every statement of two lines with three to nine
Alawsat asked many Sheikhs of AL-Azhar whether there are proofs from the holy
Quran that Sunna is a revelation from God (and since it should be considered as
obligatory as the holy Quran)? Alsharq Alawsat asked as well whether these
Quranists are really Muslims or not, and whether there are justifications for
their call to rely on the wholly Quran alone and ignore the Sunna?
Mohamed Said Tantawy, the Sheikh of AL-Azhar, replied saying that those who
call for relying only on the wholly Quran are ignorant, lairs, and do not know
religious rules because the ideas in the Sunna came from God, but it was put
into words by the prophet (Peace be upon him). Moreover, Sunna explains and
clarify the rules mention as in the wholly Quran.
Ahmed Eltayeb, the former Moftie (Official Fatwas Issuer), and the current
president of AL-Azhar University, commented saying that such calls to separate
between the Quran and Sunna are as old as Islam itself, implying that the
prophet himself predicted such calls. Finally, Dr. Eltayeb added that without
the Sunna, most of this religion would have been lost, and Islam would have
been a religion of generalities without an identity.
for Dr. Abdelhakim ELsayedi, a professor at Al-Azhar University, He relied on
the Hadith that says "I came with the Quran and a similar book," to
prove that the Sunna is Godly. Not to mention that the holy Quran does not
explain how should Muslims pray, pay charity, fast, or perform the pilgrimage.
Yousef Elbadry, a member of the Higher Assembly of Islamic Affairs, accuses the
Quranists of having a strange logic because relying on the wholly Quran only;
while the Quran itself -as he claims- is in need for the Sunna,. Dr. ELbadry
wonders what the Quranists say about verses like, "He who obeys the
messenger obeys God?" Dr. Elbadry added that these Quranists went astray
and should be considered apostates.
Mohamed Abdelmonem Elberry, a professor at the School of Hadith and
Explanation, Al-Azhar University, stressed the point that most Muslims have
always agreed on validity of the Sunna, whether it is the verbal of practical
Sunna. "The wholly Quran ordered us to obey the Messenger, and since this
who do not are not true believers," He added.
Mahmoud Ashour, a member of the Committee of Islamic Research, that the Sunna
is indeed a source of the Islamic Sharia, and that those who deny it are
illogical because it is impossible to understand Islam with the Sunna. Dr.
Ashour stresses that denying the Sunna costs the Quranists to lose their faith.
He then called to protect Islam against those Quranists who plan to destroy
Islam and pose the greatest threat on Islam and Muslims. He finally accused the
Quranists to be spies and agents for other forces to aim at destroying Islam
from Inside, but God will protect his religion as he promised.
We need to loosen up a bit on medieval ritual protocols. “Bow down with those who bow down," may be referring to prayers on the battlefield. In the hectic modern world, one may favor prayers in the privacy of one's home. Instead of reciting words that one cannot understand, one should express one's own words coming from one's heart thanking God for His bounty, or asking Him to show us the right path, or seeking his forgiveness for our trespasses. Prayers should be brief and offered one or more times a day depending upon how much time one has for an unhurried prayer. I know that this will be very objectionable to you so I shall not pursue it further.
Sultan Shahin Saheb,
your role as an “Editor & Moderator,” and also, being acutely aware of your
guidelines to let the commentators be allowed to fully express what they
desire, I must say that you have indeed accomplished your mission with flying
you must be reading certain convoluted comments about the Prophet of Islam. I
reckon in “New Age Islam” it is alright even if certain uncalled for as well as
disrespectful sentences are posted during the Holy Month of Ramadhan. Two of
Masters,” namely, Naseer Ahmed Saheb and “Ex-Tablighi”
have been relentless in trying to convey their understanding of the “Hadiths” without
even thinking about the sensitivity of the readers on your forum.
Saheb (aka Observer) goes out and opines as follows:
Point No. 1. - I don't even
claim to know what is in the hadiths of Bukhari etc . I therefore deal with
only one hadith at a time based on the specifics and avoid generalities.
Point No. 2 – Without knowledge
of hadiths and without any fondness for the hadiths, you can see how I can deal
with any hadith based on the specifics. I can very rationally either accept or
reject any hadith without a problem.
Point No. 3 - A Muslim is free
to pick and choose or discard using the Quran as furqan and his own good sense.
There is no sin in discarding what he finds unacceptable based on criteria that he can defend.
Saheb, do you for once realize the impact of selected usage of words and
sentences that can create a wrong impression in the minds of the readers? Only
an Islamic scholar lacking in the basic common sense will continue to indirectly
give a wrong messages across the board. Worst of all the scenarios which I have
seen is that Naseer Ahmed’s rebuttal at many times are based strictly on “Vengeance” or to settle the score with
another respected Islamic scholar, Muhammad Yunus. It was Yunus Saheb who has
accurately summed up his understanding of the Holy Quran as follows:
“The truth is, the
Qur'an does not connect its message with the Sunnah of the Prophet. That is to
say, there is not one verse in the Arabic Qur'an that asks the Muslims to
follow the Sunnah of the Prophet.”
those shallow minded Islamic scholars with “Madrassa” education somehow cannot
come to grip with the fact that it was Almighty Allah who instructed the way of
prayers (Namaaz) to Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) in the following verse
(5:6), “O ye Muslims! When you have to perform your prayer, wash your hands up to
the elbows and wipe your heads and (wash) your feet up to the ankles.” “Salat
is to be performed in a manner Allah or Jibrail (AS) taught the Prophet. We
however, do not get the detailed instructions from the Quran but from the
Prophet,” reminded Naseer Ahmed Saheb. We all know that, but that does not mean
one should constantly keep on harping the same thing countless number of times
to get the point across, and in process dilute the “Divine Commandments” of our Holy
Quran. Unfortunately, this is what has been happening ever since Muslims
started believing in the parallel book of sayings of Prophet written by various
Imams. Such a pattern of thinking got them to slowly but gradually be heavily absorbed
in learning the “Science of Hadiths” rather than to comprehend the true meaning
of Holy Quran. Sadly, Naseer Ahmed Saheb openly states that he does not claim
to know anything about the Hadiths of Imam Bukhari (May Almighty Allah rest his
soul in peace), yet he will be at the forefront to defend almost all of the
Hadiths. Never mind if they are against the Holy Quran.
of the Prophet (May Almighty Allah rest their souls in peace) took direct
lessons from the Prophet and the tradition of prayers continued for more than
200 years before the invention of “Hadiths.” Common sense should dictate to ordinary
Muslims that most of the Islamic rituals were already in place well before Imam
Bukhari was born. As a Muslim, I respect the authenticated Hadiths, but remain
suspicious of many owing to the possible distortions which have been pointed
out by the righteous Islamic scholars. In short, I am a staunch follower of
Holy Quran, period. I do hope that the younger generation of Muslims will
become a student of Holy Quran first so that they can correct all the wrongs
which have resulted from the invented sayings of the Prophet of Islam.
upon the “Hadiths” which was written more than two centuries later, does scholars
like Naseer Ahmed Saheb ever question to himself, “How did early Muslims
followed the standards set forth by the Prophet of Islam without referring to
Imam Bukhari?” Do you recall when he explicitly stated, “As I said earlier, the
earlier Muslims had little problem understanding the meaning of the Quran since
the language and context was theirs and the Prophet had lived among them
setting an example.” It is mind boggling to even conceive that all of a sudden
in one fine morning after 200 plus years, the example set forth by the Prophet took
a drastic turn. No, it did not. The Islamic rituals, be it prayers, fasting,
Haj or what not, were practiced by every Muslims during the living years of
Imam Bukhari. What is even more baffling is that, here we are loaded with what
Yunus Saheb rightly stated, “Imam al-Bukhari’s compilation  is spread over 9
volumes, divided into a total of 93 sections (or books) and 3,981 chapters.”
reading 114 chapters of the Holy Quran, the Muslim minds were stretched to read
3,981 chapters, thereby, the invention of “Hadiths” began, only to be
diligently followed by so many students of Islam mastering the “Science of
Hadiths” up until this day. The tragic part is that there are more defenders of
“Hadiths” today and less defenders of our Holy Quran. One does not have to look
far, but try hard to reflect upon this very thread.
Little wonder that it is Muslims who have managed to turn our great religion of
Islam in a massively complicated one by relying on thousands and thousands of “Hadith”
literature that grossly undermines the “Divine Book – Holy Quran” revealed by
Almighty Allah to our beloved Prophet Mohammad (Peace Be Upon Him).
that Naseer Ahmed Saheb has already proclaimed to me that “Expect Me To Ignore You,” hence,
his answering to any of my questions will never occur. I must tell you that it
is one of the most frustrating experiences when one Muslim does not respond to
another without taking into account the Holy Quran verses that says:
Frowned and turned away,
Because there came
to him the blind man (interrupting)
But what could tell
That percentage he
might grow (In spiritual understanding?)
Or that he might
receive admonition, and the teaching might profit him?
Holy Quran - 80:1-4
NOT FROWN" when
a fellow Muslim ask for a simple reply. Why not try to follow the footsteps of
our Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him)? Better yet, this is the commandment
of Almighty Allah as explicitly stated in the Holy Quran. A good and wise Islamic
scholar must be respectful of those who ask him specific questions and answer
them in a polite manner to Muslims and also to any fellow humans hailing from
other religions. Perhaps, it is high time for scholars like Naseer Ahmed Saheb
to ponder over “Surah: Al-Qalam – The Pen”
Chapter (68:4) Sūrat Al-Qalam
Sahih International: And indeed, you are
of a great moral character.
Pickthall: And lo! thou art of
a tremendous nature.
Yusuf Ali: And thou (standest)
on an exalted standard of character.
Shakir: And most surely you
conform (yourself) to sublime morality.
Muhammad Sarwar: You have attained a
high moral standard.
Mohsin Khan: And verily, you (O
Muhammad SAW) are on an exalted standard of character.
Arberry: Surely thou art
upon a mighty morality.
You have been formed with tremendous character.
For you are truly of a sublime character.
well, Sultan Shahin Saheb, come to think of it, “Non-Practicing Muslims” like me are far better capable to grasp the
meaning of the Holy Quran than the “Madrassa” scholars who always seem to think
that they have all the right answers. Nay, they don’t, and that is exactly why
they keep on deliberately dodging the questions. Whatever happened to the “Sunnah of the Prophet”
which they keep reminding Muslims about all day long?
the way, can you please be kind to ask Naseer Saheb, “What is the meaning of
normative behavior?” At one given point in his rebuttal, he wrote, “Moreover, I
don't think people mean and follow his normative ways which have become
anachronistic, when they talk about following his sunnat.” May be you can
enlighten all your readers given that you have repeatedly reminded that we all can
truly learn from Naseer Saheb and “Ex-Tablighi.” As always, your kind response
will be sincerely appreciated.