Was Muhammad the Promised Final Prophet of the Torah and Gospels?


Both Muhammad and Allah made this claim, which was a big lie. The Jews caught Allah red-handed of His lies in his own words. Apparently extremely embarrassed and angered, He ordered annihilation of the Jews of Medina, who caught him. He also had to change His earlier revealed requirements for prophethood to establish the validity of Muhammad’s prophethood. Find out all these and more…


Muslims claim that Muhammad was a prophet, whose coming was prophesied in Christian Gospels and the Jewish Torah. World-famous Sufi Muslim intellectual Fethullah Gulen says:

According to Islam, almost all previous prophets predicted Prophet Muhammad… Despite the distortions suffered by the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospels, we find indications of his coming.

Indeed, Muhammad himself made the same claim to the Jews and Christians of Arabia saying:

I am the one whose coming Abraham prayed for and Jesus gave glad tidings of, and I resemble my forefather Abraham more than anyone else [Muttaqi al-Hindi, Kanz al-‘Ummal, 11:384].

When he failed to convince them and they rejected him and his Islam—Allah, the God of Muhammad and Islam, ordered their persecution and annihilation; the Jews suffering their first Holocaust at Muhammad’s hand: he slaughtered en masse the men of Banu Quraiza, Banu Nadir (earlier evicted by Muhammad from Medina and resettled in Khaybar) and Banu Mustaliq tribes, and enslaved their women and children [my book, Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery, gives a concise overview of Muhammad’s pogrom of the Jews].

The claim that Muhammad was the promised future prophet of the Jews and Christians is rooted in Allah’s own claim in Quran 7:157:

Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them…

Connected to this prophetic succession is another Islamic claim that Muhammad was the “seal”—the finality—of prophethood [Quran 33:40]:

…he is the Messenger of God and the Seal of the prophets. And God is ever Knower of all things.

In other words, Muhammad was not only the Prophet, but also the final prophet, predicted in the Torah and Gospels.

Is that true? Not at all! This will be proven in Allah’s own words!

Before proceeding, let me briefly address a couple of troublesome issues with these verses.

Gospels/New Testament says Jesus was the final Messiah: Allah’s claim in Quran verses 7:157 that Gospels predict the coming of a future prophet is a big lie, which Allah repeats in Quran 61:6:

When Jesus, son of Mary, said: “O children of Israel! I am indeed a Messenger of God to you, confirming that which was [revealed] before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a Messenger who shall come after me, whose name is Ahmad [Muhammad].”

While the Torah predicts the coming of prophets, Gospels are very clear that Jesus was the final savior of the Jews, and by extension, of all Gentile nations. Those of the Jews, who embraced Jesus, would enter the “true House/Children of Israel”, the Kingdom of God; because, the Old Israel had become defunct with Jesus’ promised coming. Those, who would reject Jesus, would be thrown out of the Kingdom of God, as he told the Jews: “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit” [Mat 21:43].

The overall theme of the New Testament is:

  1. Jesus was the promised prophet;
  2. With his coming, Judaism and God’s old Law in its entirety have become obsolete, of no value, whatsoever;
  3. Those, who embraced Jesus, would constitute the “True Israel”, the Old Israel had become defunct;
  4. Those, who embrace Jesus, would have guaranteed salvation by simply believing in Christ, without even requiring to follow any law.

Thus, in Christianity, Jesus was the finality in the God’s succession of prophethood; no future prophet would come, whatsoever. Therefore, Allah is wrong or ignorant to claim that Gospels mention the coming of a prophet.

Muslims also claim that Jesus was a true prophet of their Allah. If that is so, then, 1) Islamic claim that another prophet would come is baseless; or 2) their claim of Jesus being a true prophet of Islam is a sham, a complete deception.

No finality of prophetic succession in the Torah: The second problem with Muhammad’s prophetic claim is that he was the final prophet. In the Torah, Moses prophesies the coming of prophets in Deu 18:15:

“The lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers.”

This verse spells no finality in the succession of prophethood whatsoever; prophets would continue coming whenever need arises throughout the existence of the Israelite nation; no end or finality is indicated in this verse.

Does Muhammad qualify to be a promised prophet of the Torah?

Was Muhammad’s claim to prophethood valid? Not at all, as we will see.

Jesus also made the same claim, and Apostle Peter pointed to the same verse (i.e. Deu 18:15) in the New Testament (i.e. Act 3:22) to justify Jesus’ coming as a Messiah to the Jews. Malachi 3:1, which falls outside the Torah, also make a similar prophesy (“See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me…”), but the Gospel of Mark (1:2) attributes it somewhat wrongly to the ‘Book of Isaiah’.

However, Muhammad, an illiterate prophet, completely failed to point out which verse in the Torah prophesied his coming as a prophet. Allah tried on Muhammad’s behalf, but erred big-time [Quran 2:129]:

(Abraham prayed): “Our Lord, raise up in their midst a Messenger from among them who shall recite unto them Your revelations, and teach them the Book and Wisdom, and purify them…”

It was not Abraham as claimed by Allah, but Moses—through whom the biblical God sent His first revelations—had prophesied the coming of prophets.

However, to the fulfillment of this prophesy, numerous Israelites have come with the claim of prophethood to the Jewish people throughout history—both before Jesus and after—well into the modern era (Even John the Baptist, a Jews, who had baptized Jesus, is also shown as such a prophet in the Gospels). Those, who came before Jesus, mostly received acceptance; those that came after Jesus, when the Israelites were in dispersion all over the world, received only limited and localized following of varying degrees.

Now let us see, who can qualify to be a prophet as predicted in Deu 18:15. God repeatedly says in the Old Testament that He was the God of Abraham, Isaac (Abraham’s son) and Jacob or Israel (Isaac’s son) [Exodus 3:15-16, 6:3 etc.]. When the Israelites in Egypt were oppressed by Pharaoh, “God heard their groaning and he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob”[Exodus 2:24]. And it was the children of Jacob (God later named him ‘Israel’), who ended up in Egypt, suffering Pharaoh’s oppressions. Moses, commanded by God, led them out of their Egyptian captivity and oppression. And God made His final covenant with those, who came out of Egypt with Moses—i.e. the children of Jacob/Israel. God says of this covenant: “I have promised to bring you up out of your misery in Egypt into the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusite—a land flowing with milk and honey” [Exodus 3:17]. God again makes it clear that His covenant is with the children of Jacob, when He told Moses: “This is what you are to say to the house of Jacob… if you obey me and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession” [Exodus 19:3-5].

Deu 18:15 clearly prophesies that God would choose a prophet “from among your brothers”—that is, from amongst those, who came out of Egypt under Moses’ leadership, namely the children of Jacob. In other words, God will choose prophets from amongst those, who carry the seed of Jacob as well as of his father Isaac and grandfather Abraham. The offspring of other children of Abraham and Isaac were not included in this final covenant of God.

But Muhammad and the Arabs, it is claimed, descended from Abraham’s son Ishmael. Ishmael was Abraham’s son through his slave-woman Hagar, not through Sarai, a free woman and his properly married wife. Moreover, Hagar was an Egyptian, not a Semite. Therefore, Ishmael was only half-Semitic. Semitic purity was essential to be included in the God’s covenant. So, Ishmael and his offspring fell outside the God’s covenant. Indeed, God made this clear when he said to Abraham: “…it’s through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. I will make the son of the maidservant (i.e. Ishmael) into a nation also, because he is your offspring”[Genesis 21:12-13]. In other words, the offspring of Isaac would carry forward Abraham’s true legacy; Ishmael’s offspring, carrying the gene of a non-Semitic and slave woman, will also became a nation as they multiply, but would have no legitimate claim to Abraham’s true legacy.

Therefore, Muhammad—an offspring of Ishmael, not carrying the seed of Isaac and Jacob—could, in no way, qualify to be a promised prophet of the Torah.

Indeed, Muhammad’s or Allah’s training in the Torah, it seems, was not that bad. The duo knew of this basic requirement—i.e. the necessity of carrying the seed of Isaac and Jacob, in addition to Abraham’s—to become a prophet as prophesied in the Torah. Initially Allah said the same [Quran 45:16]:

And verily we gave the Children of Israel the Scripture and the Command and the Prophethood, and provided them with good things and favored them above (all) peoples.

Here, Allah clearly agrees and affirms two cardinal facts in agreement with Old Testament: first, the Children of Israel—i.e. the Children of Jacob—were blessed with right to Prophethood; second, God’s covenant was only with them amongst all nations.

In the following verse, Allah made this central paradigm of the Torah succinctly clear:

We gave (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob, and ordained among his progeny Prophethood and Revelation… [Quran 29:27]

This means, only those—carrying the seed of all three patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob—can make a legitimate claim to prophethood.

Allah had revealed these verses in the build to later verses (7:157, 61:6 etc.), which claim Muhammad’s prophethood as promised in the Torah and Gospels. Verses 45:16 and 29:27—affirming facts of the Torah concerning the genealogical requirement for prophethood—were, it appears, intended to create a favorable and friendly impression upon the Jews (and Christians) about Muhammad, so that Allah’s later claim that Muhammad was their promised prophet would be more acceptable to them.

But the Jews, who had thorough knowledge of their scripture, had no difficulty to refute Muhammad’s claim to prophethood—given Muhammad, an Arab and the offspring of Ishmael, could not be a promised prophet. They probably had knowledge of Muhammad verses, and it seems that they point out the falsity of Muhammad’s prophetic claim by pointing to Allah’s own verses that say only the children of Jacob could become a promised prophet.

Unaware of the Jews’ depth of their scriptural knowledge, Allah initially spoke with honesty of the true requirement for prophethood without realizing that it would disqualify Muhammad’s claim to prophethood; Allah got caught red-handed in His own words. He obviously had no answer, except extreme embarrassment. All he could do to save his Godly credibility was to annihilate the Jews, to whom he got caught; this he eventually did by commanding Muhammad to put them to the sword.

Next, to legitimize Muhammad’s claim to prophet, Allah embarked on an extraordinary mission to create a completely new foundational paradigm of his creed, altering all that He had been affirming in His verses until now. First, Allah hit-back at the Jews, accusing them of corrupting the Torah, which He had earlier recognized as containing “true guidance”:

“Woe, then, to those who write the book with their hands and then say: This is from Allah, so that they may take for it a small price; therefore woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn” [Quran 2:79].

Next, he had to create a totally new genealogy of prophetic requirement, so that Muhammad’s claim to prophethood becomes legitimate. Allah made Abraham a “true Muslim”, not Jew or Christian, so that Muhammad and his Muslim followers would become legitimate bearer of Abraham’s legacy, thus, justifying Muhammad’s claim to Abrahamic prophethood. So revealed Allah:

“Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian; but he was true in Faith, and bowed his will to Allah’s (Which is Islam)…” [Quran 3:67].

Until now, Muhammad, following the Jews of Medina, was turning to Jerusalem while praying, where stood God’s original sanctuary, the Temple of Jerusalem. Now, he changed the sanctuary of the Lord from Jerusalem to the pagan temple of Ka’ba at Mecca (his home town), which he now claimed to have been built by Abraham and Ishmael (Thus, Ka’ba, not the Temple of Jerusalem, became the true House of God):

And remember Abraham and Isma’il raised the foundations of the House (With this prayer): “Our Lord! Accept (this service) from us… [Quran 2:127]

Next, Allah would include Ishmael also into the true legacy of Abraham (which is Islamic), which was carried forward not by his son Isaac alone, but all his sons:

And this was the legacy that Abraham left to (all) his sons, and so did Jacob; “Oh my sons! Allah hath chosen the Faith for you; then die not except in the Faith of Islam.” [Quran 2.132]

Next, Allah would include Ishmael (Isma’il), mentioning by name, in the God’s true covenant, which is Islamic:

Say ye: “We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma’il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam).” [Quran 2:136]

Here, Allah claims Ishmael was also amongst those, whom He gave his religion, also received by Muhammad and his followers.

As the final step of twisting facts to suit Muhammad’s claim to prophethood, and his religion as the true religion, Allah turned the entire foundation of the Abrahamic faith into an Islamic one. Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, became true heir to Abraham’s legacy. So Allah reveals:

Or do ye say that Abraham, Isma’il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Do ye know better than Allah? Ah! who is more unjust than those who conceal the testimony they have from Allah?… [Quran 2.140]

Here, Allah questions the legitimacy of identifying all the patriarchs and the twelve tribes (i.e. Children of Israel) as “Jews or Christians”. Instead, Allah, who knows better, claims they were believers in Allah, and hence, in Allah’s true religion—Islam. They were, therefore, Muslims, not Jews or Christians, in truth.

It’s interesting that even Muhammad and Allah failed to legitimize Muhammad’s claim to prophethood based on the Torah, and had to condemn it as corrupted, before perverting/rewriting all the Torah requirements for prophethood to create a completely new paradigm in the Quran to validate Muhammad’s legitimacy to prophethood; but renowned Canadian professor Jamal Badawi, trying to outdo Muhammad and Allah, outrageously tries to legitimize Muhammad’s prophetic claim based on the Torah itself using all kinds of trickery.

Summary

While Islam claims that both Jewish and Christian scriptures prophesy the coming of Muhammad as a prophet, in Christianity Jesus was the final; no future prophet would come at all. The Torah prophesies the coming of prophets, but from amongst the Children of Jacob aka Israel only. Muhammad, allegedly Ishmael’s offspring, falling outside Jacob’s descendents/genealogy, could make no claim to prophethood, whatsoever. Islamic God initially admitted this fact, albeit unwittingly. When He later tried to push Muhammad as a promised prophet to the Jews (and Christians), he got caught in His own words and was well nigh embarrassed. Angered, Allah accused the Jews of corrupting the Torah, and later altered all His earlier pronouncements about the Torah-agreeable prophetic requirements to establish the validity of Muhammad’s claim to prophethood.

Conclusion

So, was Muhammad a promised prophet of the Jews and Christians?

I leave it to readers to make their own judgment and draw conclusions accordingly.

Brought to you in courtesy of Islam-Watch

 

 

 

20 thoughts on “Was Muhammad the Promised Final Prophet of the Torah and Gospels?

  1. Lucky, thanks for making a short comment. I don’t wanna disappoint you but when a man’s knowledge increases, his speech becomes short. As your knowledge is equal to a Neanderthal, your long comments have just a few noticeable points. You quoted Al Razi. Of course, he was a great scientist. He was also a critic of religion. He’s quoted objecting the necessity of the prophets and calling Qur’an a vage and absurd book. He also criticized the challenge that nobody can bring a book equal to Qur’an.

    First of all, these quotes are doubtful. Did he really say that? Many Muslim scientists and philosophers believed that these were false attrbutions. But if we ignore these claims and suppose that Al Razi really said that, many Muslim scientists and philosophers who believed that Al Razi was a heretic, refuted his claims. Take Avicenna and Al Biruni as two examples. Both were one of the greatest scientists in the Muslim history ever. They were ardent followers of Islam. I can also name several staunch followers of Islam who mastered in science and philosophy e.g. Ali ibn Abu Talib, Muhammad ibn Ali al Baqir, Jafar ibn Muhammad al Sadiq, Jabir ibn Hayyan, Al Tusi etc. But because your research was incomplete, you brought about Al Razi and forgot about all other examples. Sigh!

    As for slave-girls, the knowledge of critics of Islam in faulty here as well. They don’t study the mentality of people at that time. They don’t study the social-biology of that era. They don’t bother to study the social sciences and environmental biology of the seventh century. First study them and then ask those slave-girls via the pages of history, ‘What do you think about all this?’

    • YOHO HO MO,

      SHIAS REJECT THE HADITHS THEY DON’T LIKE & DENIGRATE THE FIRST 3 KHALIFA, ABU BAKR, UMAR & UTHMAN:

      Who Wrote the History of Islam and How?

      History, it has been said, is the propaganda of the victorious party.

      What this means is that in any conflict, the victor can manipulate history just as it pleases him, and there is nothing that the vanquished can do about it. The victorious party can cook up a story and broadcast it as the absolute truth without any fear of being challenged by anyone. It has not only the power to cook up its own story; it also has the power to spike the story of an opposing party.

      M. Shibli, the dean of India’s Sunni historians of Islam, writes in his famous biography of Prophet Muhammad, Sira-tun-Nabi, volume I, 4th printing, published by the Maarif Printing Press, Azamgarh, U.P., India, in 1976:

      “Among all those extraneous forces which affect and influence the writing of history, none is more powerful than the government. But it will always be a source of pride for the Muslims that their pen was never subdued by the sword. Work on the compilation and collation of Hadith was begun in the times of the Banu Umayya. For full 90 years, from Sind in India (Indo-Pakistan) to Asia Minor and Andalusia in Spain, Ali and the children of Fatima were cursed from every pulpit in every mosque after every Friday sermon.

      Thousands and thousands of hadith (traditions; statements of the Prophet) glorifying Muawiya, were manufactured, and were put into circulation. In the times of the Abbasis, hadith were invented foretelling the birth and the excellence of each (Abbasi) khalifa by name. But what was the result of all this stupendous effort? The traditionalists (the collectors of the statements of the Prophet) declared publicly at the same time (during the caliphates of the Umayyads and the Abbasis) that all these hadith were spurious, and they rejected them. Today, we are proud to say that the science of hadith is free from all that filth and garbage.”

      Almost but not quite!

      In the case of innumerable hadith, the attempt to excise a false report from hadith literature, or to correct it, never caught up with the original untruths.

      Even after expurgation, if there was one, that part of the hadith literature which relates to the personal life of Muhammad, the blessed Prophet of Islam, is full of the quaint, the curious, the fanciful and the false. There are many hadith which make him appear as lustful and licentious; vindictive and cruel; opportunistic and unprincipled; and treacherous and unethical. Then there are some other traditions which can only be called smutty.

      But the evidence of history runs counter to such characterization of Muhammad. He could have been all these things but he was not. It is important, therefore, for Muslims and non-Muslims alike, to separate bunk and junk from fact and truth in studying the history of Islam.

      How did such “traditions” which defy commonsense and logic, insinuate their way into the hadith literature, and how were the deeds and statements which can only be called shocking, attributed to the man whose real life was the epitome of all purity, truthfulness, sincerity and simplicity?

      Shibli has made a rather perfunctory attempt to answer this question in the passage quoted above. He says that the most powerful extraneous “agent” influencing the writing of history in the times of the Umayyads and the Abbasis (661-1258) was the government. The government in those days had the power to get history written to its own “specifications.”

      Both dynasties felt they were free to distort history or to suppress history, and whenever they believed it was in their interest to do so – to invent ‘history.’ Whereas many hadith were invented for political reasons, there were also those hadith which were invented for sensual reasons. The sybarites of the courts of Damascus and Baghdad sought “sanction” for their own pleasures in these hadith.

      A hadith means a statement. If a man saw the Prophet doing something or he heard him saying something, and then he reported it to others, it would be called a hadith or a tradition. The companions considered it their duty to preserve all the traditions of the Prophet for the benefit of the Muslim umma for all time.

      A hadith could also be a comment of the Prophet on some person. If he paid a compliment to any of his companions, or if he criticized someone, his remarks gained wide publicity among the Muslims. During the khilafat of Muawiya, many of these hadith were in circulation. He was quick to grasp their importance, and he decided to make them a political weapon in his campaign against Ali ibn Abi Talib and the Banu Hashim.

      Muawiya who was the founder of the Umayyad dynasty, won for himself another “distinction.” He founded the “cottage industry” for the production of hadith. His successors, and after them, the Abbasi khalifas, patronized the “industry” which for a long time was busy churning out hadith.

      Though Shibli claims that hadith was expurgated by highly critical, perceptive and analytic censors, there was much that escaped detection by them, and is accepted today as genuine by a vast majority of Muslims.

      Muawiya appointed a team of men to make up statements favorable to himself and to the other enemies of Ali, and to attribute them to the Apostle of God as his own hadith. At the same time, he suppressed or tried to suppress the genuine hadith which were complimentary to Ali, and ordered his team to manufacture hadith derogatory to him. The members of this team concocted hadith of both varieties, and he put them into circulation.

      After the death of Muawiya, this campaign was carried on by his successors. Their “ghost-writers,” “public relations personnel,” and “image-makers” skillfully blended fake hadith with genuine hadith, and synthetic history with factual history, hoping that the “mix” would “jell,” as part of the sacred lore of the Muslims.

      Muawiya had one more reason for going into the business of “hadith-production.” He knew that the generations of the future would judge every Muslim ruler against the ideal ruler – Muhammad. He knew too that if they did, they would find him poles apart from Muhammad. He was also aware that no matter what he did, he could never rise as high as Muhammad; he knew in fact that he could not reach the heights attained even by the slaves of Muhammad.

      But it occurred to him that though it was not possible for him to reach the sublime plane on which Muhammad stood, it was possible for him to bring him (Muhammad) down to the plane on which he (Muawiya) stood by the simple process of tarnishing his (Muhammad’s) reputation, so that he too would look like other mortals.

      Muawiya hoped that the indictment of the historians against him would be less severe if it was shown to them that even the most perfect man – Muhammad, God’s Own Messenger – was not altogether free from blemishes of character. Clearly, much of the content of hadith literature was a conspiracy for the character assassination of Muhammad, the Messenger of God.

      Muawiya and the other entrepreneurs of his “cottage industry” were “successful” in their attempt at the character assassination of Muhammad. They interspersed hadith literature with countless stories, anecdotes and “incidents” the intent of all of which was to make Muhammad look, in the eyes of posterity, less than prophetic.

      Following is a sample of one of the “printable” traditions which has come down to us. It is quoted by Hakim Muhammad Saeed in an article published by the Hamdard Academy, Karachi, Pakistan, in 1972, in a book called Tazkar-i-Muhammad:

      “Shortly after their marriage, Muhammad, the Apostle of God, suggested to his new bride, Ayesha, that both of them run in a race. Ayesha was thin and lean, and she easily outran her husband. Some years later, the Apostle challenged Ayesha to run against him once again. (She had put on weight during the years since the first race). Both of them ran, and this time the Apostle outran her. His comment: ‘Last time you were the winner, O Humayra (Ayesha’s nickname) but this time I have won, and now the score between us is even.’“ (Perhaps the defeat in the first race had rankled in the mind of the Apostle all these years.)

      Muhammad, the Apostle of God, was 54 years old when he ran in a race against a girl of 9 or 10, and he lost; and he was 60 years old when he ran against her a second time, and won!

      Muslims are very jealous of the dignity of their Prophet. Is this “tradition” which most of them believe to be true, a portrait of that dignity?

      It appears that the “foremen” and the “production managers” whom Muawiya had appointed in his “hadith factories,” had only one love, and that was quantity. They had geared the “industry” only to mass produce “traditions.” It is obvious that they had no interest in the “quality control” of their products. They planted lies in their books, and each lie left in its wake, as it invariably does, “a drop of poison,” that polluted the minds of generations of Muslims. Some of their products are extremely crude. They are, in fact, unprintable. The critics and the enemies of the Prophet, inevitably, have shown great eagerness in accepting them as authentic, and they have quoted them in their books.

      These critics and enemies of the Prophet have not, however, taken into account those facts the authenticity of which is beyond any question. For example, they overlooked the fact that in Makkah, the Quraysh had offered to him the most beautiful woman or women as a quid pro quo if he would give up preaching Islam. They also forgot the fact that Muhammad was the sovereign of Medina, and that he could have married any girl. The Arab chiefs would have been proud to give him their daughters.
      The Prophet married many women in Medina but most of them were widows, and they were not very young either. With the exception of Khadija, all the other women entered his household when he was in his mid-fifties or late fifties. They entered his life at a time when the spring and the bounce and the sheen and the vigor of his youth had long since departed, and their place was taken by the ever-growing burdens of an ever-growing State, and other problems of superlative complexity and magnitude, leaving him little time or inclination for such dalliance as is reported in many of the “traditions.”

      For the compilation of hadith, Muawiya had given the following orders:

      1. All the traditions of the Prophet in praise of Ali or upholding his superiority in any way, should be suppressed.

      2. Any man narrating the virtues of Ali or quoting the hadith of the Prophet in this regard, would do so at his own risk. His subsidies and stipends would be withheld from him. His house and other property would be confiscated. His testimony as a witness would not be accepted in the courts, and he would be ostracized by other Muslims.

      3. On the other hand, every conceivable virtue should be attributed to Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and of course, to Muawiya himself. People should be encouraged to make up “hadith” of the Prophet in praise of these four men and their friends. Whoever invents such hadith, would become a favorite at the royal court, and would receive rich rewards in rank or cash or estates etc.

      Concurrently with the founding of his “cottage industry” for manufacturing “hadith” of the Prophet, Muawiya also set up a “brain laundry” for the Muslims. He instituted the practice of anathematizing the memory of Ali and his children from the pulpit in every mosque in his empire so that the Muslim children were born, they grew up, and they died hearing curses upon Ali, and not knowing who he was.
      Whole generations lived and died in ignorance. Falsehoods were put into circulation by the government on a scale so vast that they became the staple of their lives. Muawiya and his successors kept their “brain laundries” just as busy as their “cottage industry.”

      Muawiya mobilized every means for waging propaganda war against Ali and the Banu Hashim. The momentum of the blitz he launched against them, has lasted down to our own times. He waged his war from the mosques. The prayer-leaders in them were paid to put weird and fantastic interpretations upon the verses of Qur’an in an attempt to show Ali at a disadvantage. They tried to convince the rank-and-file Muslims that it would be in their interest “in both worlds” if they supported Muawiya against Ali and the Banu Hashim.

      Michael C. Hudson
      Incumbents have the advantage of the media and educational arms of the state, and they control through subsidies the religious establishment itself. (Islam and Development, p. 16, 1980)
      It must now be clear to the reader that the history of Islam was written under the direction of the party which held all the instruments of power in its hands. It must also be obvious to him that much of the historical material was “laundered” at the “brain laundries” established by Muawiya before it got into his hands. Muawiya was a most consummate master of the art of propaganda.

      Sir John Glubb
      The full effects of propaganda have not yet become plain, yet it is already obvious that whole nations can be indoctrinated with wrong opinions and evil moral standards. Few, if any, minds are strong enough to resist the ideas constantly projected at them. (The Course of Empire – The Arabs and Their Successors, 1965)

      If any hadith of the Prophet of Islam was complimentary to Ali, its narration was placed under proscription by Muawiya. This proscription was not lifted when he died in 680. It was not lifted even when his dynasty, the Umayyads, perished in 750, and it was not lifted even through the long centuries of the caliphate of the Abbasis.

      The Abbasis exterminated the Umayyads but they shared with them their animosity to Ali and to the children of Muhammad. In this matter, the aims and interests of the governments of Saqifa, the Umayyads, and the Abbasis converged; there was ideological compatibility among them all.
      The Umayyads and the Abbasis did their utmost to suppress the facts of history. Many of their khalifas had forbidden their subjects to say or to write anything about Ali except falsehoods. Truth was under a siege and falsehood was rampant in their dominions. And yet, Truth asserted itself.

      Truth has (now) arrived, and falsehood perished: For falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish. (Qur’an. Chapter 17; verse 81)

      True statements were volunteered by sources which, in most cases, were inimical to Ali. Even his most rabid enemies like the Umayyads and the Kharjis, conceded the sublimity of his character. As noted before, M. Shibli, the Indian historian, pointed out that the Shia Muslims did not write any history. Whatever history we have, has, therefore, come down to us from the non-Shia or the anti-Shia sources. It has come down to us from the archives of the governments of Saqifa, the Umayyads and the Abbasis. The story of the glorious deeds of Ali ibn Abi Talib, like the radiance of Truth itself, has filtered out of those archives.

      But the modern historians are not threatened by any government for writing factual history nor are they being seduced by promises of rich rewards for writing false history. They should, therefore, curb the temptation to stifle or to distort truth. If they yield even now to this temptation, as many of their forerunners did in the past, then it can mean only that they give their loyalty, not to principles but to persons; not to truth but to the organizations and the governments; and not to their integrity but to their emotional commitments.

      Loyalty is a noble quality as long as it is not blind, and does not exclude the higher loyalty to truth and to decency.

      If the loyalty of the modern historians is not blind, and if it does not exclude the higher loyalty to truth and to decency, then they should scrape away the excrescences and barnacles of history, and they should also resist the temptation to invoke the “Meyers’ Law” in their works. The “Meyers’ Law” stipulates that:

      “If the facts do not fit the theory, discard the facts.”

      A historian will inevitably run into truths which may be unpleasant to him but he must not suppress them. He must state all the facts as he uncovers them if he wishes to vindicate truth.

      But the historian, if he is a Muslim, has no choice in this matter. He is not free to write “inspired” or “synthetic” history. All he can do, if he is writing history, is to cling tenaciously to truth. If he writes false “history” for any reason, he will only merit the displeasure of God. Here, as elsewhere, al-Qur’an al-Majid, the Book of God, is explicit, emphatic, and unequivocal in its judgment which reads as follows:
      And cover not truth with falsehood, nor conceal the truth when ye know (what it is). (Qur’an. Chapter 2; verse 42)

      Those who conceal the clear (signs) We have sent down, and the guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book – on them shall be God’s curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse. (Qur’an. Chapter 2; verse 159)

      If the Muslim historians make these two verses of Qur’an their “guiding stars,” they will be protected from error, and they will also be protected from becoming either the agents or the victims of propaganda, consciously or unconsciously.

      In trying to smirch the name of Ali ibn Abi Talib; in trying to play down his services to Islam; and in desperately trying to conceal his glorious deeds, behind a screen of propaganda, from the eyes of posterity, his enemies were casting dust into the bright face of the sun. They raised clouds of dust in the form of most virulent and sustained propaganda against him, and yet, the sun only shone brighter and brighter.

      And God blots out vanity, and proves the truth by His words. (Qur’an. Chapter 42; verse 24)
      God blessed Ali’s name to all eternity. His name is the symbol of love of God, and the symbol of Justice and Truth. His name will endure as long as Love of God, and Justice and Truth, will endure in this world.

      FROM THIS SHIA BLOG IT IS CLEAR THAT YOU CANNOT TRUST MOHAMMEDANS.

      IF THEY WILL CREATE FALSE HADITHS, THEN THEY ARE CAPABLE OF CREATING A FALSE QURAN!

      MOHAMMEDANISM IS A SICK JOKE!

      • Lucky, Shia Muslims don’t reject hadiths they don’t like. They rejects fabricated hadiths only. Our base is Qur’an. Then comes the authentic hadiths of the Prophet and the Ahlul Bayt (peace be upon them). Then comes the Hadith Science. By utilizing them all, we can differ between real and fake hadiths.

    • THE YAMAMA BATTLE & THE PRESERVATION OF THE QURAN

      [Despite what Muslim apologists will say (more or less “it was Allah’s will”), the evidence from the hadith is that the Koran, in the recension of Medina aka Uthmanic recension, is not the original Koran recited by Mohammed.
      This fact alone falsifies the Koran since it makes Allah a liar.
      In the Koran ‘Allah’ says: Surat 15:9 (Haleem) We have sent down the Quran Ourself, and We Ourself will guard it.

      and:

      Surat 56:77-78 (Haleem). …this is truly a noble Quran, in a protected Record.

      Thus Allah promises to guard and protect the Koran – which he evidently DID NOT DO. Ergo Allah is a liar, ergo the Koran is false, ergo Allah is not god].

      The early Muslims lost about 450 men who had memorized parts of the Qur’an. In fact, this battle pressed Umar to request a Qur’an collection orders from Abu Bakr, the first Muslim Khalif. Abu Bakr took over the leadership of the Muslims after the death of Muhammad.

      Present day Muslims have grand claims about preserving the Qur’an as it was revealed to Muhammad, letter by letter, and word by word. There are many scholars of Islam who showed that such a claim does not stand critical scrutiny.

      Prelude to Muhammad’s death and its influence on multiplicity of Arab tribes

      The age of Muhammad was the age of “Might is Right”. Muhammad’s peaceful prophecy and stay in Mecca did not give him any grand results. He insulted other religions and Meccans ended up paying him back with the same currency he dealt them with. He had to leave. He sent “discovery” campaigns to Abyssinia (Ethiopia), and also he tried Ta’ef. The people of Ta’ef did not like what they saw from him and kicked him out. Finally, he moved to Medina. He wasted no time there in starting his gangster activities by attacking commercial caravans. First, he met failure, and then his first success came during a sacred month through the Nakhla raid.

      There is a long list of attacks by the early Muslims when Muhammad started his stay in Medina. Muhammad wasted no time in Medina, and started his hostilities against other groups right away. The date estimates is that he moved to Medina in September of 622. During the same month or in October, Muhammad started his hostilities against the Jewish inhabitants of Medina. As for the gang’s activities of attacking commercial caravan in greed of loots, Muhammad started such activities during March of 623 AD (razzia) against a Meccan commercial caravan. Muhammad continued such activities without much success. However, in January of 624 AD, Muhammad found success in the Nakhla raid.

      Moving forward, Muhammad eliminates all opposition through attacks, genocides, murders, assassinations, rapes, etc. And, of course, all of his activities were rubber-stamped by Allah. Reason being Muhammad was his last prophet!! Allah was desperate and could not find a better man than Muhammad to be his final Seal of prophets. Muslims complain that I show Muhammad in bad light when I write about him. Well, all a Muslim can do is read the Qur’an, and investigate some of the revelations and their reasons. That, in itself should suffice to convince any decent human being to leave Islam.
      Moving toward the end of Muhammad’s life, we find that he took over Mecca and forced all Arab tribes to send to Mecca part of their economic prosperity. In exchange for that, Muhammad stayed away from attacking them!! Muslims like to call such money sent to Mecca “Zakat”. I call it “protection money”. You can call it what you want, but the fact is Muhammad forced other tribes to send from their wealth, to the Meccans. Economics 101, with fringe benefits to Quraysh and the Meccans, are at the heart of Islamic creed. Even today, Muhammad guaranteed an annual economic “fringe benefits” to Mecca and the surrounding areas through the Islamic creed of “Hajj”.

      There is no spirituality in the Islam of Muhammad. His form of Islam was “Loot, Loot, Loot” and “Pay me Zakat, or Else”.

      MUHAMMAD’S DEATH (632)

      Other than the area of Mecca and its surroundings, one can imagine how happy the Arab tribes were to hear that the man who forced them at the pain of the sword to pay annual amounts of money and goods to Mecca is finally dead. The tribes became happy for a good reason: The tyrant is dead.

      This event in the history of Islam should convince any reader that the “elegance” or “greatness” of the Qur’an are no more than lies. Arabs did not think the Qur’an’s language was of superior quality. If they did, they would hesitate in leaving Islam. This was not the case at all. Arab tribes became very happy and left Islam. They just did not want to pay a protection tax levied against them from Mecca. So, they declared they are Muslims no more.

      Inside the Muslim camp, there were power struggles as to who should lead. But a quick decision is made through a select group of men. Abu Bakr becomes the Khalif. As the news of Arab tribes leaving Islam comes to him, he is not willing to give up the annual Zakat money without a fight. He had the man power and the expertise of Khalid Bin Alwaleed; a master battle leader, to get the job done. The major tribes that left Islam did not unite to make a solid front against the Muslims. For this, Abu Bakr plans his battles in an organized manner and sends his military campaigns to force Islam back. Those battles against apostatized tribes are known in the history of Islam as the Ridda wars (Ridda, in Arabic, means apostasy).

      During that time, there were many individuals in the Arabian Peninsula who claimed to be prophets, just like Muhammad. Had any of them won all of their battles against the Muslims, the form of the religious mix in the Arabian Peninsula would look much different today. Some of the names of such individuals who claimed prophecy are Sajjah, Tulaihah, and Musaylima. It is the latter one who seems to have had the largest following. The Muslim forces faced Musaylimah and his followers at the place of Yamama. They engaged him in two battles. The Muslims took heavy casualties. They had to wait until Khalid Bin al-Waleed and his troops joined their ranks. The Muslims forces, under Khalid’s leadership engaged Musaylimah and his troops. The result was a win for the Muslim camp. Musaylimah was killed. However, the Muslim forces took heavy casualties that included about 450 men who were trusted reliable memorizers of the Qur’an.

      The sum of the Ridda wars is that Abu Bakr restored the tribes into Islam by the sword. Anyone who denies that Islam’s early history was forcing the religion at the pain of the sword, denies history’s events.
      At the end of the day, a huge majority of the memorizers (Hafids) of the Qur’an were killed at Yamama. Abu Bakr did not seem worried about the fate of the Qur’an. His logic was that Muhammad did not worry about collecting the Qur’an as one unit book. So, why worry about it if Muhammad himself did not. Umar, who was destined to become the second Khalif, requested that Abu Bakr command a collection of the Suras and verses of the Qur’an. At first, Abu Bakr resisted such a project. But, upon the insistence of Umar, Abu Bakr appointed a committee for the task of collecting the Qur’an.

      THE COMMITTEE

      Bukhari Hadith narrates the story of Qur’an collection commission between Abu Bakr and Umar:
      Narrated Zaid bin Thabit Al-Ansari: who was one of those who used to write the Divine Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the (heavy) casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of yamama (where a great number of Qurra’ were killed). ‘Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said, ‘Umar has come to me and said, The people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle of) yamama, and I am afraid that there will be more casualties among the Qurra’ (those who know the Qur’an by heart) at other battle-fields, whereby a large part of the Qur’an may be lost, unless you collect it. And I am of the opinion that you should collect the Qur’an.” Abu Bakr added,

      “I said to ‘Umar, ‘How can I do something which Allah’s Apostle has not done?’ ‘Umar said (to me), ‘By Allah, it is (really) a good thing.’

      So ‘Umar kept on pressing, trying to persuade me to accept his proposal, till Allah opened my bosom for it and I had the same opinion as ‘Umar.” (Zaid bin Thabit added:) Umar was sitting with him (Abu Bakr) and was not speaking to me). “You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness): and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah’s Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur’an and collect it (in one manuscript). ” By Allah, if he (Abu Bakr) had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would not have been harder for me than what he had ordered me concerning the collection of the Qur’an. I said to both of them, “How dare you do a thing which the Prophet has not done?” Abu Bakr said, “By Allah, it is (really) a good thing. So I kept on arguing with him about it till Allah opened my bosom for that which He had opened the bosoms of Abu Bakr and Umar.
      So I started locating Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leaf-stalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who knew it by heart). I found with Khuzaima two Verses of Surat-at-Tauba which I had not found with anybody else, (and they were):– “Verily there has come to you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty He (Muhammad) is ardently anxious over you (to be rightly guided)” (9.128) The manuscript on which the Quran was collected, remained with Abu Bakr till Allah took him unto Him, and then with ‘Umar till Allah took him unto Him, and finally it remained with Hafsa, Umar’s daughter. (Book #60, Hadith #201)
      Please note that this project relied heavily on the judgment of one man; Zaid bin Thabit. Even with being a scribe, it is unlikely that Zaid knew all of the Qur’an as revealed to Muhammad. After all he was only one person among many scribes whose number was about forty two persons. With such a large number, it is highly unlikely, if not impossible, for any of them, to know all of the “supposedly” divine revelations to Muhammad. So, in a sense, Zaid was given an impossible task. For instance, let us say he was confronted with similar Qur’anic verses the rhymed and conveyed the same meaning, How was Zaid to choose? What criterion does he need to establish.

      In any case, Zaid tries his best and makes a copy of the Qur’an of what was available to him.
      To add insult to injury, Zaid was only one among many “Qur’anic” experts of the time. A short list will have to include people like Ali bin Abi Talib, Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, Mu’adh bin Jabal, and Ubai ibn ka’b.
      A wiser decision would have been to appoint all of them to collect a one “more” complete and reliable Qur’an. This did not happen, making Zaid’s decisions final on the newly collected Qur’an. The problem is that Zaid was only one of at least forty two scribes of Muhammad. Hence, there exists great discrepancy of what Zaid knew about the revelations, and the elite group knowledge of the Qur’an. By elite group I mean the group of early Muslims who knew a lot of the Qur’an and memorized it, etc. I gave the reader an example of other four men who were as competent as Zaid in their knowledge of the Qur’an, if not better than him in this endeavor.

      In any case, history tells us that Zaid did as was ordered and produced his collected version of the Qur’an. His collected work did not imply any authoritative pressure on Muslims. There were other collected versions of the Qur’an circling around. None was claimed to have the official seal of Muslim leaders of the time. Zaid’s effort was just another attempt at collecting the Qur’an. His collection lacked official adoption status. His collection remained with Umar, who passed it to his daughter, Hafsa; the prophet’s widow.

      Adopting an official version of the Qur’an had to wait till the time Khalif Uthman took office after Umar. Uthman told Zaid to make a “revised” version of the Qur’an. It was not the same as the one Hafsa had, which is the one Zaid collected earlier as per Abu Bakr’s request. This second time, Uthman canonized Zaid’s second attempt. The new Qur’an version is known as the Medina codex. At the time, there were six other versions of the Qur’an circling around. Those versions were collected by Muhammad’s faithful and intimate companions (Sahaba). Uthman “officialized” the Medina codex and ordered the other “Qur’ans” to be destroyed.

      REFLECTIONS ON YAMAMA & QURAN

      There are some important observations that we need to note regarding the Qur’an collection and its relation to the Yamama battle:

      1. Muhammad died without having his Qur’an collected in one book. So, in a sense, he “let the dogs out.” I mean that any version of a collected Qur’an in the future will suffice. Abu Bakr had the collection of the Qur’an as a low priority issue. It wasn’t but for Umar’s insistence that the Qur’an got collected at the time.
      2. In my judgment, the battle of Yamama and the death of 450 Qurra’ (Hafiths or Memorizers) did not create any additional problems to the collection of the Qur’an. In fact, it probably minimized some. The author of the book, Muhammad, did not worry about collecting Allah’s revelations. His closest companion, Abu Bakr, did not place any urgent priority on the issue. In such an environment, anything goes. If there are multiplicity of Qur’ans, then that will be a continuous problem as Muhammad is not around anymore to solve the issue.
      3. The death of about 450 Qur’an memorizers probably simplified more complications in the existing Qur’ans. You see, had they not perished, we would have had many more Suras and Qur’an verses. The problem then will be which verses belonged to Muhammad’s original revelations, and which did not. The simple fact is that human memory is not always trustworthy. Who is to say that we have to trust the memory of those Qur’an memorizers one hundred percent of the time. Human memory is fallible. We experience that in our everyday lives. How many times did I think I put the keys in my pocket, only to discover that I had left them in the car! Long term memory issues are ever more troublesome.
      4. Even with the death of most memorizers, the Qur’an still faced multiplicity of difficulties that cannot be overcome. There is no chance whatsoever that the Qur’an we have today is the one Muhammad concocted.

    • ALLAH COULDN’T GET THE SUCCESSION OF MUHAMMD RIGHT:

      WAS ‘ALI IBN ABI TALIB ALLAH’S SUCCESSOR FOR MUHAMMAD?

      Who is the successor of the Prophet (S)?
      بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

      Once a person told me that Abu Bakr is more knowledgeable than Prophet Muhammad (S) (Na’oozo Billah)! I asked him how come?! He said because Abu Bakr understood that he should assign a person as his successor to keep the system and community working in order. As it is well-known Abu Bakr assigned Umar as his successor. But the Prophet failed to realize this important task that the Islamic community needs a qualified leader after him, or perhaps it was not important for the prophet that who is going to take over the power after him!

      When I heard that, I started asking the following question from myself: Is it possible that the Prophet of Islam who has tried hard to implement Islam, and tolerated a lot of problems, disasters, and paid big price to establish Islam in Arabian peninsula, leaves people without assigning any person to keep this religion alive after him?!

      The religion that is to be the last religion of God for this world; the religion that was supposed to be for every nation all over the world both inwardly and outwardly (political authority). What happened that we Muslims are in this miserable situation in the world for centuries? What happened that the chain of successors/rulers (Ulul-Amr) has reached to people like King Fahd, King Husayn, Saddam Husayn, Husni Mubarak, …?

      Something is terribly wrong!

      Yes, The problem is leadership and Guardianship. Was this problem not so important for prophet or he didn’t take it serious? Of course, he did ake it serious and he must have assigned a chain of successors (Caliphs) who where the most qualified as the head of Islamic state and as the guardian of Shari’ah (divine law).

      Another question that came out to my mind was that: Are Allah and His prophet more qualified to assign the Caliphs, or people? Is Islam on the basis of democracy (government of people over people) or on the basis of theocracy (Kingdom of Allah over the earth)? The history of Islam testifies that the government after the death of prophet was neither democratic nor theocratic. Just a few people gathered in “Saqifah bani Saaedah”and assigned Abu Bakr as Caliph while Imam ‘Ali was busy of the burial of the holy prophet in Medina. Is it our choice as to whom should be a Prophet or it is Allah’s choice? Can we select Prophet by Shura?

      The same goes for assigning the successor of Prophet, for Allah knows best who is the most qualified for this position. It seems very strange that a deputy of a chief is assigned by any person other than him. Deputy of God (or prophet) is only assigned by God (or prophet), and it is not people’s business! There are many examples in Qur’an where Allah states that He is the one who assigns a successor on the earth. Allah, Exalted He is, states in Qur’an:

      “O’ David, we assigned you as Caliph (successor) on the earth …”(Qur’an 38:26)

      He also states:

      “… We have assigned you (Abraham) as Imam (leader) for people …”(Qur’an 2:124)

      As we see, Caliph/Imam for the mankind is assigned by Allah. See also 2:30 (about Adam). Even Prophet Moses, when he wanted to go to Miqaat, did not ask people to form a Shura to assign a Caliph for him.

      Qur’an tells us that:

      (Moses said: “O’ Allah) assign me a vizier from my family, (that is) my brother Aaron (Haroon) …,”(Allah) said: “We granted your requests, O’ Moses.”(Qur’an 20:29-36).

      Allah, Exalted, also said:
      “Surely We gave the book to Moses and assigned his brother Aaron as his vizier.”(Qur’an 25:35).

      Allah also said:
      “… And Moses said unto his brother Aaron: Take my place among the people.”(Qur’an 7:142).
      وَقَالَ مُوسَىٰ لِأَخِيهِ هَارُونَ اخْلُفْنِي فِي قَوْمِي

      Notice that “Ukhlufni”and “Khalifa”(Caliph) are exactly from the same root.

      In this connection, let us take a look at the following interesting tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari:

      The Messenger of Allah said to ‘Ali: “Your position to me is like the position of Aaron (Haroon) to Moses, except that there shall be no Prophet after me”

      أنتَ مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى إلا إنَّهُ لا نبيَّ بعدي

      Sunni References:
      (1) Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 5.56, 5.700
      (2) Sahih Muslim, Arabic, v4, pp 1870-71
      (3) Sunan Ibn Majah, p12
      (4) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p174
      (5) al-Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 15-16
      (6) Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, p309

      The Prophet (S) thereby meant that as Moses had left behind Aaron to look after his people when he went to Miqaat (meeting Allah), in the same way he was leaving ‘Ali behind to look after the affairs of Islam after he met Allah (i.e., his death). Let this reminder be food of thought for the possessors of pure heart and open mind. The above verses of Qur’an concerning Aaron show that even the prophet does not assign his deputy/successor, and it is rather Allah who does that. Prophet Moses prayed to Allah and requested that Aaron becomes his deputy, and Allah approved the suggestion/request of Prophet Moses (as).

      The Prophet Announcing His Successor in His First Sermon
      بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

      The following two traditions are written, one after the other, in the History of al-Tabari which is one of the important history books for the Sunnis. Besides al-Tabari, many other historians and traditionalists and commentators of Qur’an from among Sunnis have recorded this tradition in their books. (see below for the list of references). The two traditions explicitly indicate that the Holy Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him and his family), with the order of Allah, has introduced ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib as his successor even in his first open preach to the people:

      Narrated Ibn Humayed, from Salamah, from Muhammad Ibn Is’haq, from Abd al- Ghaffar Ibn al-Qasim, from al-Minhal Ibn Amr, from abdallah Ibn al-Harith Ibn Nawfal Ibn al-Harith Ibn Abd al-Muttalib, from Abdallah Ibn Abbas, from ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib:

      When the verse “And warn your close tribe (Qur’an 26:214)”was revealed to the prophet, he called me and said to me, “‘Ali, God has commanded me to warn my tribe of near kindred. I was troubled by this, since I knew that when I discuss the matter to them they would respond in a way which I would not like. I kept silent until Gabriel came to me and said “If you do not do what you are commanded, your Lord will punish you.”So prepare a measure of wheat for us, add a leg of lamb to it, fill a large bowl of milk for us, and then invite sons of Abd al- Muttalib for me so that I may speak to them what I have been commanded to tell them.”

      I did what he had told me to do. At that time they numbered forty men more or less, including his uncles Abu Talib, Hamzah, al-Abbas, and Abu Lahab. When they had gathered together, he called me to bring the food which I had prepared. I brought it, and when I put it down, prophet took a piece of meat, broke it with his teeth, put it in the dish.

      Then he said, “Take in the name of God.”They ate until they could eat no more, and yet the food was as it had been. I swear by God, in whose hand ‘Ali’s soul rests, that a single man could have eaten the amount of food which I prepared for them. Then he said “Give them something to drink.”So I brought them the bowl and they drank from it until they became full, and I swear by God that one man could have drunk that amount. When prophet wanted to speak to them, Abu Lahab interrupted him and said “Your host has long since bewitched you.”Then they dispersed without the prophet speaking to them.
      On the following day he said to me “‘Ali, this man interrupted what I wanted to say so that people dispersed before I could speak to them. Prepare the same food for us as you did yesterday, and invite them here.”I did this, and brought them food when he called me. He did as he had done the other day, and they ate until they could eat no more.

      Then he said, “Bring the bowl,”and they drank until they could drink no more. Then he spoke to them, saying, “Banu Abd al-Muttalib, I don’t know of any young man among Arabs who has brought for his people something better than what I have brought to you. I bring the best of this world and the world after, since God has commanded me to summon you to him.

      Which of you will aid me in this matter, so that he will be my brother, my executor (Wasi), my successor (Caliph) among you?”They all held back, and even though I was the youngest, I said “I will be your helper, O’ prophet of God.”He put his hand on the back of my neck and said “This is my brother, my executor (Wasi), my successor (Caliph) among you, so listen to him and obey him.”They rose up laughing and saying to Abu Talib, “He has commanded you to obey your son and to obey him!”
      إنَّ هذا أخي و وصيِّي و خليفتي فيكم فاْسمًعوا لهُ و أطيعوا
      Sunni References:
      (1) History of al-Tabari, English version, v6, pp 88-91
      (2) History of Ibn Athir, v2, p62
      (3) History of Ibn Asakir, v1, p85
      (4) Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v5, p97
      (5) Tafsir al-Khazin, by Ala’uddin al-Shafi’i, v3, p371
      (6) Shawahid al-Tanzil, by al-Hasakani, v1, p371
      (7) Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v15, p15, pp 100-117
      (8) al-Sirah al-Halabiyah, v1, p311
      (9) Dala’il al-Nabawiyyah, by al-Baihaqi, v1, pp 428-430
      (10) al-Mukhtasar, by Abul Fida, v1, pp 116-117
      (11) Life of Muhammad, by Hasan Haykal, p104 (First Arabic Edition only. In the second edition the last sentence of Prophet is deleted.)
      (12) Tahdhib al-Athar, v4, pp 62-63.

      The above tradition was also narrated by important Sunni figures such as Muhammad Ibn Is’haq, Ibn Abu Hatem, and Ibn Mardawayh. It is also recorded by many orientalists including T. Carlyle, E. Gibbon, J. Davenport, and W. Irving.

      As we see, Prophet ordered people to LISTEN AND FOLLOW ‘ALI even in his first open sermon, that is, when he declared his prophethood openly. “Shi’a”means “The Followers”, and it is exclusively used for “The Followers of Imam ‘Ali”. Thus Shi’a school of thought was in fact established by the Holy Prophet of Islam (S) from the beginning of his mission.

      If we follow Imam ‘Ali (as), this is because the Holy Prophet asked us to do so. Moreover, whatever Imam ‘Ali (as) (and other 11 Imams) has said is the exact teachings and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, and whatever Prophet Muhammad has said is the exact teachings and sayings of Allah. This is because the prophets and Imams are infallible and they do not say anything in contrary to what they have been commanded to say.

      The next tradition in the History of al-Tabari is as follows:

      Narrated Zakariyya Ibn Yahya al-Darir, from Affan Ibn Muslim, from Abu Awanah, from Uthman Ibn al-Mughirah, from Abu Sadiq, from Rabiah Ibn Najid:

      A man said to ‘Ali: “O Commander of believers, how did you become the heir of your cousin to the exclusion of your paternal uncle?”‘Ali said:”Ahem”three times until every body craned their necks and pricked up their ears, and then said “Prophet invited the whole of the Banu Abd al-Muttalib, including his own closest relatives, to eat a year old lamb and to drink some milk. He also prepared a quantity of wheat for them, and they ate until they were full, while the food remained as it was, as though it had not been touched.

      Then he called for a drinking cup and they drank until they could drink no more, while the drink remained as though it had not been touched and they had not drunk. Then he said Banu abd al Muttalib, I have been sent to all men in general and to you in particular. Now that you have seen what you have seen, which of you will swear an oath of allegiance to me to become my brother, my companion, and my inheritor? Not one of them rose up, so I stood up before him even though I was the youngest there. He said Sit down. He repeated the words he had spoken for three times while I would rise up and he would say to me sit down. On the third occasion, he struck his hand on mine. In this way I became the heir of my cousin to the exclusion of my uncle.”

      Sunni References: History of al-Tabari, English version, v6, pp 91-92

      Side Comments
      A Sunni brother mentioned that in the above incident the Prophet was only addressing his own family Banu Abd al-Muttalib and not the whole of the Muslims. The most probable explanation here is that the Prophet intended ‘Ali as his successor in taking care of the affairs that relate to the family of Banu Abd al-Muttalib only in his absence and after his demise and not as a successor to the leadership of all Muslims.
      Here I should state, first, that the Children of Abd al-Muttalib were not the family of Prophet. They were the relatives of Prophet. From the quoted tradition, we can not conclude that what he said was just for his relatives. He just started with his relatives.

      Now, do you honestly believe that Prophet assigned a successor after him for the tribe of Abd al-Muttalib, but he forgot to assign any successor for the rest of community? Prophet was not a nationalist. He was not sent only for the children of Abd al-Muttalib. He was sent to all mankind as he mentioned himself in the tradition. So why is this negligence (about forgetting other people)? If assigning a successor is duty of prophet, it can not be limited to a certain people, because the Prophet was not sent just to a certain people.

      Moreover, it was not the only time that the prophet declared ‘Ali as his successor. However, it was the first time. There are many traditions inside Sunni collections of traditions which either implicitly or explicitly indicate whom the Prophet (S) chose as his successor. The official announcement, however, was in “Ghadir Khum”as Sihah Sittah (the six Sunni collections of the traditions) testify.
      It is also important to recall that the historical accounts are always written and controlled by people who are in power. This is the case for every era, and the tyrant governments of the Umayad and the Abbasid were not exempt from this rule. As such, in most cases, facts are not explicitly written in the history, but one can find them implicitly. These are the pieces of information which have been mistakenly passed trough the censorship of the Governors throughout history.
      Prophet (S) said:
      عليٌ مع الحق و الحقُ مع علي
      ‘Ali is with truth, and truth is with ‘Ali.
      Sunni reference: Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi

      TREASON IN THE CAMP!

      THE THREE KALIFA, ABU BAKR, UMAR & UTMAN USURPED THE ROLE OF LEADER AGAINST ALLAH’S & MUHAMMAD’S WISHES & THESE WERE THE THREE WHO HAD THE QURAN COMPILED.

      CAN YOU TRUST SUCH MEN?

      THEY WERE APOSTATES!

      THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED!

      BUT IT WAS THEY WHO HAD MUHAMMED KILLED BY POISON.

      AISHA & HAFSA, FOLLOWING THEIR FATHERS INSTRUCTIONS POISONED MUHAMMED & HAD STUPID HADITHS WRITTEN THAT BLAMED A JEWESS!

      WHAT A F–KING MESS!

  2. YOU NEVER ARGUE WITH A MORONIC MOHAMMADAN — YOU EDUCATE THEM!

    THE PROPHET

    Prophethood is a device of the Middle Eastern origin, which seeks to impose secular and spiritual mastery of one man, the Prophet, over others in the name of God, who, in fact, is nothing but a tool for realizing the personal ambitions of the Prophet.

    Prophethood is not only the divine fountain of despotism but it is likely to act as the source of destroying mankind. This truth is well illustrated by Jerusalem, which has become an international dynamite through the Prophetic jealousies.

    Man is privileged to believe in one God, many gods or no god at all. This fundamental right is given him by his free will, which is the true distinction between the living and the dead. The Lofty sun, despite being the source of life, is still lifeless because its every movement is already determined, and therefore it exists mechanically. On the contrary, the lowermost amoeba, a protozoa of ever- changing shape, is a living being for having the ability to move as it pleases.

    Prophethood is based on a totally unverifiable claim that God has appointed the man called ”Prophet,” to act as His vicar for persuading people to obey Him; this supernatural Being, is the Perfect, the Creator, the All-mighty, the All- wise and the All-independent. This concept is highly contemptuous of God for several reasons:

    1. With all these qualities, God, the Perfect, cannot depend upon Prophet, the man, who is imperfect. Therefore, the device of Prophethood by its very nature is defective, devious and distracting.

    Again, owing to its high cultural and religious influence, veracity of the doctrine of Prophethood must be easily verifiable. Since it is not, it makes it a source of mischief, which we experience in the form of social discord.

    2. Man is not only endowed with free will but also enjoys his intelligence. This is what makes him absolutely marvelous, magical and magnificent. He is, therefore, well-equipped to find the right path for himself. A Prophet, who lived centuries ago, and rode asses and mules, does not have the ability to guide the man, who has become a space-traveler through the means that he has invented himself. If God’s guidance was really essential for man, He would not have equipped humans with such high intelligence and inventive power. Again, being All-independent and the Perfect, He should have designed man differently so that he could not err. This would have saved God all the humiliation that emanates from His dependence on an imperfect mortal, called “Prophet,” and also the disrepute that springs from the faulty design of man, which requires guidance.

    3. The concept of Prophethood seeks to turn man, a rational being, into a robot, which must be driven by faith; it is the exact opposite of rationality. Thus, a thing becomes good or bad, not because experience or wisdom proves it as such, but because God says so through His Prophet!

    4. According to the notion of Guidance, God’s greatest passion is that man must humiliate himself before the Almighty through a series of rituals known as worship. He who is Almighty and All-independent cannot be the lover of sycophancy, which worship really is; passion for flattery is not a virtue but a vice; it is a trait of humanity, which, makes people seek glory through enjoying entreaties and supplications of lesser men. This is an attribute of Dominance-Urge associated with man, who is impelled by it to usurp liberties of fellow men for looking great through their self-humiliating praises, prayers and pathetic submissions. God, the All-mighty and All-independent, is by definition, way above these belittling drawbacks of personality.

    5 . It is actually the Prophet, the man, who uses the ruse of revelation (Prophethood) to satisfy his Urge of Dominance. He pretends to be God’s servant but encourages his followers to treat him as the God, and thus, God Himself slides into the background, leaving the entire field to the Prophet, who acts as the sole medium of all the worldly and spiritual fulfillments.

    In fact, Prophethood is the gravest insult to the concept of Godhead. If you read the Bible or the Qur’an, you will find that God is someone who loves to be worshipped. He has such a childish and unstable disposition that, if man humiliates himself by worshipping Him, He feels glad as if someone were on top of the world but if man neglects Him, He becomes miserable like a fish out of water. What kind of God is He, whose pleasure and pain solely depend on man’s attitude towards Himself?

    If Prophethood was a true concept, it would be the greatest honor that a man could achieve, and in that case he would have worked hard and begged the Almighty for this dignity. Regrettably, the situation is quite the opposite: it is God who is so desperate that He imposes this divine distinction through threats and violence on a person who is most reluctant to accept it. Frankly speaking, one is obliged to think that God is extremely anxious for finding a Prophet, and the man awarded this esteem, does so as a favor to the Almighty. What a pious blasphemy it is!

    The truth about the doctrine of Prophethood is that the man eager to become a Prophet asserts that he has reluctantly accepted God’s commission to represent Him on earth. Since God cannot be seen or contacted and speaks only through the Prophet, who is visible, the latter becomes the Symbol of God like a statue, which ranks holy by virtue of representing the divine power that lurks behind it. The Prophet wants God as a figurative head only so that he himself must rank as the centre of people’s attention and adoration. Eventually, he elevates himself so high that he looms as God’s Superior. Showing God as threatening or indirectly begging a particular man to accept the dignity of Prophethood against his will, is an integral part of this ploy. Here are two examples to explain this point:

    a. According to the Biblical story (Exodus 3), Moses saw an angel in the midst of a burning bush, which suffered no consumption despite the fact that flames enveloped it. As he was amazed by this miraculous event, a voice rose from the bush, and said,
    “I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.”

    What did God want from Moses? He wanted him (Moses) to represent Him among the Jews whom he brought out of Egypt where they had suffered slavery of the worst kind. Moses’ response is expressed by this verse:
    “O my Lord, I am not eloquent … I am slow of speech.” (Exodus 4: 10 )

    Moses is apparently reluctant to accept the dignity of Prophethood on the ground that he is a stammerer and therefore lacks the eloquence needed for skilful performance of duty. The result of this unwillingness was:
    “And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses …..” (Exodus 4: 14 )

    Despite God’s wrath, Moses does not yield until God appoints Aaron, the Levite, as Moses’ assistant to interpret his speeches and render other relevant services! Could not God allot this function to some other man more suited to the job? Why did it have to be Moses, who lacked the necessary qualifications to be a missionary?

    It is simply to exhibit God’s desperation for Moses irrespective of his weakness, and his (Moses) own importance in relation to God! In fact, it is a subtle way of demonstrating a Prophet’s superiority over God. See this truth for yourself:

    As a background to this episode, I may add that the Jews were originally an idolatrous people. In the absence of Moses, they built the image of Golden Calf and started worshipping it. Anger of Yahweh, the Jewish God, flared up, and He wanted to kill them all:
    “And the Lord said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiff-necked people.”
    ( Exodus 32: 9 )

    As God points out the stubbornness of the Jewish character, possibly with a view to justifying the punishment that He intends to inflict upon them, Moses enters into a battle of words with God and rebukes Him by declaring:
    “Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For
    mischief did he (Yahweh) bring them out, to slay them
    in the mountains, and to consume them from the face
    of the earth? Turn from Thy fierce wrath, and
    repent of this evil against Thy people.”
    ( Exodus 32: 12 )

    These are surely the most impolite words for a man to use about God, especially in His presence. It is more than an altercation: it demonstrates that the Prophet is entitled to scold God with impunity.

    In another episode (Numbers 14: 11-20), when the Jews denigrate the Promised Land, Yahweh’s wrath flares up. Moses rebukes the Almighty once again to show the practical superiority of the Prophet over God, though theoretically, he remains a servant of the Creator!

    b. The story of the Prophet Muhammad, in essence, is very much the same as that of Moses:

    It is claimed that one day when Muhammad was meditating on the mysteries of creation, an angel of God called “Gabriel,” appeared before him and said:
    Read: in the name of thy Lord who createth.
    Createth man from a clot.

    Read: And it is thy Lord the Most bountiful
    who teacheth pen,
    Teacheth man that which he knew not.

    As the Qur’an testifies to the fact, it was a written message from Allah, otherwise, why would Gabriel tell Muhammad to “read in the name of thy Lord?” In answer to this command, Muhammad told Gabriel that he was illiterate and therefore, could not read the message. Hearing that, the angel caught him by the throat and ordered him again to read. Thrice the Prophet expressed his inability to read and thrice Gabriel choked him!

    One can clearly see how the dignity of God is being flouted by the man, who afterwards fought many battles to be acknowledged as the prophet, but here it is claimed:

    1. God is so desperate for a Prophet that He uses violence to persuade Muhammad, who does not want this dignity. Here, Muhammad holds the upper hand!

    2. Allah not only urgently needs a representative but He is extremely desperate for this purpose because He settles for an illiterate person knowing full well that a missionary must be literate.

    3. The whole event cannot be anything but a fiction to slight Allah, who claims to be All-knowing. How could He be All-knowing when He sends Gabriel with a written message to Muhammad, who cannot read!

    Long after “appointing” Muhammad as the Prophet, Allah realizes that a Prophet must be literate:
    “We (Allah) shall make thee read (O Muhammad)
    so that thou shall not forget.”
    (Qur’an, The Overwhelming, 87: 6)
    Obviously, Muhammad must have been taught by Allah how to read and write (because reading and writing are one process) yet the Muslims, against this Qur’anic evidence claim that Muhammad was illiterate!

    Again, surah, The Clot, 96 (“Read in the name of thy Lord”) being the first revelation, must have occurred right in the beginning of the Qur’an but it is found almost at the end.

    This disorder must not be found in the Book of God, yet the Muslims believe that God’s Word (Qur’an) cannot be changed! Surely, disorder can be worse than forgery.

    To continue the story, I may add that several traditions sprang up regarding the first meeting of Muhammad with Gabriel. One of these stories says that he was so upset by the Message of Prophethood that he tried to commit suicide. Yet, he accepted it! How desperate Allah must have been for someone to act as His Mouthpiece!

    When Muhammad was weak, he claimed to be a servant of God but as he grew stronger, all the Qur’anic commands began to be issued in the name of Allah and the Prophet conjointly until Muhammad was able to reverse the whole doctrine by declaring that
    “Allah along with His angels, prays peace to the Prophet i.e. worships Muhammad.”

    WHAT DOES A PROPHET PREACH?
    He advocates: God is One, who is Absolute: He does not include anyone in His government, and the Prophet is His appointee and a servant.

    This is the basis of monotheism i.e. there is only One God, who is Absolute. The truth is that such a God does not have a real existence; His being depends on the word of the prophet, who, as we have seen, is just a mortal, subject to human weaknesses. The cause of God would have been served better if He were to show His face to mankind frequently for assuring them that He is there. Since nobody has ever seen Him, He either does not exist or is too Great to bother about what people think of Him. It is obviously, the Prophet, who wants to be glorified as God, and to be treated as such insists that his laws (which he claims to be Divine) must be obeyed for ever because this is the highest dignity, which raises a man (Prophet) to the status of God.
    Again, as without exclusive power of law- making the Prophet cannot sustain his Divine Eminence, absolutism becomes the essence of Prophethood i.e. there is only One God, One * Prophet and One Law; nobody has any right to make law, which defies the doctrine of monotheism, and obedience to man-made law ( legislative or judicial ) ranks as idolatry. This is why monotheism is the fountain of absolute monarchy and dictatorship, and wherever Christianity and Islam have been dominant, this form of government has persisted. The most dreadful dictators of the 20th century such as Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini came from the Christian culture, which is no different from Islam in this respect.
    ———–
    * Of course, the Qur’an does say that people must believe in other Prophets as well, but insists that they all belong to the past, and only Muhammad is the Prophet of future, and it is only his laws that must be obeyed.
    ———–
    On the contrary, the nations that have practiced polytheism, i.e. belief in more than one God, come to believe in pluralism which serves as the fountain of democracy i.e. the government of the people, which is totally opposed to theocracy, the government of God, advocated by monotheism or the doctrine of Prophethood. Thus, the former represents man’s natural instincts but the latter being the exponent of dominance-urge, is a phenomenon of antihuman tendencies.

    In a previous chapter, I have stated that a Prophet spreads his message and enforces his laws to sustain his supernatural prestige. Again, the stronger his nation, the greater the chances of his own elevation. This is why prophethood becomes the source of nationalism, much viler than Nazism. The Arab history provides a good illustration of this Prophetic Nationalism, which is based on boundless Dominance-Urge of one man, the Prophet, desperately needing the force of a strongly built nation to perpetuate his glory in the name of God, who will reward his followers with worldly riches and paradise studded with rivers of milk, honey and wine, and inhabited by the most beautiful virgins and handsome boys.

    The nationhood of such people is founded on racial superiority because unless they feel exalted over other people, they cannot pronounce and enforce the superiority of their Prophet over other nations – the sole purpose of this exercise.

    People of other nations, when they embrace Islam, come to be united under the Arabian hegemony, and call themselves Umma or one nation. What a self-deception it is! It is a self-deception because Muslims of other countries are treated as foreigners in Arabia. They are not considered as citizens of Hijaz (Arabia); neither are they allowed to buy property there, nor permitted to run businesses independently. These Muslims are complete foreigners in Arabia, subject to visa, passport and all other laws governing the behavior and obligations of the aliens.
    If Islam was really based on true brotherhood of all Muslims, irrespective of geographical boundaries, Mecca and Medina would have been international cities (at least to all the Muslims); since quotations from the address of the Prophet at the Last Pilgrimage do not measure up to his pan-Islamic conduct, they must be forgeries like many hadilhs. Again, it must be remembered that almost all his audience on that occasion consisted of the Arabs, and therefore, whatever he said, related to the Arabs only. This point becomes clear when we realize that Muhammad laid the foundation of an Arab Empire in the name of Islam and not an Islamic Empire. The foreign Muslims did not have top- level representation in the government of Arabia during the times of Muhammad himself. Neither did they enjoy any such privilege during the heyday of the Arab political ascendancy, nor is there any legal precedent to prove that a Muslim from any territory can become the President or Prime Minister of an Arab country. On the contrary, a person of any race and color could become the head of the mighty Roman Empire. Yet the Muslims claim the superiority of the Islamic system!

    It may appear a digression but it is absolutely necessary to counter the false Islamic propaganda of international brotherhood. In fact, so complex is the nature of this issue that it requires a volume to clear the air, but in this context, the present brevity will have to suffice.

    The Prophetic Nationalism such as practiced by the Arabs, is the most loathsome, lethal and lowest form of racism and shall eventually bring about the total destruction of the human race. The reason being that such religions are based on the fanatical promotion of the deification of their founders. All that serves this purpose is great, good and grand irrespective of the means to achieve it. This is the reason that there is no clear concept of vice and virtue in these religions. In the background of all this, lurks the Prophetic claim to be better than all other Prophets, leading to the national rivalries and their concomitant effects, which are degrading, dreadful and destructive to mankind. Here are some facts to prove this theory:

    Let us first take the Jewish claim, which requires for better understanding, some repetition of the already stated facts:

    The Bible (Old Testament) declares:
    “But My (God) covenant will I establish with Isaac,
    (the ancestor of the Jews) which Sarah (the wife of
    Abraham) shall bear unto thee (Abraham) …”
    (Genesis, 17: 21)

    This statement is contradistinctive because it asserts superiority of the Jews whereas Genesis 21: 13 declares inferiority of the Arabs, who happen to be the children of Ishmael, borne by Hagar, the bondwoman of Abraham’s wife, Sarah:
    “And also of the son of the bondwoman ( Ishmael )
    will make a nation, because he is thy (Abraham’s)
    seed.”

    Here, the Old Testament has not referred to Ishmael as the son of Abraham but a product of his semen. Again, it is a swear-word to call someone the “son of a bondwoman.” This demonstrates the Jewish contempt of the Arabs.

    To bolster the Jewish nationalism, their God declares them to be superior to all nations:
    “For thou (the Jews) art a holy people unto the Lord
    thy God: the Lord thy God, hath chosen thee to be a
    special people unto himself, above all people that are
    upon the face of the earth.” (Deuteronomy 7: 6)

    To make the Jews the Superior race, their Lord taught them a novel formula of ascendancy, that is, be rich. This is the reason that the Jews have developed a sacred motto: “the richer, the godlier” i.e. the more money one has, the closer to God one becomes!

    This is why the Bible says:
    “The Lord shall open unto thee His good treasure …..
    and to bless all the work of thine hand: and thou shalt
    lend unto many nations, and thou shalt not borrow.”
    ( Deuteronomy 28: 12 )

    Money is power; in fact, a wealthy fool has usually proved better than a wise pauper. This is the source and secret of the Jewish “superiority.” And this is what had lifted them above the Arabs before the advent of Muhammad, who wanted to make his own people an exalted race.

    The Jews having suffered the worst type of slavery in Egypt for over four centuries, were just a socially disorganized rabble, and had no national or cultural virtue. It was Moses, the Great, who welded them into a proud nation through the marvel of his Prophethood, which only the dynamic force of Muhammad could rival.

    Besides the principle of money-making, he laid down the Law of Talion, which was to become the guideline of the Jewish culture, lacking the ideal of compassion and forgiveness. This law, stated in Exodus 21: 24-26 demands that if someone hurts your eye, you must hurt his eye and if someone breaks your tooth, you must break his tooth.
    This is the reason that even a naturally kind Jew does not believe in forgiveness.

    Realizing that just blood ties were not strong enough to weld the Jews into a nation, Moses wanted to find them a permanent home of their own. So he declared that there waited for them the Promised Land, which turned out to be Canaan (Palestine). To achieve this goal, he trained them for forty years in a ruthless environment known as “Wilderness” until they became a martial race. This Apostle of God, setting aside all rules of tenderness, taught the Jews to be tough towards other people. It is an irony of history that the Jews themselves have been haunted by similar conditions of dread, dismay and devastation that they inflicted on the Canaanites. One feels distraught when one reads ( Deuteronomy Chapter 3 ) that as an act of obedience to God, the Jews struck the Canaanites “with the edge of their swords” to murder every man, woman and child including anything that breathes: the extermination of the opponents had got to be utter and complete. Further, Joshua 10: 28 gives a systematic account of the planned destruction city by city. Even greater tragedy is the fact that after a passage of 3000 years, the religious scruples have kept the old racial hatred aflame and the war between the Jews and the Palestinians is still as active as ever.

    To understand the situation, one must realize that the Jews are a racial group like any other nation, and, therefore, entitled to preserve their national integrity through all possible means. Their religion has become their personal affair and does not seek expansion through persistent propaganda or persecution. Neither it advocates annihilation of the Gentile on religious grounds nor does it seek abrasive international grouping to create discord, distrust and destruction in the name of God or Moses to promote the Jewish cause. I could have ignored the reference to Judaism but the nature of the discussion does not permit it.

    Prophethood, though considered a Middle Eastern tradition, is not a Jewish invention; it is ascribed to Akhenaton (Amenhotep IV) of Egypt (1379-1362 B.C.) but it is the Jews who perfected this device, and are now paying for it. There is no historical evidence that the Arabs ever awaited the advent of their own Prophet. This tradition had come to be associated with the Jews only, but the genius of Muhammad spotted its national and political potential, which resulted in his own Prophethood. The Arabian Allah in His wisdom thought it fit to declare Muhammad as the Best and the Last Prophet with the sole purpose of not only denying this honor to any other human for good, but also bidding all the Jews and Christians to renounce their faith and follow Muhammad! The worst aspect of this episode is the Muslim belief that denying Muhammad as the Last and the Greatest of all Prophets, is a legitimate *1 cause of war against the infidels. This is a clear proof of the Prophetic jealousy and all the evils that spring from it in the form of power-struggle, social abrasion and international wars. Here is an example in relation to the Arabs and the Jews:

    Prophethood is essentially a form of extreme nationalism, which seeks to raise the Prophet to the status of God in the guise of humanity. However, to succeed, the device of Prophethood requires the force of a strong nation for lifting the Prophet to the status of God, without ripping off his robe of humanity. Hoisting the flag of racial superiority for igniting the undying flame of national bigotry, hatred and jealousy is a favorite, fruitful and frightening tool of prophethood. For the sake of convenience, I quote the hadith which formed the principle and practice of Muhammad’s apostolic ministry:
    “Of the two *2 tribes that God chose as the best were
    the descendants of Ishmael and Isaac. God
    *3 preferred the children of Ishmael (Arabs) to the
    children of Isaac (the Jews). Then God created
    Muhammad in the chosen tribe the *4 Quresh (the
    descendants of Ishmael) and then he chose his family
    as the best among the Quresh families and created
    *5 Muhammad as the best of all men.”
    (Jame Tirmze, Vol. 2)

    This hadith shows the racial nature and national aims of Prophethood. Just consider the following points raised by this hadith:
    *2 The Semitic race, mainly consisting of the Jews and the Arabs, is the best in the world because they both are the Chosen tribes!

    *3 However, God has preferred the Arabs to the Jews.

    This is Muhammad’s retort to the Biblical declaration that Ishmael, the ancestor of the Arabs was a “bondwoman’s son!” Again, the Bible says that it was Isaac, who was offered as a sacrifice to God by Abraham but the Qur’an negates it, and claims that it was Ishmael. Both are supposed to be the Holy Books. Which one of them is telling the truth?
    *4 The Quresh are the best tribe amongst the Arabs.

    *5 His own family, the Banu Hashim are the best family and he himself (Muhammad) is the best of all people!

    In view of the above facts, can anyone honestly say that Prophethood is not the champion of extreme nationalism?
    ————-
    *1 See hadith no. 284 (Muslim). It does not allow the Jews and Christians to hold on to their faith. Jews and Christians are held as infidels by Islam. Another hadith of Bukhari, Vol. one, declares it as the most sacred duty of every Muslim lo fight the infidels until they embrace Islam. The Qur’an openly confirms it in The Clear Sign 98: 5 by classifying “People of the Book” i.e. the Jews and Christians as unbelievers.
    ————-
    Even more surprising is the staunch belief that Islam is the ambassador of international brotherhood, and Muhammad is the humblest of men. How could he be the humblest of men when he claimed to be the best of mankind, especially when he rose to become the ruler of Arabia. Even this is not the whole truth: he claimed that Allah and His angels worshipped him, and so should do all believers, addressing him most reverently!

    It is to perpetuate his own superiority that he devised Islam and made it a highly abrasive ideology based on a permanent conflict of Momin (believer) and Kafir (unbeliever). Being rooted in faith, it is far more destructive than the theory of Class struggle, which Karl Marx borrowed from F. W. Hegel, who might have adapted it from the Qur’an.

    To understand this point, one ought to ponder over the Islamic attitude towards Jerusalem, which is not only the Holiest Jewish centre but also the foundation-stone of the Jewish nationhood and all its traditions.

    It appears that the prophet Muhammad originally dreamt of a Super Semitic Nation, with the Arabs as the senior partners, and to achieve this goal, he was willing to concede a good bit to the Jews:

    1. He acknowledged that God had exalted the Jews over all the people. (The Cow, 2: 115)

    2. He made Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, as the Leader of mankind including the Arabs.

    3. He also declared that Islam was not a new faith but the old Jewish faith of Abraham.

    4. However, his Master Stroke was the appointment of Jerusalem as the Kibla of Islam i.e. the direction of prayers for all Muslims. It means that all Muslims would pay the same adoration to Jerusalem as did the Jews but there was one basic condition attached to it i.e. the Jews of Arabia must embrace Islam, which in religious and national terms meant that the Jews would follow the Qur’anic law and the Arab traditions instead of the Torah and the Jewish practices. Circumstantial evidence suggests that in all probability, Muhammad hoped that if the Arabian Jews accepted him as the Last Messenger of God, the rest of the Jews in Diaspora would also follow suit, thus fulfilling his dream of the Super Semitic Nation on his terms. Obviously, he was convinced of the Jewish expertise that they had accumulated over the centuries. Further, Jesus Christ was also a Jew, whose reverence had raised the holy status of Jerusalem beyond imagination. Thus, this City of David, by becoming the Muslim Kibla would raise the prestige of Muhammad, resulting in his acceptance by both the Jews and Christians. It was a brilliant plan but its success depended on the attitude of the Arabian Jews towards Muhammad as the Prophet. To the utter sorrow of the Jews, they stubbornly denied him, incurring the apostolic wrath not only for themselves but also the entire Jewish race for all times. How?

    As a result of their denial, the Prophet *changed his entire policy towards the Jews, whom he had acknowledged to be the Exalted people:
    ————-
    * “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslims.” (Hadith no. 4366, Muslim)
    ————-
    “O believers, take not Jews and Christians
    as friends, they are friends of each other,
    whoso of you makes them as his friends
    is one of them. God guides not the people
    of the evildoers.” (The Table, 5: 55)

    It appears that Muhammad thought of the Jews as the most formidable foe, who could harm his religion and the country. Therefore, he was not content with their extermination in Arabia, and desired their permanent suppression by his followers during all ages. So, he adopted a stunning hate-love policy towards Jerusalem to seal the Jewish fate:
    “Turn thy (Muhammad) face towards the Holy
    Mosque (Kaaba); and wherever you are, turn your
    faces towards it.” (The Cow, 2: 135-140)

    Thus, the Prophet Muhammad deprived Jerusalem of the dignity that he had bestowed upon it: it was no more the Kibla of Islam. Why? Look at the following verse:
    “Those are they (the Jews) whom God has cursed;
    he whom God has cursed,
    thou will not find for him any helper
    Or have a share in the kingdom?
    If that is so, they do not give the people
    a single date-spot …” (Women, 4: 55)

    It is difficult to interpret this verse on its own. However, it is clear from it that the Jews are no longer a Blessed, but a Cursed people. The Qur’an has given reason for this Divine change of heart, that is, they have not believed in Muhammad. The meaning of this verse begins to amplify itself when we consider this hadith:
    “The last hour would not come unless the Muslims
    fought and killed the Jews … and until the Jews hid
    themselves behind a stone or a wall would say:
    ‘Muslims, the servants of Allah, there is a Jew behind
    me, come and kill him.”‘
    (Hadith no. 6985, Muslim, Vol. 4)

    One should note that this hadith directs All Muslims, and not just the Arabs, to kill the Jews, wherever they are found. The Jew-bashing in Arabia and the immense hatred found against them in all the Islamic sacred books and literature has resulted in a strange but a very strong belief among all Muslims throughout the world: they believe that the Qur’an has forbidden return of the Jews to Jerusalem and form a government of their own. Why should not the Jews return to Jerusalem?

    Muhammad accomplished this feat through a stroke of sagacity, which has no parallel in the world history. Look at the following:
    “Glory be to Him (Allah), who carried His servant
    (Muhammad) by night from the Holy Mosque
    (Kaaba) to the Further Mosque (Jerusalem), the
    precincts of which we have blessed …”
    (The Night Journey, 17: I)

    It is a reference to the Prophet’s visit to Allah when on his way to seeing the Almighty in person, he was taken to Jerusalem as a part of his holy itinerary. Thus Jerusalem became a sacred place in the Islamic faith and an integral part of its territory!

    Frankly speaking, one should add that the appointment of Jerusalem as the Muslim Kibla has nothing to do with spiritual affairs; it was simply a political decision seeking a permanent foothold in the Jewish life. Look at the following facts:

    1. The change of Kibla took place at the repeated requests of Muhammad because “We ( Allah ) have seen thee turning thy face about in the heaven; now we shall surely turn thee to a direction (Kaaba) that shall satisfy thee ( O Muhammad).” (The Cow, 2: 137)

    One should remember that Allah always acts as Muhammad desires! Change of Kibla was Muhammad’s decision that he imposed on Allah for the benefit of the Arabs.

    2. The Qur’an (2: 148) states that every nation has its own Kibla. Therefore, the Arabs should have had their own Kibla right from the beginning. The mere fact that they did not, demonstrates its political nature.

    3. Umar had a hand in the change of Kibla on national ground (hadith no. 5903 – Muslim). This great Arab nationalist was stabbed to death by a Persian slave owing to his (Umar’s) racial bias.

    4. The Prophet had commanded his followers not to defecate, facing Kaaba and Jerusalem because both ranked as Kibla. These instructions, which were binding on every Muslim, were meant to show one’s respect to the holiness of these places. However, the Prophet himself ignored it in respect of Jerusalem:
    “Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Umar: People say whenever you sit for answering the call of nature, you should not face the Kibla or Bait-i-Muqaddis (Jerusalem). I told them, “Once I went up the roof of our house and I saw Allah’s Messenger (Muhammad) answering the call of nature while sitting on two bricks facing Bait-ul- Muqaddas (Jerusalem) but there was a screen covering him.'” (Bukhari, 147 Vol. I)

    Muhammad’s act clearly demonstrates that he did not have genuine respect for Jerusalem: it was just a political convenience to him. It is further confirmed by the fact that twice a year (during Shabaan and Zwilhajj) Kaaba, the Arabian Kibla, receives a highly reverential treatment when it is washed with gallons of rose-scented Zamzam water and is honored with a change of new covering every year, but nothing of the sort takes place in regard to the Bait-ul- Muqaddas ( Jerusalem ) !

    Against this Islamic background, one must look at the Jewish attitude towards Jerusalem to realize the possibility of a most horrendous clash, which may sound the death-knell of human civilization.

    Diaspora, that is, dispersal of the Jews from their homeland, first resulted from the Babylonian Exile of 586 B.C. What Muhammad did twelve centuries later, only fractionally added to it, and does not strictly come within this category. Though the Jews came to be settled in Persia, Spain and many countries of the West, it has been the burning desire of the Diaspora Jewry to return home despite the fact that they did very well in the foreign lands. Returning home i.e. to Jerusalem became not only a fervent desire but an integral part of the Jewish faith. This is what led to the formation of the Zionist Movement, which sought to achieve this goal. While this forms the greatest triumph for the Jews, it strikes at the Islamic precept of No-Return, which the Muslim Zealots have so painfully forged over the centuries to keep the Jews out of their Motherland.
    Returning of the Jews to Israel may just be a historical event to the world but for the Muslims it is a tragedy of immense proportions because it strikes at the root of the Islamic traditions which hold that the Jews have been cursed by Allah and, as a result, shall not be allowed to return to Jerusalem and form a government of their own. Bearing this Islamic doctrine in mind, one can realize why the Prophet Muhammad wanted to lay a spiritual claim on Jerusalem as a part of the Islamic faith despite having no real reverence for it. Obviously, it was a political ploy to interfere with the Jewish history.

    To stress the enormity of the situation, I must add that there is no Judaism without Jerusalem. This fact is borne out by the concept of Diaspora, which describes the religious, eschatological, philosophical and political concerns of the Jewish people. It means that the Land of Israel (and Judah) has been given to the Jews as a fulfillment of the Divine Promise, and returning to it is a part of the messianic hope. Here, one can see the most devastating conflict between the Jewish faith and the Islamic Law of No-Return. And who is responsible for the lethal strife? It is the doctrine of Prophethood, which enables a person to realize the dictates of his super ego in the name of a supernatural Power, termed as God. Here the clash is between two Prophets – Moses and Muhammad. Who was right? – Moses, who claimed that Israel is the Land promised to the Jews by God, and therefore, it is exclusively theirs – or is it Muhammad who asserts that the Jews have been cursed by God for not believing in his prophethood, and as a result, shall not be allowed to return to Israel and form their own government?

    The fact, as we see is, that the Jews have returned to Israel for the last fifty years and have been able to form a government of their own. While it gives them a lot of satisfaction, it has hurt the Muslims badly and they desperately want to restore the dignity of the Islamic faith by expelling the Jews from Israel, which they claim to be their First Kibla. To prove the Qur’an right, the Muslims are determined to exterminate the Jews in Israel.

    In fact, Muhammad’s eternal desire to humiliate the Jews is rooted in his national tendencies. He abhorred the Jews, not only because he thought of them as the rivals to the Arabs, but also because he could not swallow their claim of racial superiority based on the choice of God; the Jewish claim to be the only legitimate descendants of Abraham has proved highly provocative to the Arab ego, fathered by Ishmael; mundane success of the Jews is another cause of envy.

    To remedy this situation, the Prophet not only declared the Arabs as racially superior to the Jews but also checked their historical progress by laying a perpetual claim on Jerusalem. He must have realized that the Arabs on their own might not be able to stop the Jewish march to glory, and therefore, he put the weight of Islamic Imperialism behind the Arabs.

    Thus, a true Muslim must hate the Jews as did the Prophet.

    Here one can see the nature of Islam, as the Arab Imperialism. This is a specially devised faith to serve the national interest of Arabia – subtlety being its key-word. During the heyday of the British, if there was a political upheaval in a certain part of the Empire, the government had to mobilize armed forces from other territories to restore the situation. But the unique form of Arab Imperialism that the Prophet invented does not depend on armies; the Muslims of non-Arab origin have been so thoroughly brainwashed that they hate the Jews as their religious duty and shall be happy to join any campaign of Jew-bashing of their own free will and at their own expense. The fact that most Muslim countries have still not recognized Israel, is a product of these religious tendencies.

    Over the last fifty years, the Israelis have fought several wars against the Arabs and are still on permanent alert against them, particularly, and the world of Islam, generally. It is usually believed that the American oil interest is the real cause of political instability in the Middle East, and some go as far as to claim that the Jews have been planted there by the West for this reason. This is a sheer nonsense because the Americans and the Western nations buy oil from the Arab countries at the internationally fixed prices as set by the free economic forces. The truth is the other way round: if the Americans and Europeans did not buy oil from Arabia, she would run into dire economic conditions.

    The real cause of trouble is the clash of the two Prophets – Moses and Muhammad: the Jews want to feel secure in their Promised Land and the Arabs, believing the Jewish return against the precepts of Islam, desperately want to uphold the dignity of their faith by drowning all Jews in the sea of Galilee. The Arabs have been tremendously helped by their Islamic Imperialism and the Jews have been lucky (so far) to defend themselves with the help of the West.

    How long can the Jews stand up to the Arabs and their one billion followers? When they find it impossible to survive through political means that will be the saddest moment not only for them and the Arabs, but also the entire human race. The Jews, who believe in the Law of Talion, shall not go down quietly. To demonstrate their hatred of Islam, they will turn Mecca and Medina into Hiroshima and Nagasaki, thus mobilizing the spirit of Islamic Jihad, which is a practical demonstration of Allah’s “terrible retribution” (The Cow, 2: 205). It will create a state of war throughout the world.

    What I have said above is not a wild guess but a calculation based on Arab-Jewish antagonism that has persisted over the centuries. The cause of this perpetual strife is not the Jewish religion because a Jew is someone, who is racially Jew, and not just a follower of the Jewish religion. Again, he is not dedicated to propagating his religion for gaining converts, though the doors of a synagogue are open to those, who want to embrace this faith of their own free will. It is the seeker, who has to prove his genuineness for admission.

    On the contrary, Allah has made it obligatory for all humans to embrace Islam; those who refuse to accept it, qualify as the “Satan’s Party” and must be eliminated by the Muslims, who rank as “Allah’s Party.” Rejection of Islam is the most heinous crime that one can imagine, and for this reason one is liable to a terrible punishment: Allah Himself declares and legitimizes the most despicable acts such as murder, rape, arson and enslavement of non-Muslims, when they are committed to spread Islam. This is called “Jihad,” the Holy War. The West tasted its Holiness for four hundred years in the form of the Islamic Crusades, which reduced the European population to half of its normal size.

    This Islamic attitude is at its worst towards the Jews. Any Muslim, who can kill a Jew is sure to win a seat in paradise. Realizing this fact, some Islamic countries have made Jew-bashing as the cornerstone of their foreign policy with a view to winning leadership of the Muslim world. This is what makes Israel wary of the Muslim lands and they have to watch their economic and military progress. History has recorded that Israel launched an air raid against Iraq in 1981 to destroy its nuclear reactor at Osirak. It was considered an unprovoked attack by the Muslim world. Apparently, it was so, but in view of the above mentioned facts, it was not.

    Prophethood or Revelation, being a political device, is the source of primitiveness and destruction to humankind, and these remarks equally apply to both the Qur’an and the Bible. These books are highly self- contradictory. Therefore, instead of leading, they mislead people. Take for example, the Islamic Law of No-Return in relation to the Jews.
    The QAur’an in The Table, V: 20-25 contravenes itself:
    “And when Moses said to his people, ‘O, my people,
    remember God’s blessings upon you …. When He
    gave you such as He had not given to any being.'”

    “O, my people, enter the Holy Land, which God has
    prescribed for you, and turn not back in your
    traces….”

    ” They said, ‘Moses, there are people in it, very
    arrogant; we will not enter it until they depart from
    it; if they depart from it, then we will enter.’ Said,
    two men of those that feared God whom God had
    blessed, ‘Enter against them … when you enter it,
    you will be victors.'”

    In a nutshell, it means that Palestine i.e. Israel (and Judah) is the Holy Land that has been prescribed for the Jews by Allah, who has assured them victory in the struggle.

    Today, due to the enormity of weapons, Israel is not just an Arab-Jewish affair because it may involve the survival of mankind. Since this clash is a product of the prophetic rivalries, one can clearly see that Prophethood has nothing to do with guidance; it is simply a political doctrine, which especially, exposes the reality of Islam as the tool of Arab Imperialism owing to its active role in the international field as well as its dictatorial part in the internal affairs of every Muslim country.

    • Lucky, you’re wasting your time here, dude. You really need to refer to a good doctor because:
      – You copy things from different Websites and paste them here
      – You repeat the same thing over and over
      – You refrain from indulging in debates rather keep babbling yourself
      – You are indecent and use bad words which are completely disgusting
      – You believe that all Muslims are evil however that’s absurd
      – You make lengthy comments, disabling others trying answering you

      In short, you’re a terrorist yourself. I really think you’re not normal. If you think you can disprove Islam then come and debate. If you are afraid of defeat then Alhamdulillah!

      • YO HO HO MO,

        THE BILLY GOAT NEANDERTHALS

        Zakaria Ar-Razi, one of the greatest minds of Islamic world, attacked religion in general and Islam in particular with a force unthinkable in this day. He wrote:

        “The prophets—these Billy goats with long beards, cannot claim any intellectual or spiritual superiority. These Billy goats pretend to come with a message from God, all the while exhausting themselves in spouting their lies, and imposing on the masses blind obedience to the “words of the master.” The miracles of the prophets are impostures, based on trickery, or the stories regarding them are lies. The falseness of what all the prophets say is evident in the fact that they contradict one another: one affirms what the other denies, and yet each claims to be the sole depository of the truth; thus the New Testament contradicts the Torah, the Koran the New Testament. As for the Koran, it is but an assorted mixture of “absurd and inconsistent fables,” which has ridiculously been judged inimitable, when, in fact, its language, style, and its much vaunted “eloquence” are far from being faultless. Custom, tradition, and intellectual laziness lead men to follow their religious leaders blindly. Religions have been the sole cause of the bloody wars that have ravaged mankind. Religions have also been resolutely hostile to philosophical speculation and to scientific research. The so-called holy scriptures are worthless and have done more harm than good, whereas the “writings of the ancients like Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, and Hippocrates have rendered much greater service to humanity.”

        THIS KIND OF CRITICISM OF ISLAM TODAY, WOULD CARRY THE DEATH SENTENCE!

        Can any intellectual speak so freely against Islam calling the prophets “Billy Goats” as Ar-Razi called them disdainfully in these days and live? Does the fatwa against Salman Rushdie ring a bell?

        The more a country applies Islam, the more uncivilized and uncultured it becomes.

        I have no doubt that if Islam was eliminated completely, EX-MUSLIMS would regain the past glory of their secular days and even surpass it. There is no reason to believe that the black-eyed race of the Middle East is inferior to the blue-eyed Europeans. The number of Middle Eastern scientists, academics and scholars in the West is an indication that given the opportunity they are no less intelligent than any other race. The reason that they are backward, uncivilized and barbaric in their native countries is because Islam has taken away their dignity, humanity and intelligence. Islam has brainwashed them, and like a drug has damaged the minds of their people.

        SAVAGE ARABS & THEIR CULT

        Bukhari:V5B59N459 “I entered the Mosque, saw Abu, sat beside him and asked about sex. Abu Said said, “We went out with Allah’s Apostle and we received female slaves from among the captives. We desired women and we loved to do coitus interruptus.”

        Do you think a female prisoner would desire to have sex with the very people responsible for the murder/beheading of her husband, father brother and/or son?

  3. HATERS ARE NOT JUST HATERS, BUT UNCONSCIOUS PEOPLE WITH A LOST MIND TO THE DEVIL. ISLAM WATCH IS COMPLETELY A RAGE AGAINST ISLAM AND WILL INVENT ANYTHING AND TRANSLATE ANYTHING AND FALSIFY ANYTHING JUST TO PROVE A POINT IN THEIR BLINDNESS. THEY CHANGE QURAN VERSES TO SUIT THEM, AS THEY WANT TO SHOW PEOPLE. THEY ARE THE EPITOME AND THE EXPERT IN ADVERTISING. I WONDER BRITNEY WHO CAN SING SHIT BECAME A STAR, SO DO J.LO. THIS IS WHAT THEY DO. ISLAM WATCH AND THIS WEBSITE WILL NOT GET RESPECT FROM ME AND WILL NOT DISSUADE ME TO BELIEVE ONE HAIR FROM IT. I THOUGHT THAT THIS IS A POLITICAL MANEUVER, BUT NO! I WAS WRONG, IT IS THE WIND OF GOD SEND TO THEIR MIND AND EYES TOGETHER SO THEY WON’T SEE THE LIGHT OF GOD AND WILL INHABIT HELL WITH SATAN IT WAS ADVISED TO LUCIFER WHEN HE ASKED GOD HIS LAST WISH TO DRAG THE ONE WHO WILL NOT BELIEVE IN GOD, WHILE REFUSING TO PROSTRATE TO ADAM. THE PROBLEM IS THAT I AM SHIVERING JUST WITH THE IDEA THAT WHEN THESE PEOPLE WILL REACH THEIR GRAVE AND THE ANGEL OF DEATH AN HOUR AFTER THEY FAMILY HAS LEFT THE CIMETARY WAKE HIM UP AND ASK HIM THE ULTIMATE QUESTION AND HE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER. HE WILL ASSIGN A CREATURE TO LIVE WITH HIM IN HIS GRAVE FILLED WITH FILTH AND STINGY, STINK LIKE SEWERS. HIS BODY WILL BE CRUSHED SO TIGHT THAT HE WON’T BE ABLE TO MOVE AND WHEN HE RELEASE HIM HE WILL BE SITTING BESIDE HIM BEATING HIM UP AND FEEDING HIM FOUL . OH, PEOPLE! DO NOT FOLLOW THESE TRANSGRESSORs, IT WILL LEAD YOU ASTRAY, SEEK THE LIGHT OF GOD BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE, AND HE WILL ANSWERR YOU AND SAVE YOU FROM THE HYPNOSE OF SATAN! OH PEOPLE, DO NOT BELIVE IN THIS FILTH, NO ONE HAS EVER SEEN MOHAMMAD OR WHO IS HE EXCEPT WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN HIS HADITH AND THE WORD HE RECEIVED FROM THE ALL MIGHTY.
    THIS IS ONLY HEAR SAY AND TRANSMISSION FROM A HATER TO ANOTHER ONE, AND PROBABLY THE MOST UNEDUCATED PEOPLE IN THE PLANET. If YOU BELIVE IN GOD, SEEEK AND SEARCH THE REAL STORY. THESE PEOPLE ARE ALREADY BLINDED AND IT IS WRITTEN IN THE QURAN. GOD KNOWS EVERYTHING WHAT HAVE HAPPEN TODAY ESPECIALLY IN THIS WEBSITE. HE WILL NOT SAVE THEM FROM THE TORTURE OF THE GRAVE NOR THE HEREAFTER. OH PEOPLE! REPENT AND SEEK THE TRUE, THE TRUE WILL SET YOU FREE AND READ THE QURAN. GOD CAN KILL ANYONE HE WANTS, DID’NT HE KILL EVERY ONE ON EARTH AND SAVE NOAH AND HIS COMPANION AND HIS ANIMALS. IF HE SAYS KILL, THEM HE MEANT IN SOME SOURAT FIGHT THEM NOT KILL THEM. IF HE SAID KILL THEM , IT WAS THE OLD TIME WHEN THE BELIVERS WILL BE KILLED IF THEY DONT KILL THEIR AGRESSORs, THEN HE MEANT THESE PEOPLE ARE UP TO BE KILLED BY HIM AT THAT TIME AND GOD KNOWS BEST . WHEN SOMEONE KILL ANOTHER INNOCENT PERSON TODAY, WHAT THE COURT DO IS TO KILL THAT PERSON WITH AN INJECTION OF GAZ CHAMBER. IT WAS THE SAME BEFORE AND NEVER CHANGED. HOWEVER, TODAYS PEOPLE KILLING A MURDERER WITH AN INJECTION IS NOT VIOLENT, THEY JUST PUT HIM TO SLEEP FOREVER. 14 % OF DEATH PENALTY IS INNOCENT TODAY AND THEY KILL THEM, 96 RAPES HAPPEN JUST IN ONE YEARS IN SOME COUNTRIES, SO WHAT SATAN SHOWS YOU ONLY THE BAD PART AND DECORATE THE WORST. OH PEOPLE! A PROPHET HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED IN ZORATRIAN BIBLE, HINDU BIBLE, TORAT OLD TESTAMENT AND THE BIBLE IN JOHN THE OLD JOHN THAT WAS REMOVED BY THE ROMAN OR THE GREEK. TEY MADE THE BIBLE LOOK GOOD FOR POLITICAL REASON. GOD IS NOT THAT MERCIFUL AGAINST MURDERER, TRANGRESSOR, AND THE ON WHO FALSIFY HIS WORD, BUT 100 TIMES MORE MERCIFUL THAN A MOTHER FOR HER TODLER CHILD, AND FORGIVING TO THE ONE WHO REPENT , AND THE ONE MOHAMMAD WAS SEND TO CONVINCE WITH IT PEOPLE THAT THERE IS A GOD AND WHAT TO FOLLOW. THE QURAN WHEN IT DESCRIBE THE “TO KILL” WAS A VERSE THAT WAS SEND TO MOHAMMAD AT THE TIME OF WAR WHEN YOU ARE SLEEPING AND SOMEONE TAKE YOU NECK WITH A SORD JUST BECAUSE YOU BELEIVE IN GOD AND REFUSE TO FOLLOW THEIR IDOLS, UNTIL CAME THE REASON AND THE TRUE AND STOPPEDIT. THAT IS THE REASON GOD SEND THESE VERSES. TODAY IT IS NOT THE SAME THING, BUT THE JUDGEMENT IS COMING SOON, AND WE WILL ALL BE PRESENT. THERE’S NO NO-SHOW, AS MONEY WILL DISAPREAR , NO RICH , NO CELEBRITY AND NO HOUSES, ONLY AN IMMENSE PLAIN EARTH WIHTOUT MOUNTAIN WHERE EVERYONE WHO EVER EXISTED WILL BE JUDGED IN THIS PLAIN OF RESURRECTION , AND WILL WAIT HIS TOUR BAREFOOTED AND NAKED AS HE WAS BORN. NO MONEY, NO CHILDREN, NO CAR, NO PLANE, NOTHING WILL SAVE YOU, BUT THE JUDGEMENT OF YOUR DEEDS, OR BURRY YOU IN HELLE BY THE HEAVINESS OF YOUR SINS. THE ONE WHO WILL BE CHOSEN FIRST ARE THE ONE WHO FOUGHT FOR GOD’S NAME AND DIED UNDER THE SWORD OF THE ENEMY OF GOD. AMONG THEM CHRISTIAN , JEWS AND OTHER WHO BELIVED IN HIS ONENESS.THEN COME THE ONE WHO WILL BE ILLUMINATED BY A LIGHT , WHICH MEAN THE WATER THEY PUT IN THEIR FACE FROM PERFOMING THEIR ABLUTION EVERY DAYS, BEFORE PRAYER. THEY WILL BE RECOGNIZED AND PICKED UP BY ANGELS LIKE BIRD PICKING UP SEEDS FROM THE FLOOR. ALL THESE TO HEAVEN, AND THEN THE JUDGEMENT WILL CONTINUE. THE ONE WHO INSULTED A PROPHET AND REIDCULIZED HIS NAME WILL BE LEFT AT THE END WHEN THE GATES OF HEAVEN WILL BE CLOSED AND GOD KNOWS BEST. MANY CHRISTIAN AND JEWS WILL BE PICKED UP FOR THE GARDEN OF EDEN, IT IS WRITTEN BECAUSE THEY HAVE RESTRAINED THEM SEFL FROM DOUBTING AND DID GOOD DEED. SOME MUSLIM WILL BE IN HELL ALSO AND NO ONE WILL ESCAPE THIS JUDGEMENT EVEN THOUSAND YEARS OLD PEOPLE WHO CRAMED IN THEIR GRAVE HAS BEEN RESURECTED AND PUT ALIVE TO THIS PLAIN . OH PEOPLE SHUT THIS CIRCUS OFF; SATAN IS YOU DIRECTOR, AND NOT GOD. MAY GOD HAVE MNERCY ON YOUR SOUL?

  4. I am a Muslim, and you are not my brother as every one start to call you and I do know the Quran and the hadith and very well versed in the history of Mohammad . First the Jews of Yathrib (Almadina) from the tribe of alqurayza have been protected and even defended by Mohammad PBUH as he gave the order to share their land and so forth, when he came to Yathrib the former name of Almadina almounaouara and I have been there many time. They sought power and refused the leadership of Mohammad regardless that he gave them more than their right . They conspired first against Mohammed PBUH who gave them food and shelter with the named king abudubaya , but he could not do anything and was a fake Muslim just to be close to Mohammad PBUH and kill him. the Jews of alqurayza and Quraythah allies with the Alaws tribe went to Mohammed PBUH enemy in Makah especially to the leader of quraish Abu-Soufyan and conspired for his death. when this did not work because some of the Jews were very conscientious of the situation and were his neighbor did not want to cause any problem but their head has convinced them to go against with the reason that Abu-Soufyan was coming with 10 000 troops to destroy almadina and kill Mohammed . the one who were reasonable start to think money and power. Mohamed PBUH won the battle while angel came from the sky and blow a strong wind on their caravan and their soldier and Abu-Soufyan flew the door of Almadina. when Mohamed PBUH Troup came back to the castle for the Jews who committed treason and wanted to kill Mohammad PBUH, they asked one of the Jews will be the judge and put them away as prisoner and some of them have been cast away from Almadina and the one who resisted were killed after they started the battle first by throwing an arrow on one of the prophet’s companion and killed him. all you bull shit is completely dedicated to hate because you have no religion and God is Allah and yawhe , and dieu , and dios , and elllahi in armeic, and one and one . He is the same who created you sorry ass into this world and created with the help of Satan around you a dedicated and almost impressive work just to hate on Mohammad PBUH and Islam. There’s many Muslim that are not good , but if you read the a Quran and the hadith you will understand but you are not allowed by God . he blinded you because he know that it will not serve you to have compassion . He did blind many millions before you, including abu-jahl, and the Sodom and Gomorra and people of Noah. You are just an ignorant . I will say you are Another Abu-Jahl. period.

  5. Brother Rahul,
    After u quoting me, u gave me some links of(agniveer,satyavidya)
    and further u said :”When I say that I accept the darker side of
    Hinduism, then it means that I won’t follow it. Why I need to follow a
    evil and bad thing, when I know that it is BAD?”

    1) first brother u should stop being a copy and paste not only in ur reply but even in ur posts on ur website

    2) the links wich u gave hear is only talking by they own without giving any strong references, its just like whatever they believe

    Even so (they didn’t provide any strong refrances) ,I agree with them that ,the stories of Krishna and polygamy in hindusim r fake and the Hindus beliveing that stories blindly (as I understand)

    and I congrats u ,Thats what I want to prove u and u accepted ur self ,My point is beside ISLAM all other religion scripture r corrupted , or modified and interpolated so, they r no more trust worthy boz of the man handy work and I congrats u again boz u and ur (link) both agree with me that GOD wont make u to fallow evil and bad things, but still majority of Hindus r fallow and believing in that stories blindly

    Later u said : ” for the sake of argument if at all I accept whatever Churchill said about Indians, and did with us, still his saying about Muslims is not disproved. I also quoted Khomeini, what you say about his statement?”

    For that first I thank’s to ALMIGHTY ALLAH ,that the guy (Churchill) is responsible for the death of millions poor Indians is against the ISLAM not the follower of it ,that what is happen when u go against the good , and fallow the evil and brother beside u lacking in knowledge ur lacking in ur commonsense too , why should I want the guy like him will perish ISLAM or any other religion I am happy that he is against it ,and what about the Khomeini ? what about him, who the hell is he or Churchill or any other (tom dick and harry) ? u might b know that we Muslims only fallow QURAN and HADITHS
    whoever go aginst them is nothing to do with ISLAM ,what ever Khomeini said (as u quote may b right or may b wrong) is contradicting the QURAN and HADITH .

    Next u quoted me again as I said : “Brother U already LACKING OF KNOWLEDGE ,and I mention ur IGNORANCE about ISLAM in my last reply, then how come u even think to educate them and the EVIDENCE which is given by ur godfather’s to u is already proven wrong 100’s of times before, and INSHA’ALLAH I will do it again.”

    “”” By fallowing u said : “You should remember that you are only
    discussing ‘Women in Hinduism’ and not defending Women in Islam, so you cannot expose my knowledge until you come to point. No where you have proven me wrong, not even a single time, 100 is far.

    Later u accepted : “Lastly, I accept that I escape from logical fallacies, as you said ” first I have to show u the status of women in other religion, then I have to tell u about the status of women before
    ISLAM and then proof u the difference after ISLAM,”

    Brother again I am repeating the same thing, that comparision won’t prove anything. There are many religion to compare with, and many have a very high status of Women than Islam (as per scriptures).
    Why clinging to same fallacy, please come to the point, and prove a High, Good and First class status
    of Women in Islam, as per scriptures.”””

    So, fanilly u accpeted that u doing “Tu Quoque fallacy” (before u accusing me for that)
    How can u say comparison won’t prove anything ,comparision will everything I will prove u that too
    if u saying that the other religion have a very high status of women than islam (as per scripture )
    why u dont giving an example and prove me that is better than ISLAM , and we will see how much knowledge u have.

  6. BROTHER RAHUL ,
    HELLO AGAIN THIS IS SYED ZIA,
    I THINK U DIDN’T GET MY COMMENTS ON GOOGLE +, IF U GET IT THEN U DIDN’T REPLIED .I AM WAITING FOR UR SIDE ANSWER AND EXPLANATION IF U HAVE ….OR UR RUNNING OR HIDING OFF ,
    TO MAKE UR MEMORY REFRESH I AM POSTING THE LINK OF OUR DISCUSSION AND OUR LAST COMMENTS TOO , HOPEFULLY U HAVE ANSWERS FOR MY REPLY IF NOT SO, PLZ STOP THIS NONSENSE AGAINST ISLAM ON THIS SITE .

    WHEN U SAID :
    Rahul Raj Aug 6, 2012
    Dear Zia,

    In your last comment you said, “first: first u denying to b a Hindu , now u said I can call u a Hindu , as well as u said Hinduism have darker side and u accept that, beside being in the darker side u Accusing other religions.”

    Let me remind you, I asked you how you presumed that I am Hindu, I may be a Buddhist, Sikh etc (This you are calling denial). Anyways I asked you to call me Hindu, but also I accepted that this religion too has many darker sides, and people accept it. Now here is what a Hypocrite is “a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.”

    How do I resemble to above meaning??

    Next you said, ” BUT, instead of Spreading love for Humanity u only spreading HATE, MISCHIEF, MISUNDERSTANDING about ISLAM and trying to MISGUIDE the Muslim’s as well as Non-Muslim’s”

    If I am misguiding and spreading Hatred, then what Taliban and Jihadis are doing? I am educating Non-Muslim as well as Muslim about the religion of hatred for humanity, i.e. Islam, which commands Muslims to kill Non-Believers, rape their women and loot their property. I have evidence for these claims.

    You added, “No,brother, let me correct u, if some Muslims have darker side boz they don’t fallow the ideology of ISLAM and they didn’t love enough Prophet MOHAMMED(pbuh)”

    Let me quote what Sir Winston Churchill said, he said:- “”Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.”

    Did you got it, the evil doing of Muslims is because of the commands in Quran, as such 9:29 commands Muslims to fight Non-Muslim, so they do it. In fact your own scholar like Khomeni said, “”Those who know nothing about Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those people are witless. Islam says: ‘Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all!’ Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by the infidel? Islam says: ‘Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter them.’ Islam says: ‘Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword.’ The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”

    So you see Muslims are evil because Quran teaches them to be.

    Lastly, you said “one more thing brother , for example: if ur claiming me that my religion is unjust with women, (so, for the sake of the argument keep that a side ) y don’t show me the better status of women in any other religion and tell me y its better .so,everyone can fallow that ”

    Brother I don’t prescribe religion to people, we all have mind and we can choose, what is Good. Now again you stated which religion has better status of women than that of Islam. Why we need to argue on this, we need to discuss what Islam says about Women. 

    THEN I REPLY:

    zia syedAug 6, 2012Edit
    Brother Rahul,
    Ok, Hypocrite means “a person who pretends to have virtues,moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.”
    So,u claiming that according to this definition ur not a Hypocrite , and I can call u a Hindu and u accepting the DARKER side of the Hinduism.
    So, that means -YOU GONNA SHARE UR WIFE WITH UR FOUR OTHER BROTHERS,AND IF U OR UR FATHER DIE BEFORE UR WIFE OR MOTHER SO UR WIFE AND OR UR MOTHER WILL B SATI WITH U OR WITH UR FATHER,AND THEN WHILE UR WIFE OR UR SISTER TAKING A BAATH THEN SOME KRISHNA CAN COME AND TAKE THEIR CLOTHES AND MAKE THEM COME OUT NAKED SO, HE CAN ENJOY OR U CAN GO AND STEAL FROM UR NEIGHBOUR(LIKE KRISHNA DO FOR THE MAKKHAN)AND MANY MORE?
    SO U ACCEPT and FALLOW ALL THIS , THEN ONLY UR ACTIONS DIDN’T BELIE STATED OF UR BELIEFS! THEN ONLY UR NOT A HYPOCRITE.

    BUT MY SECOND CLAIM IS STILL THER AS I SAID:
    ‘instead of Spreading love for Humanity u only spreading HATE, MISCHIEF,MISUNDERSTANDING about ISLAM and trying to MISGUIDE the Muslim’s as well as Non-Muslim’s’,
    …Because somebody doing wrong (like Taliban and jihadis as per ur knowledge) that didnt make u right, its just like someone stealing from ur home,BOz of that u stealing frm mine, (this is nonsense)

    Next U said: ‘I am educating Non-Muslim as well as Muslim about the religion of hatred for humanity, i.e. Islam, which command Muslims to kill Non-Believers, rape their women and loot their property.I have evidence for these claims’
    Brother U already LACKING OF KNOWLADGE ,and I mention ur IGNORANCE about ISLAM in my last reply, then how come u even think to educate them and the EVIDENCE which is given by ur godfather’s to u is already proven wrong 100’s of times before, and INSH’ALLAH I will do it again.

    Hear my prove of ur IGNORANCE AND LACK OF KNOWLADGE,u gave me the quote from Winston Churchill, this is the same Winston Churchill who is the responsible for the death of more then million INDIAN’s by starving (u can refer to book of journalist Madhusree Mukherjee about churchill) and He is the same guy who call INDIAN’S as cowards, filthy , dirty poor and many more
    (u can easy frm acces on google)

    U gave the verse from QURAN 9:29,I dont understand why always u guys jump on the verse without any context,why don’t u come from the beginning.This chapter is begin with the declaration of immunity between the Muslim’s and Mushriks of Mecca and after they broke this Immunity,then ALLAH order to fight with them and even ALLAH gave them a chance in
    ch 9:11: “But (even so) if they repent, establish regular prayers, and
    practise regular charity― they are your brethren in Faith: (thus) do We explain signs in detail, for those who understand”

    even in ch 9:29 :”Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last
    Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger nor, acknowledge the Religion of Truth from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission and feel themselves subdued”
    ..here also ALLAH order to fight only with THOSE who
    didnt obey the laws of the ruler (mean ALLAH ans HIS MESSENGER) and who didn’t pay jizyah,

    and last u said: ‘Brother I don’t prescribe religion to people, we all
    have mind and we can choose, what is Good’

    Brother if u cant prescribe religion then y u misguide them with wrong info,and if u said ISLAM is bad then u should know what is good, boz u cannot say BAD TO BAD UNTIL U KNOW WHAT IS GOOD(means difference between good and bad), and u just have to suggest not impose,as u said we all have our mind and we can choose what is good,

    u continue …’Now again you stated which religion has better status of women than that of Islam. Why we need to argue on this, we need to discuss what Islam says about Women’

    I know u gonna try to escape with exsuce, thats y I told u in my last reply ….. ‘I totally agree with u ,we r hear to discuss the status of
    women in Islam,because of ur IGNORANCE about ISLAM, first I have to show u the status of women in other religion, then I have to tell u about the status of women before ISLAM and then proof u the difference after ISLAM, then only we can do justice with this topic or justice with women of ISLAM’…….I hope u got it now…… atleast.

    • Dear Zia Syed,

      You started discussion with this, “So, that means -YOU GONNA SHARE UR WIFE WITH UR FOUR OTHER BROTHERS,AND IF U OR UR FATHER DIE BEFORE UR WIFE OR MOTHER SO UR WIFE AND OR UR MOTHER WILL B SATI WITH U OR WITH UR FATHER,AND THEN WHILE UR WIFE OR UR SISTER TAKING A BAATH THEN SOME KRISHNA CAN COME AND TAKE THEIR CLOTHES AND MAKE THEM COME OUT NAKED SO, HE CAN ENJOY OR U CAN GO AND STEAL FROM UR NEIGHBOUR(LIKE KRISHNA DO FOR THE MAKKHAN)AND MANY MORE?
      SO U ACCEPT and FALLOW ALL THIS , THEN ONLY UR ACTIONS DIDN’T BELIE STATED OF UR BELIEFS! THEN ONLY UR NOT A HYPOCRITE.”

      Well first of all I would ask you to read what really Hindu Scriptures say about your above claim. Following is the Vedic site which answers all your allegation:- http://agniveer.com/polygamy-hinduism/

      Regarding your allegation on Krishna, please read this:- http://www.satyavidya.org/component/content/article/50-awakening-of-nation/159-lord-krishna-an-enlightening-personality

      Further I don’t know what to say, because I think you have not understood my point. When I say that I accept the darker side of Hinduism, then it means that I won’t follow it. Why I need to follow a evil and bad thing, when I know that it is BAD?

      Next you said, “Brother U already LACKING OF KNOWLADGE ,and I mention ur IGNORANCE about ISLAM in my last reply, then how come u even think to educate them and the EVIDENCE which is given by ur godfather’s to u is already proven wrong 100’s of times before, and INSH’ALLAH I will do it again.”

      You should remember that you are only discussing ‘Women in Hinduism’ and not defending Women in Islam, so you cannot expose my knowledge until you come to point. No where you have proven me wrong, not even a single time, 100 is far.

      Also, for the sake of argument if at all I accept whatever Churchill said about Indians, and did with us, still his saying about Muslims is not disproved. I also quoted Khomeni, what you say about his statement?

      Lastly, this one is interesting,”U gave the verse from QURAN 9:29,I dont understand why always u guys jump on the verse without any context,why don’t u come from the beginning.This chapter is begin with the declaration of immunity between the Muslim’s and Mushriks of Mecca and after they broke this Immunity,then ALLAH order to fight with them and even ALLAH gave them a chance in
      ch 9:11: “But (even so) if they repent, establish regular prayers, and
      practise regular charity― they are your brethren in Faith: (thus) do We explain signs in detail, for those who understand”

      Because I know for sure that you don’t know the context. This is what one Ex-Muslim author writes, “Muslims generally accuse critics of deliberately quoting verses of the Quran “out of context” so as to distort the Quran’s message. This accusation is overwhelmingly false. Instead, Muslims themselves have an overwhelming monopoly in quoting verses of the Quran in deceptive manners so as to make its bad messages look better. And, when contexts of the Quranic verses are taken into consideration, its message turns out to be much more vile, barbaric…”

      He is talking about the same verse which we are discussing, please read the complete article here:- http://www.islam-watch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=816:context-of-verses-makes-the-qurans-message-worse-barbaric&catid=132:alamgir-hussain&Itemid=58

      Lastly, I accept that I escape from logical fallacies, as you said ” first I have to show u the status of women in other religion, then I have to tell u about the status of women before ISLAM and then proof u the difference after ISLAM,”

      Brother again I am repeating the same thing, that comparision won’t prove anything. There are many religion to compare with, and many have a very high status of Women than Islam (as per scriptures). Why clinging to same fallacy, please come to the point, and prove a High, Good and First class status of Women in Islam, as per scriptures.

      Regards..

      • Brother Rahul,

        After u quoting me, u gave me some links of(agniveer,satyavidya)
        and further u said :”When I say that I accept the darker side of
        Hinduism, then it means that I won’t follow it. Why I need to follow a
        evil and bad thing, when I know that it is BAD?”

        1) first brother u should stop being a copy and paste not only in ur reply but even in ur posts on ur website

        2) the links wich u gave hear is only talking by they own without giving any strong references, its just like whatever they believe

        Even so (they didn’t provide any strong refrances frm ur scriptures ) ,I agree with them that ,the stories of Krishna and polygamy in hindusim r fake and the Hindus beliveing that stories blindly (as I understand)

        and I congrats u ,Thats what I want to prove u and u accepted ur self ,My point is beside ISLAM all other religion scripture r corrupted , or modified and interpolated so, they r no more trust worthy boz of the man handy work and I congrats u again boz u and ur (link) both agree with me that GOD wont make u to fallow evil and bad things, but still majority of Hindus r fallow and believing in that stories blindly

        Later u said : ” for the sake of argument if at all I accept whatever Churchill said about Indians, and did with us, still his saying about Muslims is not disproved. I also quoted Khomeini, what you say about his statement?”

        For that first I thank’s to ALMIGHTY ALLAH ,that the guy (Churchill) is responsible for the death of millions poor Indians is against the ISLAM not the follower of it ,that what is happen when u go against the good , and fallow the evil and brother beside u lacking in knowledge ur lacking in ur commonsense too , why should I want the guy like him will perish ISLAM or any other religion I am happy that he is against it ,and what about the Khomeini ? what about him, who the hell is he or Churchill or any other (tom dick and harry) ? u might b know that we Muslims only fallow QURAN and HADITHS
        whoever go aginst them is nothing to do with ISLAM ,what ever Khomeini said (as u quote may b right or may b wrong) is contradicting the QURAN and HADITH .

        Next u quoted me again as I said : “Brother U already LACKING OF KNOWLEDGE ,and I mention ur IGNORANCE about ISLAM in my last reply, then how come u even think to educate them and the EVIDENCE which is given by ur godfather’s to u is already proven wrong 100′s of times before, and INSHA’ALLAH I will do it again.”

        “”” By fallowing u said : “You should remember that you are only
        discussing ‘Women in Hinduism’ and not defending Women in Islam, so you cannot expose my knowledge until you come to point. No where you have proven me wrong, not even a single time, 100 is far.

        Later u accepted : “Lastly, I accept that I escape from logical fallacies, as you said ” first I have to show u the status of women in other religion, then I have to tell u about the status of women before
        ISLAM and then proof u the difference after ISLAM,”

        Brother again I am repeating the same thing, that comparision won’t prove anything. There are many religion to compare with, and many have a very high status of Women than Islam (as per scriptures).
        Why clinging to same fallacy, please come to the point, and prove a High, Good and First class status
        of Women in Islam, as per scriptures.”””

        So, fanilly u accpeted that u doing “Tu Quoque fallacy” (before u accusing me for that)
        How can u say comparison won’t prove anything ,comparision will everything I will prove u that too
        if u saying that the other religion have a very high status of women than islam (as per scripture )
        why u dont giving an example and prove me that is better than ISLAM , and we will see how much knowledge u have.

        • Brother Syed Zia,

          We are discussing this particular topic since very long time, and I bet you it would be unproductive if we discuss it one more year. As you want comparison and I want to discuss women in Islam, these two are very different topic from each other, and we can’t discuss anything, until we agree for a common topic. Anyways, you said two points, they were:-

          1) first brother u should stop being a copy and paste not only in ur reply but even in ur posts on ur website

          2) the links wich u gave hear is only talking by they own without giving any strong references, its just like whatever they believe

          Brother, I am a student, and I do research on religion. Now i have decided to study various holy books of different religions, so I get less time to respond and even to write new articles, meanwhile I take some time out to publish well researched articles by many great critics of Islam, and I do publish my own articles too in my site as you can see. So there is no issue of copy-pasting, instead I ask permission for republishing the articles. Anyways, coming to your point that they (Agniveer, and other Hindu sites) talking without reference. You see agniveer articles are full of references, they provide reference to prove their point. As far Polygamy is concerned, they believe only VEDAS to be eternal and revealed book, and nowhere in Vedas it preaches polygamy. As I quote Muslim scholars to prove an Islamic point of view, the same way I quote Hindu scholars to prove Hindus point of view about their religion.

          Next you said:-

          “My point is beside ISLAM all other religion scripture r corrupted , or modified and interpolated so, they r no more trust worthy boz of the man handy work and I congrats u again boz u and ur (link) both agree with me that GOD wont make u to fallow evil and bad things, but still majority of Hindus r fallow and believing in that stories blindly”

          Brother even Muslims are following their religion blindly, what about Quran 9:29, can you tell me how many Muslims practice this verse publicly, if not then why not? Who said Quran is free from corruption and adulteration ? Is it Quran?? If so, it would be another fallacy of circular reasoning, I can give you links of many articles, which state and prove beyond the shadow of doubt that Quran too is corrupt. See it here and here

          Further you can see that Quran also has Errors and Contradictions in it too, see it here. If it had been from God, how it has errors?

          Lastly you quoted all what I said, and summarized it (God knows how) and declared I am following the logical fallacy!!! I need to re-check your comments to know how I am following any logical fallacy by simply asking you to discuss ‘Women in Islam’.

          Hope I answered much of your points.

          Regards

      • I re-posted my comments , boz might b u did’t seen it or u don’t have anything to reply , if u don’t have anything to reply then u should stop posting baseless nonsense about ISLAM and stop misquoting and misguiding people

        • Brother Syed Zia,

          I do see your comments, but because they are too lengthy and because I was having less time to respond I was ignoring it. But as you insist, I’ll definitely reply to that too, as I have replied previous one.

          Regards

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s