Hindus feel increasingly insecure in Islamic Bangladesh


[DW]Bangladesh’s Hindu community was targeted by Islamists in the January 5 parliamentary elections, making the religious minority feel more insecure than ever in their own country.

Religious minorities feel threatened in Bangladesh

Religious minorities feel threatened in Bangladesh

During the run-up to the January 5 general election in Bangladesh, the police arrested dozens of opposition activists for their alleged involvement in nationwide attacks on the country’s Hindu minority.

According to media reports, the anti-government protestors, which include Islamists, torched over 100 Hindu homes and injured scores of them.

It was the second major wave of attacks against Bangladeshi Hindus in less than a year. Just a few months earlier, Islamists attacked hundreds of Hindu homes and desecrated their temples following the International Crimes Tribunal decision to sentence members of the Islamist Jamaat-i-Islami party to death.

The campaign group Human Rights Watch confirmed the attacks: “Members of the Jamaat-i-Islami and its youth wing, Shibir, alongside supporters of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) have engaged in countless attacks on security forces and others.

“The attacks have included throwing homemade grenades and petrol bombs at police, arson attacks to enforce a road blockade, derailing passenger trains, setting fire to the homes and businesses of the Hindus and the Awami League officials, and throwing grenades into crowded streets.”

Bangladesh or ‘Banglastan?’

The attacks on the Hindu community, which traditionally supports the ruling Awami League party, can be viewed in the context of political alliances. But there is a lot more to the issue.

Before the country’s independence from Pakistan in 1971, Hindus made up around 30 percent of the country’s population. Today, the number of Hindus living in Bangladesh has declined to about 9 percent, with many Bangladeshi Hindus migrating to India, North America and Europe in the past decades in search of a better life.

Rana Dasgupta, a human rights lawyer, says that if attacks on Hindus continue, there will be no Hindu left in Bangladesh soon. “I fear Bangladesh will become ‘Banglastan’ if things don’t change,” Dasgupta told DW, alluding to the situation of Hindus in Afghanistan.

Another human rights lawyer and activist, Sultana Kamal, also condemned the attacks on Bangladeshi Hindus. “I strongly feel that what is happening to the Hindu community in Bangladesh definitely falls under the definition of crimes against humanity.”

Property grabbing

Legal experts say that despite its overall secular nature, certain parts of the Bangladeshi constitution could be interpreted and used against the country’s religious minorities, a loophole the extremists often take advantage of, they say.

The seizure of Hindu’s properties in is a decades-old phenomenon in the South Asian nation. It goes back to the time when Pakistan introduced the so-called “Enemy Property Act” in its then eastern wing (now Bangladesh) after a war with India in 1965. It gave the authorities the right to confiscate a person’s property if he was deemed an “enemy of the state.” The Act remained in force in Bangladesh after the country gained independence; with the government only renaming it to “Vested Property Act” in 1974.

In 2001, Bangladesh replaced this act with the “Vested Property Repeal Act,” which paved the way for the return of property confiscated from religious minorities.

Despite the constitutional amendments, the Islamists use this so-called “enemy of the state” doctrine as a legal excuse to attack religious minorities and grab their properties.

Islamists demand the imposition of shariah in the country

Islamists demand the imposition of shariah in the country

Lack of trust

Bangladesh’s Supreme Court recently ordered the police to investigate the rise in attacks against Hindus. For its part, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s government has repeatedly blamed the Jamaat-i-Islami for perpetrating violence against religious minorities.

In October 2013, the government approved legislation to help prevent the further harassment of the Hindus. But Kamal emphasizes that more needs to be done: “It is the responsibility of the state to give them (the Hindus) protection, to restore their trust as well as the belief that Bangladesh is a safe place for them.”

Dhiraj Kumar Nath, a journalist, is unequivocal about the impact of the situation on Bangladeshi society: “The legacy of discriminatory laws has continued for the past 48 years, causing communal hatred and discontent between Hindus and Muslims.”

10 thoughts on “Hindus feel increasingly insecure in Islamic Bangladesh

  1. Clever Lucky, you have NOT changed your format of long, longer…longest comments, “why”? That is NOT very clever is it?

    Since you are clever Lucky then you must be clever enough to know that all the Hadiths are fake….and so another “why”? Using them over and over does NOT make them true!! That is NOT very clever of you is it?

    I agree with you 100% but only agree to disagree as NO religion is true…do you disagree with that?

    Why do all gods “live” in heaven? Where is that?

    The heaven IS in our mind….just imaginary existence and think of this :

    Billions of people in this world BELIEVE in that fantasy as the truth!!!!

    Since you are clever you should know that….as what cleverness does one entail knowing that the truth backfires in this instance as the old stories are sunk deep down to the core… and the truth becomes tough to swallow????

    Being a cleverer dude you ought to hit the nail on the G-Spot…to make people realise the truth is that we all ought to live by……….: LOVE, PEACE and UNITY!

    There is ONE Humanity and NO other, is there?

    Be Good, Do Good

    • YO PLUM,

      SO YOU HAVE BECOME AN EX-MOHAMMEDAN!

      THAT’S GREAT!

      THIS ARTICLE WILL HELP YOU ON YOUR WAY TO SEEK THE TRUTH:

      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.

        • ISLAM DESTROYED BY FACTS Allah has said in the Quran: 17:59:“And We refrain from sending the Signs, only because the men of the former generations treated them as false: We sent the She-camel to the Thamud to open their eyes, but they treated her wrongfully: We only send the Signs by way of terror (and warning from evil).” To us, it is a very important verse of the Quran not because it lets us feel in Allah a sense of defeat, which He often suffered in the hands of the humans, but for the reason that it introduces Him to us in His true and real color of a great liar. Owing to this reason, we shall look at this verse a little bit more closely. Even though the English rendering of this verse differs from translator to translator, all translators are, however, unanimous in that that the word “Signs” in it denotes those visible, and in many cases the palpable, miracles, which prophets presented to their people to prove that they were the prophets or the apostles of Allah.[1] The Quran clearly testifies to this fact. Because it was Allah Himself who had told the Meccan Pagans that all the prophets and apostles of the past had to prove their prophethood to their people by having Allah cause, on their behalf, visible and palpable miracles, they demanded from Muhammad that he, too, must bring about at least one miracle to prove that he was, indeed, a prophet sent to them by Him to lead them to His righteous path. Since it was a major challenge from the Pagans to the Prophet of Islam, Allah became unduly agitated and brushing aside His irregular protocol, which required Him to dictate to Muhammad the responses He wanted him to give to his antagonists as well as to his followers with the word “Say” prefixed to each response, Allah personally appeared before the Meccan Pagans and told them what we are now able to read in the verse, thanks to the goat, which had failed to find, in the room of Aisha, the paper on which it was written down to satisfy its hunger. Allah’s response to the Pagans was straight, concise and clear, it being: I have stopped sending miracles, because the men of former generations treated them as false. To drive home His position on miracle, together with indicating the period of time in which He made His decision not to cause it, He also told them: I had sent my miracle in the shape of a she-camel to the Thamud people to open their eyes, when apostle Salih was with them, but they treated her wrongly and killed her.[2] After that violent action of the Thamud, I decided to send to the humans only those Signs, which terrorize them. In which era, or the period of time, apostle Salih had come to the Thamud people is not mentioned in the Quran, but we can safely conjecture that he must have preceded Moses and Jesus Christ by thousands of years. Which means (1) that Allah must have stopped sending visible and palpable miracles to the humans long before both Moses and Christ set their foot on earth and (2) that they did not perform any miracle to prove their prophethood to the people for want of approval, and help, from Allah. Are we right in believing that Moses and Jesus Christ had performed no miracle, and if the same was also the case with Muhammad, who graced our earth after them? Let us see how the Quran answers our question. Concerning Moses, it says: 2:60: “And remember Moses prayed for water for his people; We said: “Strike the rock with thy staff.” Then gushed forth there from twelve springs. Each group knew its own place for water. So eat and drink of the sustenance provided by Allah and do no evil nor mischief on the (face of the) earth.” And again: 7:117: “We put ii into Moses’ mind by inspiration: “Throw (now) thy rod”: and behold! It swallows up straightway all the falsehoods which they fake!” These two verses, as well as others we have not mentioned here, tell us in no ambiguous term that Allah had on one occasion used Moses’ staff or rod to create twelve springs of water out of a rock, and on another occasion, he turned it into a python that swallowed up those serpents, which the Egyptian Pharaoh’s magicians had created with the help of their own rods. In the words of Allah, what the magicians had done was a trick, but what He had done to their trick was a miracle from Him! On Jesus Christ the Quran says: 19:29:”But she pointed to the babe. They said: “How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?”” 19:30: “He said: “I am indeed a servant of Allah: He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet;” It is clear from this verse that Jesus Christ was able to talk to people while he was in the cradle. This was clearly a miracle, and Allah performed it to prove to the detractors of Mary, Christ’s mother, that her son was not an illegitimate child and that he was, indeed, a prophet of Allah. Did Allah perform any miracle in the lifetime of Muhammad? The answer is: Yes, for the Quran says: 54:1: “The Hour (of Judgment) is nigh, and the moon is cleft asunder.” 54:2: “But if they see a Sign, they turn away, and say, “This is (but) transient magic.” Ibn Kathir quotes Anas bin Malik, a companion of Muhammad, as saying: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say, (You and the Last Hour are as close as these two (fingers).)”’ Only Imam Ahmad collected this Hadith. There is proof to support these Hadiths in the Sahih listing, Al-Hashir (literally the Gatherer), among the names of the Messenger of Allah; he is the first to be gathered, and all people will be gathered thereafter (for the Day of Judgement). Allah’s statement, (and the moon has been cleft asunder.) It occurred during the time of Allah’s Messenger, according to the authentic Mutawatir Hadiths the scholars agree that the moon was cleft asunder during the lifetime of the Prophet, and it was among the clear miracles that Allah gave him. Hadiths mentioning that the Moon was split.”[3] So, Allah did, indeed, perform miracles when Moses, Jesus Christ and Muhammad were trying to bring their people to the righteous way of Allah. The splitting of the moon by Allah in the time of Muhammad was a portent that the hour of Judgment was at the doorsteps of the Meccan Pagans to strike them, but they were able to avert it, probably, by asking their idols to stop Allah from carrying out His threat against them.. The idols silently prevailed over Allah, and He was forced to scrap His dangerous plan against the Pagans, with the promise never to think again about destroying the whole Universe in His lifetime for the fault of a small number of the Pagans who occupied a tiny portion of one of its small planets, the earth. In no other way can anyone explain why Allah postponed His decision to put the Pagans of the Arabian Peninsula on trial for their misdeeds, especially, when He had already taken the first and the crucial step, by splitting the moon, to bring it about. But if some one has a better and believable explanation than the one we have given for the postponement of the Judgment Day, then let him lay it out so that the Muslims as well as the non-Muslims can read and benefit from it. How are we going to reconcile Allah’s statement to the effect that He stopped sending miracles after the Thamud people killed His miraculous she-camel with His admission, through the Quran, that He did perform a number of miracles in the time of Moses, Jesus Christ and Muhammad? Which of these two statements is correct? In our judgment, both the statements are correct, for Allah has always been in the habit of saying whatever He thought was necessary to fool the humans. When He wanted to impress His audience with His awesome power, He talked about the miracles, which He supposedly brought about in the distant past. But when the people of Muhammad’s time demanded that He prove that He was capable of causing miracles, He put them off by telling them: I have stopped sending miracles, as people in the past did not believe in them. So, do not ask Me to do what I have already stopped doing a long time ago! This oscillation on the part of Allah makes Him not only an untrustworthy Being; it also proves that He is a great liar and a manipulator of human minds. He lied shamelessly whenever he expected it to advance His cause. He manipulated the humans with false promises and threats when He thought these would turn them into His slaves. The Quran is replete with numerous terrorizing threats to the humans, which, He told them, they should expect to face on earth, as well as in the world hereafter, if they did not do what He wanted them to do in their lifetime. It also carries numerous promises of rewards, which they would receive from Him on the Day of Judgment, if they did what He told them, through the Quran, to do, while they were still living on earth. Despite the fact that Allah has lied all along to the Muslims, they see no wrong in praising Him umpteen times every day through the slogan, ‘Allah-O-Akbar’ – a slogan they borrowed from the Pagans of the Arabian Peninsula of Muhammad’s time, [4] in order to draw His attention to their sorry state of affairs and also to make them successful in their so-called struggles against those whom they consider to be their political and religious adversaries. This has been going on for over 1400 years without much change in the fate, and the fortunes of the Muslims, yet they continue to sing His praises without ever realizing that what they have been doing is nothing but extreme foolishness, and that all of their devotions to Him have brought them no real good result in the past, nor are they going to bring them any in the days to come. Given the fact that most Muslims consider their religion to be more precious than their own lives, we are of the view that they will never change their position on the doctrines of Islam and their belief in the invincibility of Allah even if we were to present them with tons of hard and irrefutable arguments and evidences against their beliefs, until some one is able to completely destroy their unflinching faith in the supposedly unmatchable power of Allah. Though we do not know how or who will be able to do this, but we know for sure that this will have to be done in the near future in order to instill sanity in the minds of the Muslims; otherwise, our survival on earth will become almost impossible. [1] Maulana Abul Ala Mududi; Tafhimul Quran, vol. 2, p. 626. [2] The Quran; 54:29. [3] See Tafsir ibn Kathir of 54:1 & 2. [4] Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasulallah, p. 62. THE BIBLE & QURAN: ALL MYTHS & FABLES! MOHAMMED BASED HIS CULT OF DEATH ON THE JEWISH BIBLE: EGYPT & THE JEWISH PATRIARCHS: PALPABLE NONSENSE Egyptian Old Kingdom (2400 BC) – No Israelites in Sight NEVER NEVER LAND “One of the curious features of the book of Genesis is the absence of any reference to what is going on in the ancient Near East during the second millennium BC.” – S Hooke – Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, p 188. NO “UR OF THE CHALDEANS” “Ur was Sumerian and had no connection with the people known as the Chaldaeans until a thousand years after any possible date to which Abraham can be attributed.” – M. Grant, The History of Ancient Israel, p32. ANACHRONISM “‘Ur of the Chaldees’ in Genesis is clearly an anachronistic reference … ‘Chaldaeans’ did not appear in Mesopotamia until the 7th century BC.” – Magnus Magnusson, The Archaeology of the Bible Lands-BC, pp 31,206. Egypt in Palestine – 1850 BC (12th Dynasty) onwards For many centuries the Egyptians were present in Palestine, controlling the trade routes and importing the timber, olive oil and minerals not found in Egypt. Archaeology has uncovered dramatic evidence of this pervasive Egyptian presence in ‘Canaan’ – yet nowhere does the Bible refer to Egyptians outside of Egypt. It would spoil the story – How could Hebrews escape into the promised land if the Bible admitted Egyptians were running the show there too? NO ABRAHAM “So anachronistic and inconsistent … are the profuse legends that have gathered round the figures of the patriarchs that it cannot even be stated for certain that they ever existed at all … In any case, the existences and traditions of these patriarchs seem to have been originally quite separate from one another and unrelated.” – M. Grant, The History of Ancient Israel, p30. Hyksos in Palestine & Egypt – 1700-1600 BC (15th – 16th dynasties) For a time, rival monarchies ruled Egypt as Hyksos control spread out from Avaris in the delta. Theban propaganda decried the Hyksos as ‘Asiatics’ and ‘foreigners’ though they were probably indigenous ‘northerners.’ They introduced superior bronze weapons, the composite bow, the horse and chariots and took Memphis in 1674 BC. Ahmose (1550-1525 BC) reasserted Theban supremacy and inaugurated the Empire of the New Kingdom. NO TRACE OF MOSES ‘Neither Moses, nor an enslaved Israel nor the event of this Exodus are recorded in any known ancient records outside the Bible … Although its climate has preserved the tiniest traces of ancient bedouin encampments and the sparse 5000-year-old villages of mine workers there is not a single trace of Moses or the Israelites.’ – John Romer, Testament, pp57/8. FABLE Pharaoh Prototype for ‘Moses’: Akhenaten (1352 – 1336 BC). Sun-worshipping priest/king and religious fanatic. Knew God personally. Egyptian Empire 1500 -1300 BC (19th dynasty). Still no Israelites Tutmosis III (1479 – 1425 BC) campaigned beyond the Euphrates and reached the Fourth Cataract on the Nile. Amenhotep III (1390 – 1352 BC) ruled Egypt at a time when it was the richest country in the world. The Amarna letters reveal his extensive diplomacy. Rameses II (1279 – 1212) halted the advance of the Hittites in Syria and built more temples and monuments than anyone. NO ISRAELITES IN BONDAGE- DESPITE HOLLYWOOD’S BEST EFFORTS OLD CODGER Genesis 12.4. “So Abram departed as the Lord had spoken to him, and Lot went with him. And Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran.” Genesis 17.17. “Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, “Shall a child be born to a man who is one hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?” Genesis 17.24. “Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.” Genesis 21.5. “Now Abraham was one hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him.” Genesis 25.7. “This is the sum of the years of Abraham’s life which he lived: one hundred and seventy-five years.” The two primary books of the Old Testament – Genesis and Exodus – refer to ‘Pharaoh’ 155 times. Curiously, not once in either book is Pharaoh identified by name – and yet, in fact, the references are to many different pharaohs, across many centuries. The anomaly is all the more telling in that the holy books are not lacking in naming numerous sundry and incidental characters. For example, the grandmother, of the grandmother, of King Asa of Judah was Abishalom, should you be interested! (1 Kings 15.10). But this style of literature should be familiar to us all: “Once upon a time, in a land far away, was a bad king. And in the forest, David played … ” IT’S CALLED A FAIRY TALE OUT OF EGYPT Let’s remind ourselves of Israel’s supposed early encounters with the diverse kings of Egypt. In the sacred history of the Jews, the ‘father of the races’ Abraham is placed in Babylonia, anachronistically re-labelled Chaldea, a term more appropriate to the empire of Nebuchadnezzar in the 600s BC. The character of Abraham alternates between bedouin pastoralist and landed grandee. Neither has the slightest claim to historical veracity. PIMPING PATRIARCH Abraham’s wife Sarah – an irresistible beauty at 70 An unnamed (possibly blind) pharaoh whisked this babe from the Levant into his harem – and rewarded Abraham with “sheep, oxen, asses, menservants, maidservants, she asses and camels.” (Genesis 12.14,15) THE NONSENSE BEGINS Abraham – and Unnamed Pharaoh No. 1 To identify this pharaoh choose any date between 2300 BC – 1400 BC. Abraham’s supposed existence hinges exclusively on biblical sources and working backwards from the supposed existence of Solomon, several centuries later. The Good Book informs us that there is a 10-year age gap between Abraham and his wife/half-sister Sarah (Genesis 17.17). Thus when the Patriarch gets God’s call to leave Haran, Sarah is already a pensioner (he is 75, so she is 65) (Genesis 12.4.) After wandering in Canaan, a spate of altar building and camping in the mountains, famine drives the old fellow and his missus down into Egypt (Genesis 12.12). Abraham fears his wife’s “great beauty” will get him killed so they concoct the ruse that “she’s my sister.” Sure enough, Sarah gets fast-tracked into the harem of ‘Pharaoh’ – but the duped king gets a nasty case of plague. Though the trick is unmasked, Abraham is allowed to leave – with Sarah and, it seems, with all his ill-gotten gains. The Patriarch, his Wives, his Egyptian Slave, and King Abimelech Tired of waiting for her god-promised pregnancy (she’s now 75), Sarah encourages Abraham to impregnate his compliant slave Hagar (Gen. 16). The result is Ishmael (he who will father 12 ‘Arab’ princes). 13 years pass in the town of Hebron, during which time Abraham heads up a military force to rescue his nephew Lot, captured by 4 raiding kings (Gen. 14). The invaders are “utterly routed” near Damascus (and Abraham gets blessed by the mysterious priest/king Melchizedek). In contrast, when Abraham takes a “sojourn” in Gerar, the remarkable warrior/sage again fears Sarah’s “great beauty” will get him killed. For a second time they employ the “she’s my sister” ruse. King Abimelech takes Sarah into his harem and Abraham collects another bounty (Gen.20.1,18). Luckily the Philistine king gets a private message from God and sends the happy couple on their way. The 90-year-old Sarah now gives birth to Isaac, gets Hagar and Ishmael thrown out the tent, and lives to the ripe old age of 127 (Genesis 23.2). Abraham, 137 at the time of Sarah’s death, is still in the prime of life and takes Keturah as his new wife. She produces for him not one but six more children. The old goat does not himself check out until he is 175 years old.* Hmm. Isaac doesn’t get to meet a pharaoh. Perhaps the trauma of ritual abuse when he was a boy made him a bit of a stay at home. His dad sends a servant out to get him a wife and when Isaac gets to the ‘famine strikes Canaan’ bit his fidelity to Yahweh causes him NOT to go down into Egypt – the exact opposite of his dad’s behaviour. Believe it or not, Isaac and his wife Rebekah use the “she’s my sister” trick on the hapless King Abimelech – in Genesis 26.1,14! Jacob, trickster son of Isaac, is the guy who fathers the ancestors of all 12 tribes. Amazingly, he also gets to wrestle with God himself! (Genesis 32.24) – hence his new name ‘Isra’EL’ (‘El has conquered’). Jacob gets to Egypt as an old man. He meets a pharaoh – after his favourite son Joseph has made the big time. It seems unnamed Pharaoh No. 2 asks Jacob his age (a sprightly 130 – and he lives a further 17 years in ‘Goshen’!) and receives a blessing in return. JOSEPH & UNNAMED PHARAOH NO. 2: THE SOJOURN Choose any date between 1900 BC – 1500 BC for this pharaoh – there’s no evidence that Joseph ever existed either. Abraham got to meet the great king of Egypt by having a real babe as a wife; Joseph (his great grandson) got to meet Pharaoh by being a real babe himself. It seems that the wife of Potiphar, captain of the imperial guard (who had bought Joseph), got the hots for the young man – but he was having none of it. Thrown into prison on a false charge (Genesis 39) he made a name for himself by “dream interpretation.” This, it seems, is enough to get him catapulted before the god/king himself. Once again, an Egyptian monarch is shown to be amazingly credulous. On the strength of a 14-year forecast of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ harvests the inexperienced, foreign pastoralist is made Grand Vizier and given command of the world’s most important agricultural economy. Fat chance. But this – would you believe – is the foundation stone of the Hebrew presence in Egypt. Joseph’s reorganised agronomy saves Egypt and a grateful Pharaoh sends carts to bring Joseph’s clan to Egypt: “all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were three score and ten.” – Genesis 45.27. A handful of Hebrews take up residence in Egypt, multiply prodigiously, and – in the familiar story – are first enslaved then set free. 70 persons arrive and multiply with a phenomenal, rabbit-like, fecundity to reach 3 million in 215 years – an average of 66 children per female! (430 years is often quoted but in the original version of the story – as reiterated in the Septuagint and by Josephus – half of that time was spent in Canaan.) HOLLYWOOD KEEPS THE FANTASY CURRENT As nomads, the migratory pattern of the Hebrews might take them into the Nile Delta. Egyptian forces repeatedly passed through Palestine to fight wars further north. Any culture the Jews did not copy from the Babylonians they took instead from the Egyptians. Tellingly, the huge corpus of Egyptian records contains no reference at all to Israelites, the Oppression, the Exodus or Moses. The hapiru were, after all, merely bandits on the Canaanite frontier. The closest we get to ‘Israelites in bondage’ is some evidence for Canaanite cities in the Nile Delta. These almost certainly were established by that alliance of tribes known as the ‘Sea People’ that attempted an invasion of Egypt in the 13th and 12th century BC. In effect, the Jews, bit-players in a history over many centuries, ‘talked up’ their own ancestral origins by associating themselves with the major empires and events around them. Probably their fanciful tale of the fall of Jericho and other Canaanite cities is a recasting of the invasion of the coastal plain from the north by the Philistines (unlike themselves, users of iron weapons). “There had been a need, on the part of 19th century scholars, to ‘find’ the Bible in Egypt. They identified Ramesses II as Pharaoh of the Oppression simply because they assumed an historical link between Pi-Ramesse (Ramesses’ delta residence) and the store-city of Raamses (mentioned in the book of Exodus) … The link between Ramesses II and the Israelite Bondage was an illusion without any real archaeological foundation.” – Rohl (A Test of Time, p138) EGYPT & “MOSES” – FANTASY ON STERIODS The hero of the Exodus has an Egyptian not a Hebrew name (as in Thut’moses, Ah’moses, etc). No contemporary non-biblical source mentions Moses and the lack of any external reference in the biblical story makes it impossible to connect the life of the superhero with the known history of other cultures. Baby Moses and Unnamed Pharaoh No. 3: the “Ethnic Cleanser” Choose any date between 1500 BC – 1200 BC for this pharaoh. We are not told the name of the pharaoh – but the Hebrew midwives are ‘Shiphrah’ and ‘Puah’! In this unlikely episode, a pharaoh who “does not know” Joseph is alarmed by the explosive growth of the Hebrews and decides “hard labour” will keep them in check (Exodus 1.8,14). Frustrated that this does not work (we are talking Hebrew virility here) he issues an order that all the new born male infants of the Hebrews should be drowned. One is saved in an ark made of bulrushes daubed with slime. Amazingly, none other than the daughter of Pharaoh himself finds the infant mariner and adopts him as her own. But in true pantomime fashion his own mother is hired to nurse him. The idea of “threatened child becomes great figure” is commonplace: it was told of Sargon the Great, Heracles, Romulus & Remus, etc. It is, of course, reworked in the story of Jesus. IN THE MOSES STORY, WE HAVE A FORETASTE OF THE JESUS FANTASY ITSELF According to Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews – II.9) pharaoh’s daughter is named ‘Thermuthis’ – a name which she happens to share with a manifestation of Isis – which would make Moses the Horus figure. Irenaeus reiterates Josephus’ other startling claim: that God gave the polytheistic Egyptians counsel to make Moses Generalissimo. Our youthful hero “cheerfully” accepted, rallied the Egyptians and defeated the Ethiopians who had overrun the entire country. His victory included vanquishing a “multitude of serpents” with the “Ibes” bird. What a coincidence! In Egyptian mythology, the evil Seth, in the guise of a snake had bitten the infant Horus. He had been saved by Thoth – the Ibis headed god! In true fairy tale manner, the Ethiopian princess saw Moses from the city wall, fell immediately in love, and brokered peace for marriage. And they all lived happily ever after. Well, not quite … Prince Moses and Unnamed Pharaoh No. 4: the “Oppression” The youthful Moses becomes a murderer and fugitive from justice (Exodus 2.11,15). Moses flees to Arabia where he marries the daughter of a Midianite priest and lives as a shepherd. His father-in-law is ‘Reuel’ (Exodus 2.18) or ‘Jethro’ (Exodus 3.1, 4.18) or ‘Hobab’ (Judges 4.11) – take your pick. After 40 years in Midian, Moses returns to Egypt to make his famous demand of pharaoh to “let go” (Exodus 5.1) the people he has lived without for 80 years (Exodus 7.7). Patriarch Moses and Unnamed Pharaoh No. 5: the “Exodus” This pharaoh is the hard-man opponent of Moses (well, he can’t help it – God himself hardened his heart – Exodus 4.21;7.3 etc.). The whole pageant would collapse if he had been a softy like pharaohs 1 and 2! Ten plagues later and Egypt loses its labour force and its army (Exodus 5). Moses, an octogenarian, now begins 40 years of wandering. Salt crystals in the mummy of Merenptah favoured him as the drowned ‘Pharaoh of the Exodus’ – until it was realised all mummies showed evidence of these embalming salts! Oddly enough, Egypt reached new heights of imperial splendour and prosperity during the New Kingdom (18th – 19th dynasties). Tutmosis III campaigned beyond the Euphrates and reached the Fourth Cataract on the Nile; Rameses II halted the advance of the Hittites in Syria and built more temples and monuments than anyone. Perhaps those Hebrews hadn’t pulled their weight after all! Though the colourful story of the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt is known to everyone the legend itself is a complete fantasy, a re-write of a story learned in Babylon. In Exodus, Yahweh creates a people, not the cosmos: “Instead of splitting the carcass of a sea-monster to create the world, as Marduk did, Yahweh divided the Sea of Reeds to let his people escape from Pharaoh and the pursuing army. Instead of slaying the demonic hordes, like Marduk, Yahweh drowned the Egyptians.” – K. Armstrong, A History of Jerusalem, p31. In the fantasy ‘history’ (chapter 1 of the Book of Numbers) 603,550 ‘males of military age’ fled Egypt at the time of the Exodus, which implies a refugee army of at least two million – more than the total population of Egypt itself! And this multitude supposedly wandered the wilderness for forty years, contriving to leave not a trace of their passing for posterity. Records one historian: “Despite the mass of contemporary records that have been unearthed in Egypt, not one historical reference to the presence of the Israelites has yet been found there. Not a single mention of Joseph, the Pharaoh’s ‘Grand Vizier’. Not a word about Moses or the spectacular flight from Egypt and the destruction of the pursuing Egyptian army.” – Magnus Magnusson, The Archaeology of the Bible Lands – BC, p43. Not that Egypt had no impact on the people who were to emerge as Jews in the sixth century. Jewish theology is permeated with ideas which had prevailed in Egypt for millennia. For example, that most hallowed of Jewish festivals, the Passover, was borrowed from an Egyptian celebration of the Spring Equinox, of the passing of the sun from south to north of the equator. Passover, the most important feast of the Jewish calendar, is celebrated at the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox, typically occurring on March 21, though it can fall a day earlier or later. Many scholars have seen a link between the sun-worshipping monotheism of Akhenaten and the Yahweh-worshipping monotheism of the Jews. Conceivably, expelled priests of the Aten started the whole thing off. A nomadic people required a portable god. Though they contrived to make a virtue of their technical inability to make idols, none the less, their sacred texts anthropomorphised the deity – a human representation of the pharaoh’s sun. So humanoid was their god that initially they provided him with a mobile home, the so-called ‘Ark of the Covenant.’ This itself was originally an Egyptian idea. Paraded about as a lethal protector of the tribe and a throne for their god, it somewhat lost its importance when Philistines sacked the settlement of Shiloh and carried away the Ark as a trophy. It was not replaced. Though nominally ‘invisible’ (and now homeless!),Yahweh acquired a most man-like countenance PART 2 So! Shishak? Hophra? Biblical ‘Pharaohs’ – Unknown to the Egyptians! Despite the omission of pharaonic names in Genesis, Exodus and most other biblical books, in a few places pharaohs are indeed named. This should have made it possible to synchronize the real history of Egypt with some part of the purported “history” of the Jews recorded in the Bible. Unfortunately there is a small problem: the Bible’s ‘Pharaohs’ are unknown in all of the vast corpus of Egyptian history. Thus, 1 Kings (11.40) introduces the character “Shishak”; 2 Kings (17:4) brings on “So”; and Jeremiah (44.30) gives us “Hophra.” The anomaly has given rise to 200 years of “name that pharaoh.” With many centuries, 30-odd dynasties, and dozens of monarchs to choose from the possibilities are endless. JEROBOAM’S “REFUGE” IN EGYPT Pharaoh ‘Shishak’ delivers God’s punishment on Judah (1000 – 800 BC) In the last days of Solomon, a labourer, promoted to overseer, called Jeroboam “lifts up his hand” against the monarch and has to flee to Egypt and the protection of Shishak (who of course has an open-house for renegade Jewish labourers) (1 Kings 11). Solomon dies, Jeroboam becomes king of 10 northern tribes (what a star!) and Solomon’s legitimate heir Rehoboam is left with just 2 tribes in the south. Jeroboam’s accommodating monarch Shishak plunders the Temple in Jerusalem, controlled by his rival, and conquers the whole of Judah. We never hear of Shishak again. Nothing is known in Egypt of ‘Shishak’ but inscriptions of Pharaoh Shoshenk I (22nd dynasty) record his attack upon Jerusalem – so Shoshenk has traditionally been identified as the biblical ‘Shishak.’ Hoshea of Samaria challenges the King of Assyria: “Pharaoh So” to the rescue (800 -700 BC) “And the king of Assyria found conspiracy in Hoshea: for he had sent messengers to So king of Egypt, and brought no present to the king of Assyria, as he had done year by year: therefore the king of Assyria shut him up, and bound him in prison.” – 2 Kings 17.4. An obvious candidate for So is Shoshenk – but he’s already identified with Shishak! Thutmose III has a temple relief showing conquered cities of Judaea – perhaps we should make Thutmose ‘Shishak’ so that ‘So’ can be Shoshenk?! EGYPTIAN CIVIL WAR WRITTEN INTO THE STORY Pharaoh ‘Hophra’ gets on the wrong side of the Lord “Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will give Pharaoh Hophra king of Egypt into the hand of his enemies, and into the hand of them that seek his life; as I gave Zedekiah king of Judah into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, his enemy, and that sought his life.” – Jeremiah 44.30. With the ‘clue’ of Nebuchadnezzar (605 – 561 BC) and an obvious fate, chief suspect is the grandson of Pharaoh Neckau who reigned from 589 to 570 BC. This pharaoh died in a rebellion led by his general and son-in-law Ahmose. Unfortunately, this pharaoh is actually called Apries (Herodotus ii.169) and on his monuments as Uah`ab`ra (Wahibre). Perhaps the Pharaoh used the name ‘Hophra’ when he sent letters to the Jews …?! The biblical author was using the literary device of a royal murder to put an instructive ‘prophecy’ into the mouth of ‘Jeremiah.’ His oracle of woe was directed at recalcitrant Jews, many of whom lived in Egypt and were susceptible to Egyptian religious practices. Postscript – Akenaten anticipates the Psalms, 1350 BC! Hymn to the Aten ” Lord of All, Lord of heaven, Lord of Earth Thy rays embrace the lands Thou layest the foundations of the earth How manifold are thy works! The ships go down and up the stream…” Psalm 104 “O Lord thou art very Great Who coverest thyself with light as a garment Who laid the foundations of the earth O Lord how manifold are thy works! How ships sail to and fro…” Sources: Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (Phoenix Grant, 1987) Dan Cohn-Sherbok, The Crucified Jew (Harper Collins,1992) Henry Hart Milman, The History of the Jews (Everyman, 1939) Josephus, The Jewish War (Penguin, 1959) Leslie Houlden (Ed.), Judaism & Christianity (Routledge, 1988) John Romer, Testament (Viking, 1999) V. Davies, R. Friedman, Egypt (British Museum, 1998) Herodotus, The Histories, (Penguin, 1972) Ahmed Osman, Moses Pharaoh of Egypt (Grafton, 1990) M. Grant, The History of Ancient Israel (Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1996) Aidan Dodson, Monarchs of the Nile (Rubicon, 1995) MOSES PLAGERIZED THE 10 COMMANDMENTS FROM PAGAN EGYPT THE 42 COMMANDMENTS OF ANCIENT EGYPT I. Thou shalt not kill, nor bid anyone kill. II. Thou shalt not commit adultery or rape. III. Thou shalt not avenge thyself nor burn with rage. IV. Thou shalt not cause terror. V. Thou shalt not assault anyone nor cause anyone pain. VI. Thou shalt not cause misery. VII. Thou shalt not do any harm to man or to animals. VIII. Thou shalt not cause the shedding of tears. IX. Thou shalt not wrong the people nor bear them any evil intent. X. Thou shalt not steal nor take that which does not belong to you. XI. Thou shalt not take more than thy fair share of food. XII. Thou shalt not damage the crops, the fields, or the trees. XIII. Thou shalt not deprive anyone of what is rightfully theirs. XIV. Thou shalt not bear false witness, nor support false allegations. XV. Thou shalt not lie, nor speak falsely to the hurt of another. XVI. Thou shalt not use fiery words nor stir up any strife. XVII. Thou shalt not speak or act deceitfully to the hurt of another. XVIII. Thou shalt not speak scornfully against others. XIX. Thou shalt not eavesdrop. XX. Thou shalt not ignore the truth or words of righteousness. XXI. Thou shalt not judge anyone hastily or harshly. XXII. Thou shalt not disrespect sacred places. XXIII. Thou shalt cause no wrong to be done to any workers or prisoners. XXIV. Thou shalt not be angry without good reason. XXV. Thou shalt not hinder the flow of running water. XXVI. Thou shalt not waste the running water. XXVII. Thou shalt not pollute the water or the land. XXVIII. Thou shalt not take God’s name in vain. XXIX. Thou shalt not despise nor anger God. XXX. Thou shalt not steal from God. XXXI. Thou shalt not give excessive offerings nor less than what is due. XXXII. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods. XXXIII. Thou shalt not steal from nor disrespect the dead. XXXIV. Thou shalt remember and observe the appointed holy days. XXXV. Thou shalt not hold back the offerings due God. XXXVI. Thou shalt not interfere with sacred rites. XXXVII. Thou shalt not slaughter with evil intent any sacred animals. XXXVIII. Thou shalt not act with guile or insolence. XXXIX. Thou shalt not be unduly proud nor act with arrogance. XL. Thou shalt not magnify your condition beyond what is appropriate. XLI. Thou shalt do no less than your daily obligations require. XLII. Thou shalt obey the law and commit no treason. The 42 Principles of Ma’at, the Goddess who personified the ideals of Truth and Righteousness, were known to all the ancient Egyptians. They have been rephrased here in Biblical Commandment form to make them more intelligible and familiar to moderns. In the original form they were preceded with “I have not” as in “I have not stolen.” The Egyptians believed that when they died, their souls would be judged by these principles. Moses and the Israelites, who were originally Egyptians, would have been familiar with these principles, but after wandering for forty years they seem to have only remembered 8 of them (those highlighted in red). Moses added three new non-secular commandments; the one about not honoring the other gods, the honoring of their parents, and the one that included their neighbor’s wives and slaves as coveted chattel. The remarkable thing about the principles of Ma’at is not only how much more advanced they are in comparison with the Hebrew Commandments, but how most of them are strikingly relevant to this day. Various translations of the Declarations of Ma’at exist and they do not all agree in phrasing, order, or even the total number of principles (since some have multiple statements and some are redundant). “I form the light, and create darkness. I make peace, and create EVIL. I the LORD do all these things.” – Isaiah 45.7. All cultures have anthropomorphized their gods into humanoid (if sometimes grotesque) form. Were the Jews the exception? Hardly. We know precisely what the Hebrew god looked like. We are, after all, fashioned in his own likeness! “Yahweh”, in fact, is an abbreviation of the longer name, “Yahweh Sabaoth.” It means, “He who musters armies.” Thus Yahweh’s name identifies the god primarily as the military leader of the tribe. No wonder the God bequeathed to the world by the Jews turned out to be a monster. A GOD IN MAN’S IMAGE “The Lord is a man of war; Yahweh is his name.” – Exodus 15.3. Yahweh was a man, no doubt looking remarkably like the bearded sage asking us to worship him. If we believe the Bible, he has body parts: eyes and a face (‘they are not hid from my face, neither is their iniquity hid from mine eyes’ – Jeremiah 16.17); nose and a mouth (Psalms 18.8); lips, tongue and breath (Isaiah 30.27,33); loins (Ezekiel 1.27); even ‘back parts’ (Exodus 33.23). He also has several ‘human’ emotions, manly appetites, and a worrying disposition towards pathological violence. Yahweh feels regret for his own evil (‘And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.’ – Jonah 3.10); and grief (at the wickedness of men) (‘and it grieved him at his heart’ – (Genesis 6.6). He actually gets down and wrestles with Jacob, dislocating his thigh (Genesis 32.24). He forgets (he goes on calling Jacob ‘Jacob’ even after re-naming him ‘Israel’ – Genesis 35.10, 46.2). He practices favoritism (choosing the Israelites ‘above all people’ – Exodus 19.5; but he just does not like Cain or Esau!). He holds grudges (‘I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation’ – Exodus 20.5). For an omniscient god he is surprisingly unknowing (‘They have set up kings, but not by me; they have made princes, and I knew it not.’ – Hosea 8.4). And for an omnipotent god he has his limitations (‘The Lord was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley because they had chariots of iron.’ – Judges 1:19). And after his creation of the world, he even has to rest from his labour (‘And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work’ – Genesis 2.2) – to the endless bemusement of pagan critics, whose own gods didn’t need to rest! CARNIVORE The most disturbing aspect of Yahweh’s humanoid personality, however, is his blood-lust. The smell of burning flesh is a ‘sweet savour unto the lord’ – so sweet, in fact, that the phrase appears in the Old Testament no fewer than twenty-three times. The butchery demanded by god is truly monumental. Believers are required to sacrifice two lambs day-by-day continuously – and that’s just for starters! Just as well Yahweh had several thousand priests to help him trough through the banquet! Livestock bears the brunt of god’s appetite but humans could so easily get the chop from the big guy. God kills Uzzah for simply steadying the tumbling Ark (1Chronicles 13.9,10). Poor Onan was zapped for using the withdrawal method of birth control (Genesis 38.10). But such isolated vindictiveness palls in comparison with the mass killings of the Lord. When the autocratic Moses faces a rebellion led by Korah, God uses an earthquake and fire to consume two hundred and fifty rebels. When indignant sympathizers protest at the injustice, God wipes out another fourteen thousand seven hundred with a plague (Numbers 16). What a guy! NATURAL BORN KILLERS God tells Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. (Genesis 22.2) Boy terrified in ritual abuse in the mountains -Yahweh cult’s ‘Test of Fear’ “God put Abraham to the test … Abraham built an altar … bound Isaac hand & foot … took the slaughtering knife to kill his son … But the angel of the Lord began calling … ‘Do not put out your hand against the boy …. for now I know that you fear the Lord …’ (Genesis 22.1,12) The story of Isaac is NOT a condemnation of child sacrifice. Isaac was spared not because human sacrifice was seen to be wrong but because Isaac was the “child of promise” and needed to survive. The yarn requires the normality of human sacrifice. Abraham was praised for his willingness to appease Yahweh by killing his own son. The sham murder of Isaac (the ‘Aquedah’) was the prototype for a ‘redemptive sacrificial death’ subsequently re-worked as the crucified Jesus. It should be noted that in the biblical text, Isaac (like Jesus) is repeatedly called “the only son” of Abraham (Genesis 22.2., 12., 16.) even though Abraham actually has another, older son, Ishmael. Prostitute’s son Jephthah, in victory vow with God, makes burnt offering of his only daughter. (Judges 11.29,39) Girl Not So Lucky – Religious Fanatic Sacrifices Virgin Daughter “I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering … her father kept his vow, and she died a virgin.” Moses orders Levite fanatics to murder 3000 golden-calf enthusiasts. (Exodus 32.27,29) BLESSED MURDERERS “‘Today,’ Moses said, ‘you have consecrated yourself to Yahweh, at the cost of your sons and brothers. And so he bestows a blessing on you today.’” When the Lord says kill everyone He means EVERYONE! Saul loses out: “You didn’t kill enough,” says the Lord. “You can’t be king!” “And Saul defeated the Amalekites … and devoted to destruction all the people … But Saul spared Agag and … all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them. All that was despised and worthless they devoted to destruction. And Samuel said, “What then is this bleating of the sheep in my ears and the lowing of the oxen that I hear?” … Then Samuel said, “Bring here to me Agag the king of the Amalekites.” And Agag came to him cheerfully … And Samuel hacked Agag to pieces before the LORD in Gilgal. And the LORD regretted that he had made Saul king over Israel.” – 1 Samuel 15 The LORD delivers 10,000 Canaanites and Perizzites for slaughter in Bezek. As part of the fun 71 kings have their thumbs and big toes cut off. (Judges 1.2,7) “And the LORD said, Judah shall go up: behold, I have delivered the land into his hand … Then Judah went up, and the Lord delivered the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand; and they killed ten thousand men at Bezek.” – Judges 1.2-4. Female fan of Yahweh drives tent peg into head of sleeping Canaanite general. (Judges 4.21) “And Jael went out to meet Sisera, and said … fear not … she covered him with a mantle … and gave him drink, and covered him … Then Jael took a nail of the tent, and took an hammer in her hand, and went softly unto him, and smote the nail into his temples, and fastened it into the ground: for he was fast asleep and weary. So he died.” Elisha orders the assassination of Jezebel. (2 Kings 9,5,37) Joshua Slaughters 31 kings (Joshua 12.1,24) Elijah Murders 450 Priests of Baal. (1 Kings 18.40) Samson Slays 1000 Philistines (with an ass’s jawbone! ) (Judges 15.16) King Amaziah of Judah (c. 801–783 BC) throws 10,000 captive Edomites from the top of a rock. (2 Chronicles 25.12 Usurper Jehu tricks all the priests of Baal into temple slaughter. (2 Kings 10.19.30) “Jehu said to the guard and to the captains, Go in, slay them; let none come forth. And they smote them with the edge of the sword; and the guard and the captains cast them out, and went to the city of the house of Baal. And they brought forth the images out of the house of Baal, and burned them.” YAHWEH WAS DELIGHTED WITH THE MASSACRE “And the LORD said unto Jehu, Because thou hast done well in executing right in mine eyes, hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart, thy children of the 4th generation shall sit on the throne of Israel.” In Joshua’s (supposed) wars of conquest, God gets right in there. He throws down ‘great stones from heaven’ (Joshua 10.11) and scores a better body-count than his Israelites with mere swords. When the Lord gets up a real head of steam the slaughter reaches a truly epic scale. For merely looking into his Ark, Yahweh wipes out fifty thousand and seventy unfortunate men of Bethshemesh (1 Samuel 6.19). When King David slips up and orders a national census, an enraged God zaps seventy thousand. Quite apart from the celestial superman’s own killing, he animates his favourites into wiping out whole cities and nations. Jericho, Sodom, Gomorrah, Ai, Makkedah, Libnah etc., etc., are ‘smote and consumed’ – men, women, young, old, ox, sheep and ass! ‘You shall annihilate them – Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, Jebusites – as Yahweh your God commanded you.’ – Deuteronomy 20.11,18. In the largest single god-inspired massacre in the Bible, one million Ethiopians are slaughtered! (2 Chronicles 14). But then we have been warned! JEWISH TERRORISM All this carnage, of course, is allegorical, albeit that certain stories may have a tenuous link with an ancient skirmish somewhere. The point is to terrify people into obedience of the priesthood. ‘Moses’ is an archetypal ‘wise priest’, who rules with a rod of iron and brooks no opposition. ‘Take heed’ is the warning. ‘Look what happens when you disobey the word of the Lord!’ 10 COMMANDMENTS? INTOLERANCE WRIT LARGE Despite the apparent early date for Moses and his commandments, it is really only in the post-Babylonian period that we can speak of ‘Mosaic’ Judaism, when a priestly caste and a fantasy history of race origins are in place. It is only after the Babylonian experience that the Jews adopted a monotheistic religion, with Yahweh as sole god, not merely as chief god. And with this single ‘jealous’ god, the priests imposed a rigid liturgical year, a regimen in which readings from the Torah (Genesis through to Deuteronomy) were to be read successively and completed within the year. By the closing years of the 6th century BC the priesthood had codified their tribal rules, and were writing with all the authority of their singular deity. The famed ‘Ten Commandments’ – even today erroneously accepted in the popular mind as absolute and universal rules to live by – are nothing other than a codification of Jewish male property rights. In their original full versions, two of the commandments endorse slavery; the taboo on adultery was an attempt to stop polygamous Jewish males taking each others wives (‘foreign’ concubines and wives had no rights); the ‘honour’ to be accorded parents merely endorsed a draconian patriarchal social structure; even the taboo on murder was open to interpretation, since the slaying of enemies and wrong-doers would not be ‘murder’ but the Lord’s will! Here was intolerance writ large. No spirit of ‘live and let live.’ In essentials, these barbarous ‘Laws’ ratified the correctness of annihilating enemies, the subjugation of women, the enslavement of conquered tribes, the suppression of dissent and the curtailment of any liberality, especially relating to the body or sexuality. The priests of other cults were to be murdered; their ‘altars, images and groves’ to be destroyed (Exodus 34.13). Libidinous ‘foreign’ women were a particular cause for concern (just look how Delilah had brought Samson down by cutting his strength-giving hair!) – and ‘foreign’ in this context meant from a town a whole 25 miles from Jerusalem! Captured war-brides were to have their head shaved (Deuteronomy 21.14) but otherwise could ‘give delight.’ However Jewishness could only be inherited from a Jewish female. The stress was upon racial purity and in the real politic of the 6th century, even the original Jewish ‘people of the land’ were summarily excluded from ‘the Jewish race.’ Subsequently, Jewish numbers grew rapidly. Neighbouring tribes were conquered and forcibly converted to the Yahweh cult! They were made part of the ‘Jewish race’ – and were circumcised accordingly – giving the lie to the latter-day notion that circumcision had something to do with ‘health’! In fact, the Bible tells us that circumcision is purely symbolic and that the obligation extended to purchased slaves. We are led to believe that ‘the LORD appeared to Abram’ (who was ninety nine years old at the time!) and (of all possibilities) told him: “And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you … He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.” – Genesis 17.11,14. Thus, for the Jews, ‘race’ was determined by one’s mother and/or forced genital mutilation, unless that is, political expediency stepped in and required otherwise! Having thus ‘defined’ their race in a conveniently flexible way, Jewish hostility to marriage outside the cult, fussy dietary laws, and generations of inter-breeding, protected the Jewish gene-pool. Certain physiological traits may have become pronounced, though hardly unique. By the time Greek civilization advanced across the eastern Mediterranean, the Jews were an in-bred cult of several generations, a ‘pseudo-race’, possessors of a sacred text of racial superiority. Sources: Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (Phoenix Grant, 1987) Dan Cohn-Sherbok, The Crucified Jew (Harper Collins,1992) Henry Hart Milman, The History of the Jews (Everyman, 1939) Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion (Pluto, 1994) Josephus, The Jewish War (Penguin, 1959) Leslie Houlden (Ed.), Judaism & Christianity (Routledge, 1988) Karen Armstrong, A History of Jerusalem (Harper Collins, 1999) Jonathan N. Tubb, Canaanites (British Museum Press, 1998) Norman Cantor, The Sacred Chain – A History of the Jews (HarperCollins, 1994) Thomas L. Thompson, The Bible in History (Pimlico, 2000) Race is a sensitive subject. To use the word almost invites the charge of racism. Yet to understand the rise of Christianity one must come to terms the people who were its original authors – the Jews. PART 3 THE MYTH OF THE JEWISH RACE “Thus saith the Lord God unto Jerusalem; Thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of Canaan; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother an Hittite.” – Ezekiel, 16.17. The Jews claim themselves to be a race – but are they? The earliest reference yet found to this singular people is on a statue from the Syrian city of Alalakh, dated to about 1550 BC. The inscription refers to hapiru warriors in the land of Kin’anu – a presence confirmed by clay tablets from Akhenaten’s capital of Amarna, referring to marauders in the hill country of Palestine. The famous stele of Pharaoh Merneptah dated to 1207 BC records ‘Israel is laid waste, his seed is not’. ‘Israel’ here is a reference to a people, not a territory. The weight of evidence suggests these original ‘Hebrews’ coalesced during the bronze age from successive migrations, some from the periphery of the Nile delta (in Egyptian, ‘Peru or apiru meant a labourer) but most from across the Jordan and Euphrates rivers. In their own semitic tongue, habiru meant ‘beyond’, suggesting an origin elsewhere. In Babylonian script khabiru referred to a class of slaves. As a people, therefore, the Hebrews combined Mesopotamian and Egyptian stock, almost certainly drawn from the lowest social order, conceivably including runaway slaves. One migration, at least, brought with it a mountain/sky god – Yahweh – destined for higher things. SETTLEMENT IN CANAAN As barbarous newcomers to what was the land of Canaan, these semites (speakers of a tongue common to Syrians, Arabs and Mesopotamians) took up migratory occupation of the less fertile hill-country of the interior. Neither their limited sub-culture – an illiterate donkey nomadism; nor their social organisation – patriarchal and authoritarian – distinguished them from other tent-dwelling pastoralists. These early, polytheistic, Hebrews scratched an existence in an unpromising land on the fringes of the major civilisations, occasionally moving with their animals into the Nile delta in times of draught. It seems as if they were joined, over time,by outcasts or refugees from the more sophisticated Canaanite (Phoenician) coastal cities. ‘Israel emerged peacefully and gradually from within Canaanite society ‘ concluded Karen Armstrong, the noted religious scholar. (A History of Jerusalem, p23] The Canaanite migrants brought with them cultic practices and images of their traditional gods. A major Canaanite god was El, and the phrase ‘El has conquered’ gives us the word Isra’el. The Canaanite god El had a ghostly presence in a host of Jewish heroes: Dan-i-El; Ezek-i-El; Sam-u-El, Ish-ma-El, El-i-jah, El-o-him, etc. God-inspired names were common throughout the west-Semitic language region. Other Canaanite gods included Baal (a storm god) – also honoured in a host of Hebrew names, Asherah (a fertility goddess, consort of El), Shalem (a Syrian sun god – later to be honoured in the name Jeru’salem ), Milcom, Chemosh, etc. Ru’shalimum is mentioned in records of the Pharaoh Sesostris III (1872 – 1847 BC) – the settlement actually pre-existent long before the tribe of Hebrews made it their own. The site then appears to have been unoccupied for three hundred years until the Jebusites (otherwise known as Kereti or Peleti – Cretans or Philistines) arrived. POLYTHEISTIC JEWS? YHWH & HIS ASHERAH “It will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, YHWH, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai.” – Ha’aretz Magazine, October, 1999 – ‘Should you not possess what your god Chemosh gives you to possess? And should we not be the ones to possess everything that Yahweh our God has conquered for our benefit?’ – Judges 11:24 “However, in the Second Temple period, the Shema‘ Yisrael text in Deuteronomy would have been read “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord alone.” The Shema‘ Yisrael was originally a monaltric statement; it stated that Israel had an exclusive relationship with its God, but it did not deny the existence of other national deities for other peoples.” – Noah Wiener, Bible History Daily (BAR) 04/12/2013 BLOOD SACRIFICE Influenced by these Canaanite cults, but devoid of artistic or metal working skills of their own, the early Hebrews adopted a way of honouring their god of choice by genital mutilation. This sometime practice of the Egyptian priesthood became, for the ‘Jews’, a tribal obligation, part of the male regenerative organ offered as a blood sacrifice to the ‘jealous’ god Yahweh. Other gods were worshipped but Yahweh demanded precedence. Thus though the Hebrews were not a race, the males at least acquired a distinctiveness from other Semitic tribesmen who did not practice circumcision. Women, regarded as mere chattels, were spared this mutilation. In this period of proto-Judaism, polygamous males acted as ‘priests’ for their extended families and kinship groups and exercised absolute authority over wives and children. At some point in the tenth century BC the Hebrews were completely overwhelmed by the more advanced Philistines, moving down from the north. Armed with iron weapons and deploying chariots the Philistines scattered the primitive Hebrew nomads into the hill country and a few austere places in the Jordan River valley. The various Hebrew clans had no single warlord but were led by tribal elders and shamans. The backward Hebrews remained under the sway of their shamanic ‘judges’ to a much later date than neighbouring peoples. Theirs was a harsh culture of ‘scapegoat’ sacrifice and collective and inherited guilt (‘eye for an eye’ vengeance). As marginalised pastoralists they were acutely xenophobic and demonized the city dwellers and farmers. With the ebb and flow of empires over centuries, and the endless movement of peoples, we might have expected this marginal tribe to have passed into history, along with countless other peoples, assimilated into a greater multitude. SACRED HISTORY But we have a story, a tale of tribal fidelity – with frequent, and instructive, lapses – to a protector god Yahweh, who had chosen this ‘people’ as his very own. For them, he has a divine purpose. In particular, their migration into Canaan is given an heroic re-interpretation. No longer do we have piecemeal migration over centuries but a single glorious conquest by a cohesive people. The ‘idolatrous’ city dwellers (of ‘Jericho’, etc.) get their comeuppance and the whole land is promised to the Jews in perpetuity. They have, it would seem, arrived as a single group from Egypt, released from slavery by divine intervention. The extraordinary thing about this ‘history’ – complete with verbatim dialogue between man and god – is that it was not written until more than a thousand years after the supposed events. Records one historian, “The first millennium of Jewish history as presented in the Bible has no empirical foundation whatsoever.” – Cantor, The Sacred Chain, p 51. The impressive race history, tracing the Jews (the people of Judah), back through Hebrews in Canaan and Israelites in Egypt, to a noble ancestor called Abraham (father, it seems, of all the races, including Greeks and Arabs!), and the whole melodramatic story of the Exodus, was concocted at a much later date, after the tribal leadership of these Judaean tribesmen had been taken into exile and had learned the rudiments of civilization from their Babylonian captors. This was not at the dawn of time but in the seventh century BC, when Greece was already a civilization and Carthage had a maritime empire. The original Hebrew/Canaanite occupants of Palestine did pass into history. Many, including the so-called ‘lost tribes’ of Israel (those living in northern Palestine) were assimilated by Assyrian conquerors during the eighth century. But the ‘victors’, a Persian-sponsored priesthood who settled in Judaea in the 6th century BC, wrote a sacred history, known to the Jews as the Torah (or Pentateuch ) and to the Christians as the first ‘five books’ of the Old Testament. Together with the ‘Prophets’ and ‘Wisdom’ literature this voluminous text purports to be an account of the trials and tribulations of the Jews through the previous two millennia. Rather oddly, its detail and obvious accuracy peters out the closer it approaches the time when it was actually written. Joshua, supposedly on the rampage in the thirteenth century BC gets vast reportage, whereas several 7th century kings known to history are omitted. Indeed, the four hundred years between the last book of the Old Testament (the 5th century Malachi) and the first book of the New Testament echo in a biblical silence. No biblical text gives the conquest of Palestine by Alexander the Great (in 323 BC) a mention. Ptolemaic Egypt’s loss of her Palestinian provinces to Syria in 198 BC is unrecorded. ‘Minor’ personages like Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great are overlooked. And the books of Maccabees – which should tell us the ‘recent’ story of the successful Jewish rebellion against Greek rule in the second century BC – are so blatantly filled with error and incoherence that even biblical editors shunted them into the ‘Apocrypha’ or omitted them entirely. But of course we are not speaking of history but rather, of sacred testimony, designed to control, justify and inspire. Anyone can be factual. In the Bible we have a book with a purpose. “Lachish Letters” – only first hand ‘evidence’ for the entire corpus of the Old Testament A FEW BITS OF CROCKERY “They have entered the land to lay waste … strong is he who has come down. He lays waste.” The Lachish Letters (British Museum) – a collection of 21 pottery shards or ‘ostraca’. Found in the ruins of Tell ed-Duweir in the 1930s the fragments bear a few words of Hebrew relating to the fall of Judaean cities to the Babylonians in the 580s BC. The letters are from outposts of Lachish to the city’s military commander (a man named Ya’osh) and represent field reports monitoring the situation as the armies of Nebuchadnezzar closed in. Some writers find confirmation of the biblical ‘Jeremiah’ in these scraps (Letter XVI to be precise) though the reference could equally well have been to a ‘Urijah’. Sources: Finkelstein and Silberman, The Bible Unearthed (Touchstone, 2002) Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (Phoenix Grant, 1987) Dan Cohn-Sherbok, The Crucified Jew (Harper Collins,1992) Henry Hart Milman, The History of the Jews (Everyman, 1939) Josephus, The Jewish War (Penguin, 1959) Leslie Houlden (Ed.), Judaism & Christianity (Routledge, 1988) Karen Armstrong, A History of Jerusalem (Harper Collins, 1999) Jonathan N. Tubb, Canaanites (British Museum Press, 1998) Norman Cantor, The Sacred Chain – A History of the Jews (Harper Collins, 1994) Thomas L. Thompson, The Bible in History (Pimlico, 2000) Shlomo Sand, When and How Was the Jewish People Invented? (Resling, 2008)
          • Lucky, so you want to bring sanctity to the minds of Muslims? And after they have known the “truth” about Allah from you, what religion should they follow?

            For the first time your approach is plausible! Jesus was a story character a mere “story” character….as what evidence is there that he ever lived in Egypt for thirty years?…doing what???????? Where in Egypt??

            A is based on myth but if you have to follow a religion than none matches Islam where the Code of Conduct and Ethics is established by the Quran!

            Muslims have NO fake Babas and the cheating Healing Bishops nor the anointed Popes. Buddhism is a fake Cult…nor any Leaders to be followed.

  2. APOSTLES’ GREATEST MIRACLE WAS SEX

    by Ayesha Ahmed : May 19, 2005 :

    Apostle’s greatest miracle was not the Quran. It was his capacity for lovemaking. Allah had given him libido of 30 men.

    Most infidels don’t even consider the Quran to be a big deal. They say a village idiot can come up with such a book. They claim that any book is better than the Quran. But I ask them, can anyone match the apostle’s lovemaking prowess? Can they at the age 60+ make love to 10 young women in a single night? Yes, the apostle could do it. That is an irrefutable proof of his prophet hood, which cannot be duplicated.
    Bukhari,Volume 1, Book 5, Number 268:
    ‘Prophet was given the strength (sexual) of thirty men’.
    Apostle could make love (continuously) to all his wives (9 to 11) in one night.
    Volume 1, Book 5, Number 268:
    “The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number. Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men).”
    Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 62, Number 6:
    The Prophet used to go round (have sexual relations with) all his wives in one night
    Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 270:
    Aisha said, “I scented Allah’s Apostle and he went round (had sexual intercourse with) all his wives.”

    PROPHET SULAIMAN WAS GIVEN SIMILAR STRENGTH
    Such sexual capability and stamina is Allah’s miracle, which is only given to prophets.
    Prophet Sulaiman used to have sex with 100 women in one night.
    Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 74i:
    Allah’s Apostle said, “Once Solomon, son of David said, ‘(By Allah) Tonight I will have sexual intercourse with one hundred (or ninety-nine) women each of whom will give birth to a knight who will fight in Allah’s Cause.

    EVEN GIBRAEEL VISITED APOSTLE’S BEDROOM

    His lovemaking was complimented by visits of archangel Gibraeel. Once apostle even introduced Gibraeel to Ayesha. Ordinary mortals cannot see angels, needless to say she was clueless and could not see him.
    Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 57, Number 112:
    Narrated Abu Salama:
    ‘Aisha said, “Once Allah’s Apostle said (to me), ‘O Aish (‘Aisha)! This is Gabriel greeting you.’ I said, ‘Peace and Allah’s Mercy and Blessings be on him, you see what I don’t see’ ” She was addressing Allah ‘s Apostle.

    ALL HIS OTHER WIVES WATCHED HIM MAKE LOVE

    Apostle’s love making was outstanding and was watched (and admired) by all his wives….
    Muslim, Book 008, Number 3450:
    Anas (Allah be pleased with him) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) had nine wives. They (all the wives) used to gather every night in the house of one where he had to come (and stay that night).

    PEEPING TOMS ALSO WATCHED

    Bukhari , Volume 9, Book 83, Number 38a:
    A man peeped into one of the dwelling places of the Prophet.
    Muslim, Book 025, Number 5369:
    Anas b. Malik reported that a person peeped in some of the holes (in the doors) of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him).
    Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 83, Number 38:
    Narrated Sahl bin Sa’d As-Sa’idi:
    A man peeped through a hole in the door of Allah’s Apostle’s house,

    ALLAH BLESSED HIM WITH SPECIAL PRIVILEDGES FOR SEX

    Allah not only gave him extraordinary capability for sexual activity but also gave him special privileges to use those capabilities.
    .Q33.50 : O Prophet! In addition to all your wives, slave girls and captured women, we have made lawful to you all your first cousins and any believing woman if she gave herself to you, and if you desire her.

    ALLAH BLESSED HIM WITH DIVINE INSPIRATIONS AFTER SEX

    Allah blessed his lovemaking with divine inspirations afterwards.
    Tabari Vl7, page :7 Ayesha said ‘Inspiration came to him when he and I were in a single blanket’.
    Bukhari Vol 5 Bk57 N 119
    Prophet said, By Allah, the Divine Inspiration never came to me while I was under the blanket of any woman except Aesha.

    WOMEN OFFERED THEMSELVES TO HIM

    Apostle got solicitated by hot women all the time (apparently by the publicity of his greatness in bed)..
    Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 62, Number 24:
    A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I have come to give you myself
    Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 62, Number 48:
    Narrated Hisham’s father:
    Khaula bint Hakim was one of those ladies who presented themselves to the Prophet. ‘Aisha said, “Doesn’t a lady feel ashamed for presenting herself to a man?”
    Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 62, Number 53:
    Narrated Thabit Al-Banani:
    “A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and presented herself to him, saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle, have you any need for me ?’ “Thereupon Anas’s daughter said, “What a shameless lady she was! Shame! Shame!” Anas said, “She was better than you; she had a liking for the Prophet
    Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 54:
    ‘A woman presented herself to the Prophet.’
    ‘Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 62, Number 58:
    Narrated Sahl bin Sad:
    A woman came to Allah’s Apostle and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I have come to you to present myself to you.

    HIGH LIBIDO CAUSED QUICK ARROUSALS

    Apostle got aroused at sight of (attractive) women.
    Muslim, Book 008, Number 3240:
    ‘Jabir reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) saw a woman, and so he came to his wife, Zainab, as she was tanning a leather and had sexual intercourse with her’.

    AROUSED BY CLOSE RELATIVES

    One day Apostle of Allah walked into his adopted son Zaid’s house. Zaid was not there but he caught a glimpse of his voluptuous and beautiful wife Zainab (she was apostle’s first cousin) in her birthday suit.
    Tabari wrote:
    “One day Muhammad went out looking for Zaid. Now there was a covering of hair cloth over the doorway, but the wind had lifted the covering so that the doorway was uncovered. Zaynab was in her chamber, undressed, and admiration for her entered the heart of the Prophet”.
    The admiration aroused him instantly, which Zainab also noticed and mentioned it to her husband Zaid later. He rushed to his father’s house and offered Zainab to him. Mohammed worried about possible bad press and refused to accept it. But Allah will not take no for an answer and insisted on their union.
    Q 33:37 We gave her (Zaid’s wife) unto thee in marriage, so that (henceforth) there may be no sin for believers in respect of wives of their adopted sons’.

    AROUSED BY WIFE’S MAIDS

    Once he entered his wife Hafsa’s room for some reason. Hafsa was not there but he found her lovely young maid Maria instead. He grabbed her and jumped into the bed with her for a quickie. But the quickie was not quick enough and Hafsa walked in and started yelling. To quieten her down and to please her he promised never to touch her maid again. However Allah did not approve of this sacrifice and revealed the following ayas:
    Q66.1 SHAKIR: O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you (slave girl Maria); you seek to please your wife(Hafsa)
    66.2 Allah has sanctioned for you to break your promise (go sleep with Hafsa’s maid)

    AROUSED BY LITTLE GIRLS

    Apostle was helpless because of his 30 man libido and got excited even when he saw little girls.
    Ibn Ishaq: Suhayli, 2.79: In the riwaya of Yunus Ibn Ishaq recorded that the apostle saw (Ummu’l-Fadl hen she was baby crawling before him and said, ‘If she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.’ (ref.10, p. 311)
    Muhammad saw Um Habiba the daughter of Abbas while she was fatim (age of nursing) and he said, “If she grows up while I am still alive, I will marry her.” (Musnad Ahmad, Number 25636)

    AROUSED BY DREAMS OF LITTLE GIRLS

    Twice he dreamt of a little girl, the 6 year old pretty daughter of his best friend Abu. She was wrapped in a silk cloth. He uncovered the silk cloth to see more of her.
    Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 15:
    Narrated ‘Aisha:
    Allah’s Apostle said (to me), “You have been shown to me twice in (my) dreams. A man was carrying you in a silken cloth and said to me, ‘This is your wife.’ I uncovered it; and behold, it was you. I said to myself, ‘If this dream is from Allah, He will cause it to come true.’”
    He ended up marrying the 6 year old girl of his dreams.

    HIGH LIBIDO CAUSED REALISTIC DAY DREAMING

    Apostle could think of having sex with his wives and it felt just like real thing..
    Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 71, Number 660:
    Narrated Aisha:
    ‘Allah’s Apostle used to think that he had sexual relations with his wives while he actually had not’.

    DRY CLEANING

    His day dreaming was so realistic that he even got wet spots on his garments . Ayesha drycleaned those spots.
    .Bukhari,Book 002, Number 0572:
    Ayesha said ‘In case I found that (semen) on the garment of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) dried up, I scraped it off with my nails’.

    APOSTLE’S LIBIDO HAD ITS LIMITS

    Apostle was turned off instantly whenever he was suspected of shadiness.
    One night Ayesha got a punch instead of getting sex because she got suspicious of his strange activities and followed him at night (without his knowledge) to a cemetery, where he stood in darkness waving his hands.
    Muslimi,Book 004, Number 2127:
    Ayesha narrated. “He struck me on the chest which caused me pain.’
    (the hadith is too long, one can read on usc.edu/msa)

    AL SHANBA GETS KICKED OUT OF BED

    When the apostle was in bed with his new young and pretty bride Al Shanba bint Amr bin Ghiffuriya, she told him that if he was a real prophet, his most beloved 2 year old son Ibrahim would not have died of sickness after he prayed day and night for him. Apostle kicked her out and divorced her without consummation of the marriage.
    (She was lucky to have been just kicked out. Allah demands death for doubting Mohammed)
    (Tabari, vol 9, page 136)
    Responses to Apostles’ Greatest Miracle was Sex
    1. Luckylarry says:
    February 9, 2014 at 12:45 am

    THE CAVE-BOY

    Mutt lived in a cave for 9 months. He was happy & content in there, but one day, out of the blue, he was evicted. He kicked up and screamed as they pulled him out of the cave & then someone slapped him on the arse for good measure. “F–king c–t, you”, Mutt muttered to himself, “I’ll get back in some day”! Mutt was distraught & angry as he made his way out into the world. Mutt felt rejected & wandered about looking for a new cave.

    He tried cow caves, camel’s caves, sheep caves, goat caves & even chicken caves. He was desperate, and sad to say, he became the butt of a joke & the people called him “Cave-Boy”!
    An old crone who knew about Mutt & his need for a cave called him one day & told him that she had an old cave & would he like to see it. Mutt was delighted & said YESSS! “Come home with me & I will show you my lovely cave & you can be my toyboy, oh I mean, my Cave-Boy”!

    Mutt thought all his birthdays had come together! For the first time in years he felt happy & contented. When they reached the old crone’s house, she told Mutt to have a shower & meet her in her bedroom & then she would show Mutt her cave. Mutt showered quickly & ran to the bedroom, where the old crone was standing there stark naked. She pointed to a BIG, BLACK, BUSHY CAVE between her thighs that scared the shit outta Mutt.

    “Come on “Ali Baba”& enter the lovely cave” she croaked. Mutt was nervous, so he peeked inside with his Willie! He could see nothing; it was pitch black & then the walls of the cave closed in on him & nearly squeezed the life outta his Willie. Then outta the blue a snake-like creature attacked his Willie & thumped the life outta him. It seemed to be saying:

    “Excite-Excite-Excite”!

    Mutt didn’t know how long the horrible experience lasted, but he swore an Oath,

    “I will NEVER, EVER again enter a BIG, BLACK, BUSHY CAVE, so help me Allah”!

    And that dear friends is the reason Mohammedan women today have to shave their pubic hair & are circumcised. Mohammedan men prefer small, hairless, circumcised vaginas & so did Mohammed after his terrible experience.

    Sahih Bukhari:Volume 7, Book 62, Number 173:
    Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
    The Prophet said,
    “If you enter (your town) at night (after coming from a journey), do not enter upon your family till the woman whose husband was absent (from the house) shaves her pubic hair and the woman with unkempt hair, combs her hair”
    Allah’s Apostle further said, “(O Jabir!) Seek to have offspring, seek to have offspring!”

    Five practices of fitra
    1. Circumcision;
    2. Shaving pubic region;
    3. Clipping nails
    4. Cutting mustache short;
    5. Removal of arm pit hair…7.72.777

    Mohammed ordered that ALL Mohammedan women:

    (1) Always keep their vagina shaved!
    (2) Be circumcised
    (3) And that the Mohammedan men have the hoody of their Willies removed, so they can see where they’re going & see if there is a snake-like creature in the cave.

    ISLAMIC LAW ON FEMALE CIRCUMCISION

    The following quotation is taken from Reliance of the Traveller, Revised edition, amana publications, Beltsville, 1997.

    DON’T CIRCUMCISE IT – CUT IT OFF

    The Arabic actually says:
    Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female)
    by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male,
    but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the clitoris
    (this is called HufaaD).
    The Arabic word bazr does not mean “prepuce of the clitoris”, it means the clitoris itself (cf. the entry in the Arabic-English Dictionary).
    The deceptive translation by Nuh Hah Mim Keller, made for Western consumption, obscures the Shafi’i law, given by ‘Umdat al-Salik, that circumcision of girls by excision of the clitoris is mandatory. This particular form of female circumcision is widely practiced in Egypt, where the Shafi’i school of Sunni law is followed.

    2. Luckylarry says:
    February 9, 2014 at 12:34 am

    DIVINELY SANCTIONED

    1.5 billion Muslims believe that Allah sanctioned their prophet to marry a 6 year old child and wank between her thighs for 3 years, shooting his cum all over her little, naked body and when the child was 9 years he f–ked her. She was never able to have a child after this ordeal.

    THE WANKING PERVERT FROM MECCA

    A marriage is engaged in by 2 consenting adults.
    Do you really believe a 6 year old child would desire to marry a 51 year old man?
    Do you think that is what she would choose?
    Do you think a 9 year old girl would desire to have sex with a 54 year old?
    The thought of an old man becoming aroused by a child is one of the most disturbing thoughts that makes us cringe as it reminds us of pedophilia and the most despicable people. It is difficult to accept that the “Holy Prophet” of Mecca married Aisha when she was 6-years-old and WANKED BETWEEN HER THIGHS FOR 3 YEARS and consummated/RAPED her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old.

    THE PERFECT MUSLIM

    And surely thou hast sublime morals
    (Surat Al-Qalam 68:4).
    Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar
    (Surat Al-Ahzab 33:21).
    Muslims believe that the Koran is the eternal word/laws of god to acts as a divine guidance for mankind about how to live a moral, righteous life. Prophet Muhammad, the highest perfection of human life and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct in Islamic belief, emulated the guidance of Allah perfectly.

    HOW TO THIGH & GET HIGH

    Now let us see how thighing is practiced on a female child & who began this evil practice. According to an official Fatwa issued in Saudi Arabia, the prophet Muhammad began to practice thighing his child-bride, Aisha when she was 6 years old until she reached 9 years of age (Fatwa No. 31409). The hadith mentioned the prophet Muhammad started performing literal sex with Aisha ONLY when she reached the age of 9 (Sahih al-Bukhari, book 62, hadith No. 89).
    Muslim scholars collectively agree, a child becomes an adult, available for sexual intercourse as soon as she reaches the age of nine. Likewise, the Shari’a allows any of the faithful to marry a six-year-old child.
    According to the fatwa, the prophet Muhammad could not have sex with his fiancée, Aisha when she was six due to her small size & age. However, the fatwa said that at age six, he would put his penis between her thighs and massage it gently because he did not want to harm her.
    Imagine a man of 51 removing the clothes of a 6-year-old girl and slipping his erect penis between her thighs, rubbing her until he ejaculated and his semen ran down her thighs. To this day, this is considered a benevolent act on the part of the adult male “not wanting to harm her.” What harm could be inflicted upon a young girl mentally and emotionally if not a grown man showing her his penis and stripping her of her clothes and rubbing his male organ between her legs?
    Of course the twisted mind that does such an evil to a female child, would not hesitate to ejaculate on her body. And if this sexually perverted evil frame of mind committed such an act upon a child, the pedophile would not stop at ejaculating on her. His evil desire would go further and rape the child before she was a mature adult. This is exactly what Muhammad did to Aisha when she was yet a child of 9.

    AISHA WASHING SEMEN FROM MUHAMMAD’S CLOTHES

    From the Hadith of Bukhari:
    Volume 1, Book 4, Number 229:
    Narrated ‘Aisha:
    I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).
    Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:
    Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar:
    I asked ‘Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. “
    3. Chiulo-Ruiz says:
    June 3, 2013 at 2:16 am
    Aisha the child bride and the mother of no one gives the status of all lies to the supposed prowess of Muhammad of Arabia aka Abul Qasim (booty distributor)!
    Islam attempts to save the barrenness of Aisha bint Bakr with the false appellation of
    “Mother Of Believers”,
    when Aisha bint Bakr was in reality the mother of no one!
    The greatest miracle of the false Arab prophet Muhammad was that he has millions of people believing in falsehoods without any verifiable proofs to support it (Islam)!
    4. knanjund says:
    June 1, 2013 at 5:01 pm
    how would he get so many women if he had focused on sex. He had get his folk to conquer lands , plunder their belonging so that he could get his booty Mo knew he could make himself the ruler and then create rules that suit him. But strange that people accepted his nonsense like “any believing woman is game”
    5. manfred says:
    May 31, 2013 at 5:15 am
    Maybe he should have stuck to sex… become a gigolo or something… an Arab Casanova… he could have written his memoirs…
    He would have done a lot less harm. But sex freak as he was, he stumbled on a way to get all the sex he could ever want… Become a Prophet!
    6. Assta B. Gettu says:
    May 29, 2013 at 11:18 am
    Can anyone tell me if Muhammad had sex with his camel called Kaswa?
    7. Christian Faith says:
    January 27, 2013 at 11:43 am
    Not only was Mohammed a sexual predator he also had a massive ego to match his massive lust.
    And muslims worship this man!! Who would believe it?
    8. atheist says:
    January 26, 2013 at 1:00 am
    Islam is just a pile of non sense and sexul lust and violence
    9. Bharat says:
    January 25, 2013 at 8:45 am
    Devout Muslims even today follow in the footsteps of their polygamous and pedophile prophet.(Pigsit be Upon Him)Allah is great!

    • You said “Islam is just a pile of non sense and sexual lust and violence” : Wrong!

      Your head will be chopped off if you live with remotest lust in Islam. Just go to any Islamic country and try your perversity!

      • YO DUMB PLUM,

        ALL MOHAMMEDANS ARE SEX PERVERTS!

        ALLAH’S ARITHMETIC:
        54 INTO 9 GOES NICELY

        THE WANKING PERVERT FROM MECCA

        A marriage is engaged in by 2 consenting adults.
        Do you really believe a 6 year old child would desire to marry a 51 year old man?
        Do you think that is what she would choose?
        Do you think a 9 year old girl would desire to have sex with a 54 year old?

        The thought of an old man becoming aroused by a child is one of the most disturbing thoughts that makes us cringe as it reminds us of pedophilia and the most despicable people. It is difficult to accept that the “Holy Prophet” of Mecca married Aisha when she was 6-years-old and WANKED BETWEEN HER THIGHS FOR 3 YEARS and consummated/RAPED her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old.

        HOW TO THIGH & GET HIGH

        Now let us see how thighing is practiced on a female child & who began this evil practice. According to an official Fatwa issued in Saudi Arabia, the prophet Muhammad began to practice thighing his child-bride, Aisha when she was 6 years old until she reached 9 years of age (Fatwa No. 31409). The hadith mentioned the prophet Muhammad started performing literal sex with Aisha ONLY when she reached the age of 9 (Sahih al-Bukhari, book 62, hadith No. 89).

        Muslim scholars collectively agree, a child becomes an adult, available for sexual intercourse as soon as she reaches the age of nine. Likewise, the Shari’a allows any of the faithful to marry a six-year-old child.

        According to the fatwa, the prophet Muhammad could not have sex with his fiancée, Aisha when she was six due to her small size & age. However, the fatwa said that at age six, he would put his penis between her thighs and massage it gently because he did not want to harm her.

        Imagine a man of 51 removing the clothes of a 6-year-old girl and slipping his erect penis between her thighs, rubbing her until he ejaculated and his semen ran down her thighs. To this day, this is considered a benevolent act on the part of the adult male “not wanting to harm her.” What harm could be inflicted upon a young girl mentally and emotionally if not a grown man showing her his penis and stripping her of her clothes and rubbing his male organ between her legs?

        Of course the twisted mind that does such an evil to a female child, would not hesitate to ejaculate on her body. And if this sexually perverted evil frame of mind committed such an act upon a child, the pedophile would not stop at ejaculating on her. His evil desire would go further and rape the child before she was a mature adult. This is exactly what Muhammad did to Aisha when she was yet a child of 9.

        Before she reached puberty, he began to have sex with her. Let us see what the fatwa said about the prophet of Islam and his child-bride, Aisha.”Praise be to Allah and peace be upon the one after whom there is no [further] prophet. After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwas (religious decrees) reviewed the question presented to the grand Mufti Abu Abdullah Muhammad Al-Shamari, with reference number 1809 issued on 3/8/1421(Islamic calendar).

        The inquirer asked the following: ‘It has become wide spread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufakhathat of the children (mufakhathat literally translated means “placing between the thighs of children” which means placing the male erected penis between the thighs of a child). What is the opinion of scholars knowing full well that the prophet, the peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, also practiced the “thighing” of Aisha – the mother of believers ?’

        After the committee studied the issue, they gave the following reply: ‘It has not been the practice of the Muslims throughout the centuries to resort to this unlawful practice that has come to our countries from pornographic movies that the kofar (infidels) and enemies of Islam send. As for the Prophet, peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, thighing his fiancée Aisha. She was six years of age and he could not have intercourse with her due to her small age.

        That is why the prophet peace and prayers of Allah be upon him placed his penis between her thighs and massaged it lightly, as the apostle of Allah had control of his penis not like other believers'” (Fatwa No. 31409).

        Thighing of children is practiced in many Arab and Muslim countries, notably in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, and the Gulf countries. Also evil practices like altamatu’a bil almuka’aba (pleasure from sexual contact with her breasts), altamatu’a bil alsagirah (pleasure from sexual contact with a baby girl), altamatu’a bil alradi’ah, (pleasure from sexual contact with a suckling female infant), (Reported by Baharini Women’s Rights Activist, Ghada Jamshir)

        AISHA WASHING SEMEN FROM MUHAMMAD’S CLOTHES

        From the Hadith of Bukhari:

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 229:

        Narrated ‘Aisha:

        I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:

        Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar:

        I asked ‘Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. ”

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 232:

        Narrated ‘Amr bin Maimun:

        I heard Sulaiman bin Yasar talking about the clothes soiled with semen. He said that ‘Aisha had said, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayers while water spots were still visible on them.

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 233:

        Narrated ‘Aisha:

        I used to wash the semen off the clothes of the Prophet and even then I used to notice one or more spots on them.

        From the Hadith of Bukhari:

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 229:

        Narrated ‘Aisha:

        I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 230:

        Narrated ‘Aisha:

        as above (229).

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:

        Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar:

        I asked ‘Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. ”

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 232:

        Narrated ‘Amr bin Maimun:

        I heard Sulaiman bin Yasar talking about the clothes soiled with semen. He said that ‘Aisha had said, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayers while water spots were still visible on them.

        Volume 1, Book 4, Number 233:

        Narrated ‘Aisha:

        I used to wash the semen off the clothes of the Prophet and even then I used to notice one or more spots on them.
        MUHAMMAD RESERVED BABY AISHA FOR HIMSELF, BECAUSE SHE WAS A VIRGIN & HE WANTED A VIRGIN.
        Sahih al-Bukhari, volume 7, book 62, number 17
        Narrated jabir bin ‘abdullah:
        When I got married, Allah’s apostle said to me, “what type of lady have you married?” I replied, “I have married a matron.” he said, “why, don’t you have a liking for the virgins and for fondling them?” Jabir also said: Allah’s apostle said, “why didn’t you marry a young girl so that you might play with her and she with you?”
        Hence, Muhammad’s comments indicate that his reason for marrying Aisha while a young virgin is so that he could fondle and sexually play with her!
        AISHA WAS NOT THE ONLY BABY GIRL MUHAMMAD FANTASIZED ABOUT
        In the classic history, Sirat Rasul Allah (The Life of Muhammad) by Ibn Ishaq, there is an account in which Muhammad expressed a marital interest in a crawling baby. This event seems to have occurred around the time of the battle of of Badr, when he was about 55 years old. He had married Aisha two years earlier, when he was 53 years of age.
        (Suhayli, ii. 79: in the Riwaya of Yunus i. I. Recorded that the apostle saw her (Ummu’lfadl) when she was a baby crawling before him and said,
        ‘if she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.’
        but he died before she grew up and sufyan b. Al-aswad b. ‘Abdu’l-asad al-Makhzumi married her and she bore him rizq and lubab… [Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, Karachi, p. 311]
        Muhammad saw Um Habiba the daughter of Abbas while she was fatim (age of nursing) and he said, “if she grows up while I am still alive, I will marry her.” (Musnad Ahmad, number 25636)
        MUHAMMAD WOULD BATH & FONDLE AISHA
        Bukhari (6:298) – Muhammad would take a bath with the little Aisha and fondle her.
        Narrated ‘Aisha:
        The prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me. While in itikaf, he used to bring his head near me and I would wash it while I used to be in my periods (menses).
        MUHAMMAD CONSUMMATED HIS MARRIAGE TO BABY AISHA, WHEN SHE WAS 9
        Sunaan abu Dawud: book 11, number 2161:
        Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
        I and the apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) used to lie in one cloth at night while I was menstruating. If anything from me smeared him, he washed the same place (that was smeared), and did not wash beyond it. If anything from him smeared his clothe, he washed the same place and did not wash beyond that, and prayed with it (i.e. The clothe).
        MUHAMMAD WOULD SEXUALLY ABUSE HIS WIVES
        Bukhari (6:300) – Muhammad’s wives had to be available for the prophet’s fondling even when they were having their menstrual period.
        Bukhari volume 1, book 6, number 299:
        Narrated ‘Abdur-rahman bin al-Aswad:
        …(on the authority of his father) ‘Aisha said: “Whenever Allah’s apostle wanted to fondle anyone of us during her periods (menses), he used to order her to put on an izar and start fondling her.” ‘Aisha added, “None of you could control his sexual desires as the prophet could.”
        WOMEN ARE SEXUAL OBJECTS
        Allah promoted this abusive sexual behavior:
        “Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will” [Koran 2:223]
        Koran (2:223) likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills. In this verse, Allah also gives divine sanction for anal sex.
        According to Islam, Muhammad is the perfection of humanity and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct. He had sex with Aisha at the age of nine, which amounts to rape of a minor. He also left behind an enduring legacy for aged Muslim men to fulfill their carnal desires contrary to natural law and to the life-long devastation of young girls.

        ALLAH PROMOTES PEDOPHILIA
        Quran 65.4 “and those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘iddah (prescribed divorce period), if you have doubts (about their periods), is three months, and for those who have no courses [(i.e. They are still immature) their ‘iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise, except in case of death] . And for those who are pregnant (whether they are divorced or their husbands are dead), their ‘iddah (prescribed period) is until they deliver (their burdens) (give birth) and whosoever fears Allah and keeps his duty to him, he will make his matter easy for him.”
        Sura (65:4) lays down rules for divorce and sets the prescribed period for divorce. It clearly says, Muslim men can marry (and divorce) little girls who have not yet reached menstruation age. This means that Muslim men were allowed to marry baby girls. This is the eternal word of god. This is an eternal law of Allah. All Muslims must believe in this teaching. Otherwise, they are no longer Muslims but apostates of Islam.

        ALLAH ORDAINS RAPE
        “All married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.” 4:24
        You can have sex with slaves women captured in war (with whom you may rape or do whatever you like).
        Muhammad established an appalling precedent for abuse of young girls which is continued to be nurtured by the Muslim faithful. For example, Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran gave a fatwa about Quran 65.4:
        “A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, other sexual acts such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed. A man having intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not permanently damaged. If the girl, however, is permanently damaged, the man must provide for her all her life. But this girl will not count as one of the man’s four permanent wives. He also is not permitted to marry the girl’s sister.”

        ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS ALL SUNI MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

        You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.

        ‘PERFUMED GARDEN’

        by Abu Nuwas:

        O the joy of sodomy!
        So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
        Turn not away from it–
        therein is wondrous pleasure.
        Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
        twisting on his temple
        and ride as he stands like some gazelle
        standing to her mate.
        A lad whom all can see girt with sword
        and belt not like your whore who has
        to go veiled.
        Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
        very best to mount them, for women are
        the mounts of the devils

        THIS IS REAL MOHAMMEDANISM:

        Surah 8:69: “But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good.” (Yusuf Ali)

        ISLAMIC QUESTION & ANSWER, ONLINE WITH MUFTI EBRAHIM DESAI, SOUTH AFRICA, ASK THE IMAM:

        “It may, superficially, appear distasteful to copulate with a woman who is not a man’s legal wife, but once Shariah makes something lawful, we have to accept it as lawful, whether it appeals to our taste, or not; and whether we know its underlying wisdom or not.”

        ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

        Satan Attends Every Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant
        Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)
        Whenever a child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)
        Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

        ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER FC-KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

        In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

        EVEN MUTT & HIS COMPANIONS

        Islamic cleric confirms Muslim men really are sodomites
        You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
        In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

        TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

        “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

        For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

        Cleric Yasser Habib exposes Kalifa Umar as a Sodomite

        It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
        A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

        The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
        One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.

        If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

        Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

        When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

        ANIMAL LOVING MUSLIMS:

        ISLAM & ZOOPHILIA

        Zoophilia, from the Greek Ζωον (zôon, “animal”) and φιλία (philia, “friendship” or “love”), is a paraphilia, defined as an affinity or sexual attraction by a human to a non-human animal. Such individuals are called zoophiles. The more recent terms zoosexual and zoosexuality describe the full spectrum of human/animal orientation. A separate term, bestiality (more common in mainstream usage and frequently but incorrectly seen as a synonym; often misspelled as “beastiality”), refers to human/animal sexual activity. To avoid confusion about the meaning of zoophilia — which may refer to the affinity/attraction, paraphilia, or sexual activity — this article uses zoophilia for the former, and zoosexual activity for the sexual act. The two terms are independent: not all sexual acts with animals are performed by zoophiles; and not all zoophiles are sexually interested in animals.
        Pakistan has banned content on more than a dozen websites because of “offensive” and “blasphemous” material, while they themselves rank No. 1 for certain sex-related search terms, including “child sex,” “rape sex,” “animal sex,” “camel sex,” “donkey sex,” “dog sex,” and “horse sex”.[1]

        IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD

        AFGHANISTAN

        In a society where homosexuals and adulterers are stoned to death for “sexual immorality” you would expect a similar outcome for someone caught having sex with an animal. Surprisingly this is not the case.
        An Afghan soldier was detained by police after being caught having sex with a donkey in southeastern Afghanistan, a police officer told AFP.
        The soldier was discovered with the donkey in an abandoned house in a small village of Gardez, the capital of Paktia province, last week, a local police officer said.
        “He was caught in the act by a small boy who immediately told police about what he had seen and police arrested him in action,” the Gardez-based officer told AFP, requesting anonymity.
        The soldier claimed he committed the act because he did not have enough money to get married.
        After being caught with the donkey in a village about 100km south of the capital Kabul, he was jailed for four days and then released without charge.
        According to tradition in south and southeastern Afghanistan, a suitor must pay around $US5,000 ($A6,800) to the parents of the girl he wishes to marry.
        Soldier caught with his pants down
        The Age, March 16, 2004
        Could it be that the soldier was released without charge because there is nothing in the Qur’an that prohibits bestiality?

        PALESTINE

        In 1923, the Director of Health in the British Mandate government in Palestine sent out a questionnaire to his Principal Medical and Health Officers in the country, asking them to report on various sexual practices and attitudes among the Muslim Arab population.
        As a result, the British discovered that the Muslim Arabs engaged in bestiality.
        The Nablus officer finds sodomy and “similar vices” “not uncommon in some of the towns but less so in the villages where…bestiality is by no mean unknown” and “immorality…rather lightly regarded” in those villages that are closer to the larger towns. He comments, “in the villages there seems to be curiously little feeling against bestiality which I have heard admitted in a very airy way on more than one occasion. Sodomy is considered disgraceful but not I think more so than ordinary immorality” (III).
        “Unnatural Vices” or Unnatural Rule? The Case of a Sex Questionnaire and the British Mandate
        Ellen L. Fleischmann, Jerusalem Quarterly File, Issue 10, 2000

        PAKISTAN

        In Southern Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh and Balochistan, sex with animals is a common practice among rural youths and considered a rite of passage into adulthood.
        In southern Punjab, much of NWFP, Sindh and Balochistan sodomy and bestiality are common among rural youths. In fact, he caught two boys trying to rape a goat in the vicinity of the mazar of Hazrat Sultan Bahu. The punishment meted out to them was 10 blows with a chhittar (shoe) each on their butts. They protested however that in many rural areas having sex with an animal was considered a rite of passage on the way to becoming full members of the male society!
        Desegregation of the sexes and promiscuity
        Ishtiaq Ahmed (associate professor of political science at Stockholm University), Daily Times, June 27, 2006

        DONKEY KILLED AFTER BEING RAPED

        In June 2011, a male who was caught having sex with another man’s donkey was fined Rs 50,000. This fine was not imposed for having sex with an animal, but for committing adultery. The raped donkey was labelled a ‘kari’ (an adultress) and eventually honor killed by its owner.

        Incredible though it may sound, a donkey was declared ‘Kari’ and shot dead here in a remote area on Monday. The Jirga imposed 110,000 rupees fine on the alleged ‘Karo’.
        The reports said that in Village Ghahi Khan Jatoi, a villager Ghazi Khan alias Malang shot dead his donkey on being ‘Kari’ with Sikandar Ali alias Deedo. He attempted to kill Sikander too but the alleged Karo managed to escape and surrendered himself to an influential person of the area.
        Sources said the influential person summoned both the parties and imposed 110,000 rupees fine on the Karo. They said Sikander and his family were forced to pay Rs 50,000 on the spot and the remaining amount in two installments.
        The sources added that the alleged Karo pleaded innocence at the Jirga, but the Jirga members paid no attention to it. Sikander’s family said he paid Rs 50,000 to save his life otherwise he would have been killed.
        Donkey declared ‘Kari’ killed
        The News International, July 19, 2011
        Pakistan ranks number 1 for such varied search terms as “child sex,” “rape sex,” “animal sex,” “camel sex,” “donkey sex,” “dog sex,” and “horse sex”.
        The Muslim country, which has banned content on at least 17 websites to block offensive and blasphemous material, is the world’s leader in online searches for pornographic material
        . . .
        Google ranks Pakistan No. 1 in the world in searches for pornographic terms, outranking every other country in the world in searches per person for certain sex-related content.
        Pakistan is top dog in searches per-person for “horse sex” since 2004, “donkey sex” since 2007, “rape pictures” between 2004 and 2009, “rape sex” since 2004, “child sex” between 2004 and 2007 and since 2009, “animal sex” since 2004 and “dog sex” since 2005, according to Google Trends and Google Insights, features of Google that generate data based on popular search terms.
        The country also is tops — or has been No. 1 — in searches for “sex,” “camel sex,” “rape video,” “child sex video” and some other searches that can’t be printed here.
        No. 1 Nation in Sexy Web Searches? Call it Pornistan
        Kelli Morgan, Fox News, July 13, 2010

        OTHER COUNTRIES & BESTIALITY — RELATED SEARCHES

        Pakistani Muslims are not alone in their search for porn.
        Google, the world’s most popular Internet search engine, has found in a survey that mostly Muslim states seek access to sex-related websites and Pakistan tops the list. Google found that of the top 10 countries – searching for sex-related sites – six were Muslim, with Pakistan on the top. The other Muslim countries are Egypt at number 2, Iran at 4, Morocco at 5, Saudi Arabia at 7 and Turkey at 8. Non-Muslim states are Vietnam at 3, India at 6, Philippines at 9 and Poland at 10.
        Pakistan most sex-starved
        Khalid Hasan, Daily Times, May 17, 2006
        Here are the Muslim countries and how they placed in the top five world ranking of various bestiality-related internet search terms:[8]
        Pig Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Egypt (No. 2) Saudi Arabia (No. 3)
        Donkey Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 3) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
        Dog Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Saudi Arabia (No. 3)
        Cat Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 2) Egypt (No. 3) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
        Horse Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Turkey (No. 3)
        Cow Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 2) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
        Goat Sex: Pakistan (No. 1)
        Animal Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Morocco (No. 2) Iran (No. 4) Egypt (No. 5)
        Snake Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Malaysia (No. 3) Indonesia (No. 4) Egypt (No. 5)
        Monkey Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Indonesia (No. 3) Malaysia (No. 4)
        Bear Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Saudi Arabia (No. 2)
        Elephant Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Egypt (No. 3) United Arab Emirates (No. 4) Malaysia (No. 5)
        Fox Sex: Saudi Arabia (No. 1) Turkey (No. 4)

        MIDDLE EAST

        Bestiality is common among boys of tribal Arab cultures.
        Miner and DeVos (1960) comment that amongst Arab tribal cultures, “Bestiality with goats, sheep, or camels provides another outlet. These practices are not approved but they are recognized as common among boys.” Havelock-Ellis [note 52] states “The Arabs, according to Kocher, chiefly practice bestiality with goats, sheep and mares. The Annamites, according to Mondiere, commonly employ sows and (more especially the young women) dogs.”
        Historical And Cultural Perspectives On Zoophilia
        Serving History
        There is also a certain saying which remains popular among the Arabs:
        The Arabs have never taken quite so condemnatory an attitude towards the practice, and indeed a popular Arab saying had it that

        “The pilgrimage to Mecca is not complete without copulating with the camel.”[9]

        SUDAN

        In February 2006, a man caught having sex with a neighbor’s goat was not punished, but ordered by the council of elders to pay the neighbor a dowry of 15,000 Sudanese dinars ($50) and marry the animal because he “used it as his wife”.
        A Sudanese man has been forced to take a goat as his “wife”, after he was caught having sex with the animal.
        The goat’s owner, Mr Alifi, said he surprised the man with his goat and took him to a council of elders.
        They ordered the man, Mr Tombe, to pay a dowry of 15,000 Sudanese dinars ($50) to Mr Alifi.
        “We have given him the goat, and as far as we know they are still together,” Mr Alifi said.
        Sudan man forced to ‘marry’ goat
        BBC News, February 24,2006

        MOROCCO
        Morocco is an Islamic country, with 98.7% of the population Muslims.[10] The following is taken from a paper on sexuality in Morocco written by Nadia Kadiri, M.D., and Abderrazak Moussaïd, M.D., with Abdelkrim Tirraf, M.D., and Abdallah Jadid, M.D. Translated by Raymond J. Noonan, Ph.D., and Sandra Almeida.[11]
        In the rural world, zoophilia is still very widespread and not blameworthy. With masturbation, it constitutes an obligatory passage in the adolescent male’s apprenticeship of sexuality.
        The operative phrase is ‘obligatory passage in the adolescent male’s apprenticeship of sexuality’. Obligatory. It means in rural Morocco, Muslim males must have sexual intercourse with animals as part of their sexual apprenticeship.
        Also according to the scholars Allen Edwardes and Robert Masters, Ph.D, FAACS, the Muslims of Morocco believe that sexual intercourse with donkeys “make the penis grow big and strong” and masturbation is often scorned by them in favor of bestiality.[12]

        SLAMIC SCRIPTURE

        The above paper also says “it is prohibited without question by the Shariâ”. But is this alleged prohibition within the Shari’ah extracted (as it must be) from the Qur’an and Hadith, or has this fiqh been derived using external non-Islamic sources?

        QURAN

        In contrast with what secular and non-Islamic religious sources say about bestiality, this is what the Qur’an has to say on the subject:
        That’s right – absolutely, positively nothing. Unlike the Qur’an’s clear-cut rulings on the morality of homosexuality, Polygamy, rape, and pedophilia, the permissibility of bestiality seems to have been left open to ‘interpretation.’
        If Islamic teachings were truly opposed to such a practice, then this omission is somewhat surprising when you consider that, historically, bestiality was indigenously accepted in the Middle-East.[13]

        HADITH

        There is no prohibition against bestiality to be found within the two Sahihs. The following hadith is taken from the Sunnah Abu-Dawud collection, not Bukari or Muslim.
        Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: If anyone has sexual intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill it along with him. I (Ikrimah) said: I asked him (Ibn Abbas): What offence can be attributed to the animal/ He replied: I think he (the Prophet) disapproved of its flesh being eaten when such a thing had been done to it.
        Abu Dawud 38:4449
        Sounds too good to be true, doesn’t it? And it is. Just look at the very next hadith.
        Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: There is no prescribed punishment for one who has sexual intercourse with an animal.
        Abu Dawud 38:4450
        This is a very clear contradiction. How can one hadith say kill the person committing bestiality, and the very next one say there is no prescribed punishment for the same person? Both statements cannot be true.
        What’s worse; these two contradictory hadiths (transmitted through different isnad) have been attributed to the same person. Abu Dawud himself had said the former of the two hadith is “not strong” and the latter further “weakens” it.[14]
        From the above, we can gather that Robert Masters had correctly stated, “bestiality was not specifically prohibited by the Prophet,”[9] so there is little wonder that Islamists generally shy away from mentioning Abu Dawud 38:4449 in their pronouncements on bestiality.

        SAHIH (AUTHENTIC) HADITH

        As we have previously mentioned, there is no prohibition against bestiality to be found within the two Sahihs (Authentic). However there does exist a certain hadith and commentary by the renowned Islamic scholar al-Nawawi, which is of interest.
        The following narration does not exist in the English translations of Sahih Muslim, but a similar (but sanitized version) appears in: Sahih Muslim 3:684
        و حدثني ‏ ‏زهير بن حرب ‏ ‏وأبو غسان المسمعي ‏ ‏ح ‏ ‏و حدثناه ‏ ‏محمد بن المثنى ‏ ‏وابن بشار ‏ ‏قالوا حدثنا ‏ ‏معاذ بن هشام ‏ ‏قال حدثني ‏ ‏أبي ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏قتادة ‏ ‏ومطر ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏الحسن ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبي رافع ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبي هريرة ‏ ‏أن نبي الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏إذا جلس بين ‏ ‏شعبها ‏ ‏الأربع ثم جهدها فقد وجب عليه الغسل ‏
        ‏وفي حديث ‏ ‏مطر ‏ ‏وإن لم ينزل ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏زهير ‏ ‏من بينهم بين ‏ ‏أشعبها ‏ ‏الأربع ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن عمرو بن عباد بن جبلة ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن أبي عدي ‏ ‏ح ‏ ‏و حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن المثنى ‏ ‏حدثني ‏ ‏وهب بن جرير ‏ ‏كلاهما ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏شعبة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏قتادة ‏ ‏بهذا الإسناد ‏ ‏مثله غير أن في حديث ‏ ‏شعبة ‏ ‏ثم اجتهد ولم يقل وإن لم ينزل ‏
        Narrated by Zuhair Ibn Harb, narrated by Ghasan Al-Masma’i, narrated by Muhammad Ibn Al-Mathny, narrated by Ibn Bashar, who said that it was narrated by Muath Ibn Hisham, narrated by Abu Qatada, narrated by Mattar, narrated by Al-Hassan, narrated by Abu Rab’i, narrated by Abu Huraira who said:
        “The prophet — peace be upon him — said, ‘If one sits between a woman’s four parts (shu’biha Al-arba’) and then fatigues her, then it necessitates that he wash.’
        In the hadith of Mattar it is added ‘even if he does not ejaculate (yunzil).’ Zuhair narrated among them using the phrase ‘Ashba’iha Al-arba’. It was also narrated by Muhammad Ibn Umar Ibn Ibad Ibn Jablah, narrated Muhammad Ibn Abi Uday, narrated by Muhammad Ibn Al-Mathny, narrated by Wahb Ibn Jarir who both related from Shu’bah who narrated from Qatada who gave this same chain of transmission, except that in the hadith of Shu’bah it has the phrase ‘then he labored’ but did not have the phrase ‘even if he does not ejaculate.’
        Sahih Muslim – Book of Menstruation – hadith #525

        IMAM AL-NAWAWI (1234 — 1278 AD)

        Below is a short bio of al-Nawawi, whose commentary of Sahih Muslim is second only to Ibn Hajar’s commentary of Sahih Bukhari.[15]
        Imam Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi was born in the village of Nawa in Southern Syria, Nawawi spent most of his life in Damascus where he lived in a simple manner, devoted to Allah, engaging single-mindedly in worship, study, writing and teaching various Islamic sciences. The life of this world seems scarcely to have impinged upon him. He was a versatile and extremely dedicated scholar whose breadth of learning was matched by its depth.
        Imam Nawawi died at the young age of 44 years, leaving behind him numerous works of great importance, the most famous of these being:
        • al-Arba’un Nabawi (An-Nawawis Forty Hadith)
        • Riyadhus saleheen
        • al-Maqasid (Al-Nawawi’s Manual of Islam).
        • Kitab al-Adhkar,
        • Minhaj al-Talibin (a main reference for Shafi’i fiqh)
        • Shar’ Sahih Muslim (he was the first to arrange the sahih of Muslim in the now familiar categories)
        Although best known for his works in hadith, Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277) was also the Imam of the later Shafi’i school of Jurisprudence, and widely acknowledged as the intellectual heir to Imam Shafi’i. He was a renowned scholar and jurist who dedicated his life to the pursuit of Islamic learning.
        About Imam al-Nawawi

        COMMENTARY
        صحيح مسلم بشرح النووي ‏ ‏قَوْله : ( أَبُو غَسَّان الْمِسْمَعِيّ ) ‏ ‏هُوَ بِفَتْحِ الْغَيْن الْمُعْجَمَة وَتَشْدِيد السِّين الْمُهْمَلَة , وَيَجُوز صَرْفه وَتَرْكُ صَرْفه . وَالْمِسْمَعِيّ بِكَسْرِ الْمِيم الْأُولَى وَفَتْح الثَّانِي , وَاسْمه مَالِك بْن عَبْد الْوَاحِد , وَقَدْ تَقَدَّمَ بَيَانه مَرَّات , لَكِنِّي أُنَبِّه عَلَيْهِ وَعَلَى مِثْله لِطُولِ الْعَهْد بِهِ , كَمَا شَرَطْتهُ فِي الْخُطْبَة . ‏
        ‏قَوْله : ( أَبُو رَافِع عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَة ) ‏ ‏اِسْم أَبِي رَافِع : ( نُفَيْع ) وَقَدْ تَقَدَّمَ أَيْضًا . ‏ ‏قَوْله صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : ( إِذَا قَعَدَ بَيْن شُعَبهَا الْأَرْبَع ثُمَّ جَهَدهَا ) ‏ ‏وَفِي رِوَايَة ( أَشْعُبهَا ) اِخْتَلَفَ الْعُلَمَاء فِي الْمُرَاد بِالشُّعَبِ الْأَرْبَع , فَقِيلَ : هِيَ الْيَدَانِ وَالرِّجْلَانِ , وَقِيلَ : الرِّجْلَانِ وَالْفَخِذَانِ , وَقِيلَ : الرِّجْلَانِ وَالشَّفْرَانِ , وَاخْتَارَ الْقَاضِي عِيَاض أَنَّ الْمُرَاد شُعَب الْفَرْج الْأَرْبَع , وَالشُّعَب النَّوَاحِي وَاحِدَتهَا شُعْبَة , وَأَمَّا مَنْ قَالَ : ( أَشْعُبِهَا ) , فَهُوَ جَمْع شُعَب . وَمَعْنَى ( جَهَدَهَا ) حَفَرَهَا كَذَا قَالَهُ الْخَطَّابِيُّ وَقَالَ غَيْره : بَلَغَ مَشَقَّتهَا , يُقَال : جَهِدْته وَأَجْهَدْته بَلَغْت مَشَقَّته , قَالَ الْقَاضِي عِيَاض رَحِمَهُ اللَّه تَعَالَى : الْأَوْلَى أَنْ يَكُون جَهَدَهَا بِمَعْنَى بَلَغَ جَهْده فِي الْعَمَل فِيهَا , وَالْجَهْد الطَّاقَة , وَهُوَ إِشَارَة إِلَى الْحَرَكَة وَتَمَكُّن صُورَة الْعَمَل , وَهُوَ نَحْو قَوْله مِنْ حَفَرَهَا أَيْ كَدّهَا بِحَرَكَتِهِ . وَإِلَّا فَأَيّ مَشَقَّة بَلَغَ بِهَا فِي ذَلِكَ . وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَم . وَمَعْنَى الْحَدِيث أَنَّ إِيجَاب الْغُسْل لَا يَتَوَقَّف عَلَى نُزُول الْمَنِيّ بَلْ مَتَى غَابَتْ الْحَشَفَة فِي الْفَرْج وَجَبَ الْغُسْل عَلَى الرَّجُل وَالْمَرْأَة , وَهَذَا لَا خِلَاف فِيهِ الْيَوْم , وَقَدْ كَانَ فِيهِ خِلَاف لِبَعْضِ الصَّحَابَة وَمَنْ بَعْدهمْ , ثُمَّ اِنْعَقَدَ الْإِجْمَاع عَلَى مَا ذَكَرْنَاهُ , وَقَدْ تَقَدَّمَ بَيَان هَذَا . قَالَ أَصْحَابنَا : وَلَوْ غَيَّبَ الْحَشَفَة فِي دُبُر اِمْرَأَة , أَوْ دُبُر رَجُل , أَوْ فَرْج بَهِيمَة , أَوْ دُبُرهَا , وَجَبَ الْغُسْل سَوَاء كَانَ الْمَوْلَج فِيهِ حَيًّا أَوْ مَيِّتًا , صَغِيرًا أَوْ كَبِيرًا , وَسَوَاء كَانَ ذَلِكَ عَنْ قَصْد أَمْ عَنْ نِسْيَان , وَسَوَاء كَانَ مُخْتَارًا أَوْ مُكْرَهًا , أَوْ اسْتَدْخَلَت الْمَرْأَة ذَكَرَهُ وَهُوَ نَائِم , وَسَوَاء اِنْتَشَرَ الذَّكَر أَمْ لَا , وَسَوَاء كَانَ مَخْتُونًا أَمْ أَغْلَف , فَيَجِب الْغُسْل فِي كُلّ هَذِهِ الصُّوَر عَلَى الْفَاعِل وَالْمَفْعُول بِهِ إِلَّا إِذَا كَانَ الْفَاعِل أَوْ الْمَفْعُول بِهِ صَبِيًّا أَوْ صَبِيَّة فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُقَال وَجَبَ عَلَيْهِ لِأَنَّهُ لَيْسَ مُكَلَّفًا , وَلَكِنْ يُقَال صَارَ جُنُبًا فَإِنْ كَانَ مُمَيِّزًا وَجَبَ عَلَى الْوَلِيّ أَنْ يَأْمُرهُ بِالْغُسْلِ كَمَا يَأْمُرهُ بِالْوُضُوءِ , فَإِنْ صَلَّى مِنْ غَيْر غُسْلٍ لَمْ تَصِحّ صَلَاته , وَإِنْ لَمْ يَغْتَسِل حَتَّى بَلَغَ وَجَبَ عَلَيْهِ الْغُسْل , وَإِنْ اِغْتَسَلَ فِي الصِّبَى ثُمَّ بَلَغَ لَمْ يَلْزَمهُ إِعَادَة الْغُسْل . قَالَ أَصْحَابنَا : وَالِاعْتِبَار فِي الْجِمَاع بِتَغْيِيبِ الْحَشَفَة مِنْ صَحِيح الذَّكَر بِالِاتِّفَاقِ , فَإِذَا غَيَّبَهَا بِكَمَالِهَا تَعَلَّقَتْ بِهِ جَمِيع الْأَحْكَام , وَلَا يُشْتَرَط تَغْيِيب جَمِيع الذَّكَر بِالِاتِّفَاقِ . وَلَوْ غَيَّبَ بَعْض الْحَشَفَة لَا يَتَعَلَّق بِهِ شَيْء مِنْ الْأَحْكَام بِالِاتِّفَاقِ إِلَّا وَجْهًا شَاذًّا ذَكَرَهُ بَعْض أَصْحَابنَا أَنَّ حُكْمه حُكْم جَمِيعهَا , وَهَذَا الْوَجْه غَلَط مُنْكَر مَتْرُوك , وَأَمَّا إِذَا كَانَ الذَّكَر مَقْطُوعًا فَإِنْ بَقِيَ مِنْهُ دُون الْحَشَفَة لَمْ يَتَعَلَّق بِهِ شَيْء مِنْ الْأَحْكَام , وَإِنْ كَانَ الْبَاقِي قَدْر الْحَشَفَة فَحَسْب تَعَلَّقَتْ الْأَحْكَام بِتَغْيِيبِهِ بِكَمَالِهِ , وَإِنْ كَانَ زَائِدًا عَلَى قَدْر الْحَشَفَة فَفِيهِ وَجْهَانِ مَشْهُورَانِ لِأَصْحَابِنَا أَصَحّهمَا أَنَّ الْأَحْكَام تَتَعَلَّق بِقَدْرِ الْحَشَفَة مِنْهُ , وَالثَّانِي لَا يَتَعَلَّق شَيْء مِنْ الْأَحْكَام إِلَّا بِتَغْيِيبِ جَمِيع الْبَاقِي . وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَم . ‏ ‏وَلَوْ لَفَّ عَلَى ذَكَرِهِ خِرْقَة وَأَوْلَجَهُ فِي فَرْج اِمْرَأَة فَفِيهِ ثَلَاثَة أَوْجُه لِأَصْحَابِنَا مِنْهَا وَالْمَشْهُور أَنَّهُ يَجِب عَلَيْهِمَا الْغُسْل , وَالثَّانِي لَا يَجِب لِأَنَّهُ أَوْلَجَ فِي خِرْقَة , وَالثَّالِث إِنْ كَانَتْ الْخِرْقَة غَلِيظَة تَمْنَع وُصُول اللَّذَّة وَالرُّطُوبَة لَمْ يَجِب الْغُسْل . وَإِلَّا وَجَبَ . وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَم . ‏ ‏وَلَوْ اسْتَدْخَلَت الْمَرْأَة ذَكَرَ بَهِيمَة وَجَبَ عَلَيْهَا الْغُسْل , وَلَوْ اسْتَدْخَلَت ذَكَرًا مَقْطُوعًا فَوَجْهَانِ أَصَحّهمَا يَجِب عَلَيْهَا الْغُسْل
        Commentary of Imam Al-Nawawi on the Hadith
        The saying of the prophet — peace be upon him- ‘When he sits between her fours parts) mostly its a home animal (shu’biha Al-arba) and has intercourse with her then fatigues her’

        In another narration the word ‘Ashu’biha’ is used. The scholars have disagreed about the intended meaning of ‘shu’biha Al-arba’ (the fours) for some said that it means the arms and the legs, while others have said that it refers to the legs and thighs, and other said it means the legs and the edge of the pubic area. Al-Qadi Ayad chose the meaning of the four areas surrounding the vagina. The word (Shu’b) means areas, its singular form being (Shu’bah). As for those who say (Ashba’iha) that is the plural of the word (Shu’b).
        The word Aj-hada-ha (fatigue her) means to plow her, which was also stated by Al-Khatabi. Others have said it means to make her reach exhaustion as in the phrase ‘she made him toil and labor till he was exhausted’. Al-Qadi Ayad — may Allah rest his soul- said ‘Primarily, the word (Jahada’ha) means that the man exerted his effort working in a woman, where the word (Juh’d) means energy and refers to motion by describing the type of work. This is similar to his (the prophet) saying ‘he who plowed her’ meaning he who penetrated her by his motion. Otherwise, what other fatigue could a man experience because of her, and Allah knows best.

        The meaning of the hadith is that the necessity to wash is not limited to when semen is ejaculated, rather it is when the penile head (Hash-fa, lit. “the head of the male member,” i.e. head of the penis) penetrates the vagina, then it is necessary for the man and the woman to wash. There is no disagreement on this today, even though there was disagreement on this by some of the early companions and others later. However, an agreement was later reached and this is what we have shown and presented previously.
        Our companions have said that if the penile head has penetrated a woman’s anus, or a man’s anus, or an animal’s vagina or its anus then it is necessary to wash whether the one being penetrated is alive or dead, young or old, whether it was done intentionally or absentmindedly, whether it was done willfully or forcefully.

        This also applies if the woman places the male member inside her while the man is asleep, whether the penis is erect or not, whether the penis is circumcised or uncircumcised. All these situations require that the person committing the act and the one the act is committed on must wash themselves, unless the person committing the act or the person the act is committed on is a young male or female. In that case it cannot be said that the person must wash, for they do not have the responsibility, rather it is said that this person is in a state of impurity. If that person can discern (the sexual act) then his guardian can command him to wash just as he commands him to perform the ablution washing for prayers. For if he prays without washing, his prayer has not been performed correctly; likewise if he doesn’t wash after he reaches puberty he must be forced to wash. If he washed as a youth and then reaches puberty, then he does not have to repeat the washing.

        Our companions have said that intercourse occurs when a healthy male’s penile head completely penetrates (an orifice), as has been unanimously agreed. Thus, when the penile head has completely disappeared (inside the orifice), then all the regulations concerning washing apply. It is unanimously agreed that it is not necessary that the entire penile shaft penetrate to apply the regulations of washing. If part of the penile head penetrates, then the regulations of washing are not imposed as is agreed, except by an odd few of our companions who said that even in this case all the regulations of washing apply. However, this opinion is wrong, rejected and abandoned. If the male member was severed and what remained was less than the length of the penile head, then none of the washing regulations apply. If the part remaining was equal in length to the penile head length then that part must completely penetrate for the regulation of washing to apply. If the part remaining was greater in length to the penile head length then there are two famous opinions for our companions. The most correct is that if the portion that penetrates is equal to the length of the penile head, then the regulations for washing apply. The other opinion is that none of the regulations for washing apply until the entire remaining length of the penile shaft completely penetrates and Allah knows best.
        If a man wraps a sheath around his male member and then ejaculates inside a woman’s vagina, then there are three opinions from our companions. The most famous is that the man must wash. The second is that he does not have to wash because he ejaculated inside the sheath. The third is that if the sheath is thick and prevents climax and wetness (in the vagina) then washing is not necessary, otherwise it is necessary and Allah knows best.
        If a woman inserts (in her vagina) an animal’s penis she must wash, and if she inserts a detached penis (thakaran maktu-an, lit. “a severed male member”) there are two opinions; the most correct is that she must wash.

        Sahih Muslim – Book of Menstruation – hadith #525 – Commentary

        ISLAMIC SCHOLARS

        Some Sunni Islamic scholars have ruled that bestiality does not invalidate the hajj or ones fast.
        ولو وطئ بهيمة لا يفسد حجه

        “If he had sexual intercourse with an animal, that will not make his hajj void”
        Abu Bakar al-Kashani (d. 587 H), Badaye al-Sanae, Vol. 2, p. 216
        “Sex with animals, dead people and masturbation, does not invalidate one’s fast provided ejaculation does not occur”
        Allamah Hassan bin Mansoor Qadhi Khan, Fatawa Qadhi Khan, Page 820
        Others have said it is halal.
        لقد كانت نكاح الحيوانات قبل البعثه منتشره وتروى كثير من الروايات انها حلال لكنها مكروه والاحوط وجوبا ترك هذه العاده التي تسبب الأذى النفسي ويجب عليك الاعتراف لصاحب الاغنام ودفع قيمتها لمالكها

        Sex with animals before the mission (Islam) was wide spread and many narrations are narrated that it is halal but makrooh (disliked). And on the compulsory precaution one should abandon this practice that may cause self harm. And you must admit this to the owner of the sheep and pay the owner.
        Sex with animals Fatwa
        al-Uzma Seyyid Ali al-Sistani

        CONCLUSION

        From all of the above, we can certainly see that, unlike the West, Islamic societies do not universally harbor negative attitudes towards bestiality. Many Muslims seek out gratification or are indifferent to this perversion, and in some cases it is even openly promoted and made obligatory.
        This is all in stark contrast with their attitudes towards homosexuality and their allowance of pedophilia. Therefore to claim that the West without the guidance of Islam has allowed bestiality is not only false, but hypocritical when you consider that this perversion, alongside pedophilia, is left largely unhindered by the Islamic clerisy in their societies and runs rampant among followers of Islam.
        Aside from their own embarrassment, we can also see that there is little basis for any Shari’ah prohibition of bestiality/zoophilia as the Qur’an and the Sahih Hadiths (Bukhari and Muslim) do not prohibit this unnatural practice, furthermore the references we have examined outside of the two Sahihs are considered weak.

        References

        1. ↑ Kelli Morgan – No. 1 Nation in Sexy Web Searches? Call it Pornistan – Fox News, July 13, 2010
        2. ↑ Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper
        3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 Bestiality – Dictionary.com
        4. ↑ Collins English Dictionary – Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition 2009
        5. ↑ Merriam-Webster’s Medical Dictionary, © 2007 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
        6. ↑ Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
        7. ↑ Rebecca F. Wisch – Overview of State Bestiality Laws – Animal Legal & Historical Center, 2008 (updated 2010)
        8. ↑ Watcher – Pakistan: Muslims Are Sex-Starved Surfers, With Bestial Interests – Eye On The World, May 18, 2006
        9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 Robert E.L. Masters – Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality – The Julian Press, 1st edition 1966,
        10. ↑ Africa :: Morocco – The online Factbook
        11. ↑ Read the full text here.
        12. ↑ Allen Edwardes and R.E.L. Masters – Cradle of Erotica (pp. 223-224) – Bantam Paperback; New Ed edition (1977), ISBN 0553103016
        13. ↑ Judith Worell – Encyclopedia of women and gender: Volume 1 (p. 298) – Academic Press; 1 edition, September 27, 2001, ISBN 9780122272455
        14. ↑ Dr. Ahmad Shafaat – Ahadith About Rajm – Islamic Perspectives, March 6, 2005
        15. ↑ ON TASAWWUF Imam Nawawi (d. 676) – Sunnah.org

        • Man, you are a GENIUS in Islam 😉
          I too have read couple of your comments…No NON-Muslim can have this kind of detailed knowledge on these topics 😮 THEY SIMPLY DON’T HAVE THIS MUCH TIME.
          I too have glanced very few hadiths of these sort. Its very difficult to control erection 😉

          BUT, you know one thing? These hadiths were written and promoted by ancient corrupted Muslim Mullas, Ullahs, Priests, so-called Imams, etc., etc., just to satisfy their own Cheap + Evil + Selfish + Sex-hungry motives to fool the ignorant, illiterate general muslim people, so they can eat the cream of the society.
          Few documents of THESE sort (BUT not too vulgar like few hadiths) are also present in Hinduism.

          Any intelligent Muslim/Hindu can understand WHAT I am trying to MEAN.

          Muslims say ISLAM is peace. India is the only country in this planet which never raged a war to conquer any other nation (Check History…hope no STUPID would start to argue on this). Instead ALLOWED Pakistan & Bangladesh as to form as a separate nation.

          THEN WHY THIS ENEMITY. MONEY? POWER? FAME? WOMEN? FOR WHAT? 😦

          WHAT is the difference in the BLOOD composition of a Hindu, a Muslim, a Christian, a Buddhist, a Sikh???
          Any scientific logical answer for the last question??? 😦

          • THE ARABS ARE SUPERIOR IN ISLAM
            August 27, 2012

            Here is the original fatwa from Sunnipath. Those who are curious may go there and read it all
            The fact that Allah Most High has chosen the Arabs over other nations is affirmed in rigorously authenticated hadiths of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace; related by Bukhari and Muslim in their “Sahih” in the beginning of the chapter of merits, # 5897, on the authority of Wathilah ibn al-Asqa` who said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘Verily Allah has chosen Kinanah from the son of Isma`il, and He has chosen Quraysh from among Kinanah and He has chosen Hashim from among Quraysh and He has chosen me from the Bani Hashim.’”
            So this hadith is a primary text about the preference of Arabs over others and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs. And this is what the Imams have chosen from the………of their books, and even in individual books such as the book of Qurb about the merit of Arabs, authored by the great Imam al-Hafiz Zayn al-din al-`Iraqi. And it was summarized by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami and others.
            Therefore the preference of Arabs over other nations, and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs is affirmed in the Sacred Law. Allah has even preferred some months over other months and some days and nights of over others, as well as places. So in the same way, Allah Glorious and Exalted is He, has chosen some men over others, such as the prophets over others and even some prophets over other prophets. Muslims should not have any objection to this, because all of this returns to the wisdom of the Most Wise, Glorious is He, who is not asked about what He does, but rather, they are the ones who are asked. So after a Muslim has believed in Allah as his Lord, the Truth, and that there is no God but Him, then he should know that this is from among His matters, Blessed and High is He, and there is nothing but magnificent wisdom in it that we might see or that we might not see. Either way, we are only responsible for submitting to His rule, Glorious is He. And among His rulings is that Arabs are preferred over others and that some Arabs are better than other Arabs, as the above hadith clearly explained. So it is not appropriate for anyone to disagree in this when the proof is perfectly valid.
            And there should be no disagreement in what has just preceded nor any disagreement in what appears in the Magnificent Book and in the sunna where we find that the real source of Allah’s preference is God-fearingness (taqwa) which result in the good deeds that people earn and that they are accounted for. So whoever sends forth good for himself, Allah has preferred him over those who have sent forth evil. As for the preference of an Arab over a non-Arab, and the preference of some Arabs over others, this is not a deed that one can earn. Rather, it is a bounty that Allah gives to whom He wills. So he may will something for these people, and there is no objection to your Lord’s rule. This is like the preference of some days over others, because the mind reasons that all days are the same in and of themselves, and there is no distinction that might appear between them. However, the mind can understand why something is better if there is not ……….. So the Sacred law came and affirmed the preference of some over others, and for some of those things there were reasons and wisdoms, such as the preference of the night of Power over others because the Majestic Qur’an was revealed during it. And in some of these things, the wisdom is not apparent to us and so this falls into the chapter of absolute obedience, such as the number of cycles (rak`ahs) in the prayer.
            It is obligatory on a Muslim to believe that Arabs are preferred over other nations because there is a proof for it. However, this is not one of the pillars of our religion such that if someone rejected this, they would be considered outside of Islam. But if one does reject this, one has sinned for not believing in it because it is an affirmed matter according to a clear rigorously authenticated hadith. Also, this issue is not something that is commonly known among most Muslims, so for this, one should not hasten to blame one who disagrees with it. It is necessary, rather, to tell him about the issue.
            And the fact that Arabs are preferred over others does not mean that a non-Arab can not have a higher merit in the religion than an Arab, because a person earns the good deeds that Allah has recommended we compete for. This is the highest merit of God-fearingness and this will be the basis upon which things are decided in the hereafter. However, the merit of the Arabs will still remain, in terms of their respect and exaltation being higher than others. And from this some hadiths have come to us about the Quraysh being put first for the caliphate before others, such as the hadith in Bukhari (#3500) on the authority of Mu`awiyah, may Allah be well pleased with him who said, ” I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘This matter of government belongs to the Quraysh. Anyone who takes a hostile attitude to them will be thrown on his face, as long as they are true to the faith.” And Bukhari also related (#3501) on the authority of Ibn `Umar from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace, that he said, “Government continues to belong to the Quraysh, even if they are (no more than) two.”
            So I say that the merit of God-fearingness is what counts, according to the rigorously authenticated hadith, “And he who is slow in doing good deeds, his noble lineage will not quicken him (into entering Paradise).
            So many Muslims hold this belief and even say that you are not a proper Muslim if you are not.
            Abu Usamah, an American from the Salafi sect, even wrote the following to his followers admonishing them for not believing that Arabs are better than non-Arabs:
            Sheikh-ul-Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) was of the opinion that Arabs ARE SUPERIOR (Afdal) than Non-Arabs and he claimed that this was the view that was held by the MAJORITY of the scholars – ‘Al-Jamhoor’- .
            He wrote:
            “And the MAJORITY of scholars are of the opinion that the Arab species is better (Afdal) than the Non-Arab (species) just as the nation of Quraish is better (Afdal) than the Non-Quraish nations and (just as) the nation of Bani Haashim is better (Afdal) than the Non-Bani Haashim (nations).” Majm’u Al-Fataawa 19/29
            Sheikh-ul-Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) wrote:
            “Verily, what Ahlul Sunnah is upon: Is the BELIEF (I’tiqaad) that the Arab race is better (Afdal) then the Non-Arab race. Whether (the Non-Arabs) are Hebrews, Aramaic, Romans, Persians and other than them…”. Iqtidaa As-Siraatil-Mustaqeem 2/419
            Abu Muhammad, Harb ibn Ismail ibn Khalaf Al-Kirmaany (died 280 – ra) who was one of the students and companions of Imaam Ahmed (ra) also mentioned this point when he wrote about the descriptions and BELIEFS of the PEOPLE OF THE SUNNAH.
            Shiekh-ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said:
            “Know that the Ahaadith (that show) the superiority of Quraish and then the superiority of Bani Haashim are numerous and this is not the place (to gather all of them) but they also prove this (superiority of the Arab over Non-Arabs).
            And this is due to the fact that the relationship of Quraish to the Arabs is just like the relationship of the Arabs to the rest of the people (i.e. Quraish are superior to Non-Quraish and the Arabs are superior to Non-Arabs). Verily Allah the Most High has designated the Arabs and their language with ‘Ahkaam’ that are peculiar and unique.
            And then He preferred Quraish over the rest of the Arabs in what He has given them of prophecy and other than that from the ‘Khasaais’ (unique and peculiar qualities)”. Iqtidaa As-Siraat-il-Mustaqeem 2/431
            Sheikh-ul-Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) also said:
            “…The superiority of the Arab race and then (the superiority of) Quraish and then (the superiority of) Bani Haashim, is not simply due to the fact the Prophet (peace be upon him) is from them – even though this is (a point) of superiority – but instead, they themselves are superior within themselves”. Iqtidaa As-Siraatil-Mustaqeem 2/420
            To review:
            – The Arab is better than the non-Arab; the Arab from the tribe of Quraish (the tribe of Muhammad) is better than the Arab that NOT from the Quraish; The Ahl-Bayt (Member of Muhammad’s family) is better than those members of Quraish that are not Ahl-Bayt. (Most Muslims note the “significance” of being a member of “Ahl-Bayt”).
            – The Khalifah that jihadists always refer to is, according to Sunni texts, to always be a member of the Quraish (i.e., an Arab). So even if this Khilafah were to be established, then they would demand an Arab be the ruler at all times. A non-Arab can never hold that title.
            – As both Sunni Path and Abu Usamah note, this is not a strange or solitary opinion as many of the medieval scholars, including famous ones such as Imam Ash-Shafii, Abu Hanifah, and Imam Ahmad held this belief, and many modern Muslim scholars and laymen maintain this belief today. Indeed Sunnipath and Abu Usamah adamantly argue that MOST scholars held this opinion, are proud of it and demand it of others. Also, the Muslim Brotherhood today staunchly holds this belief as well (explaining why all of their leaders are Arab). Many Muslim Brotherhood members will not even deny it if asked.
            – No, not all Muslims (as Muslims are of many different types and beliefs) believe that Arabs are superior to them (many are unaware of these opinions) but the point here is that a very large segment of Muslims DO DOGGEDLY believe in the superiority of the Arabs but they hide this information from those they invite to Islam. This often comes as a shock to new Muslims because Islam is portrayed as egalitarian when in fact many scholars throughout Muslim history held this opinion. But this explains the haughty attitude of Arab Muslims toward non-Arabs.
            – To those Muslims who do NOT believe the Arabs to be superior, consider the following points:
            1) You pray (make salaat) in their language (and deem salaat unacceptable in any other language).
            2) You turn toward their land (qibla) to perform your salaats five times a day.
            3.) You feel that you are religiously obligated to travel to their land at least once in your lifetime.
            4.) You greet other non-Arab Muslims in their language (as-salaam alaikum).
            5.) And you even pepper your every day conversation in their language. (e.g. for an

            English speaker “alhamdulillah” instead of “praise God”; “insha Allah” instead of “God willing”, etc).
            So considering the points above, why would a non-Arab Muslim not think that Arabs are better even on a subconscious level? And none of this is to mention that many non-Arab Muslims give themselves and their children Arabic names, dress in Arabic clothing, and generally take on Arab customs. Also, why is it that an Arab can walk into a predominantly non-Arab masjid and instantly be held in the highest respect and even become the imam if that is what he desires? And some of you even wonder why so many non-Arabs hold the Arabs in such high regard. Start by looking at your daily actions. I did and I’m glad I did.
            Qibla > Answers > Guidance & Counsel > Methodology > Sources of Sacred Law > Arabs preferred over other nations
            Question ID:9427
            ARABS PREFERRED OVER OTHER NATIONS
            Answered by Shaykh Amjad Rasheed
            Translated by Ustadha Shazia Ahmad
            Question:
            I saw in the chapter of suitability of marriage that Allah has chosen Arabs over others. The outer purport of this hadith contradicts the sunna, can you explain?
            Answer:

            The fact that Allah Most High has chosen the Arabs over other nations is affirmed in rigorously authenticated hadiths of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace; related by Bukhari and Muslim in their “Sahih” in the beginning of the chapter of merits, # 5897, on the authority of Wathilah ibn al-Asqa` who said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘Verily Allah has chosen Kinanah from the son of Isma`il, and He has chosen Quraysh from among Kinanah and He has chosen Hashim from among Quraysh and He has chosen me from the Bani Hashim.'”
            So this hadith is a primary text about the preference of Arabs over others and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs. And this is what the Imams have chosen from the………of their books, and even in individual books such as the book of Qurb about the merit of Arabs, authored by the great Imam al-Hafiz Zayn al-din al-`Iraqi. And it was summarized by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami and others.
            Therefore the preference of Arabs over other nations, and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs is affirmed in the Sacred Law. Allah has even preferred some months over other months and some days and nights of over others, as well as places. So in the same way, Allah Glorious and Exalted is He, has chosen some men over others, such as the prophets over others and even some prophets over other prophets. Muslims should not have any objection to this, because all of this returns to the wisdom of the Most Wise, Glorious is He, who is not asked about what He does, but rather, they are the ones who are asked. So after a Muslim has believed in Allah as his Lord, the Truth, and that there is no God but Him, then he should know that this is from among His matters, Blessed and High is He, and there is nothing but magnificent wisdom in it that we might see or that we might not see. Either way, we are only responsible for submitting to His rule, Glorious is He. And among His rulings is that Arabs are preferred over others and that some Arabs are better than other Arabs, as the above hadith clearly explained. So it is not appropriate for anyone to disagree in this when the proof is perfectly valid.
            And there should be no disagreement in what has just preceded nor any disagreement in what appears in the Magnificent Book and in the sunna where we find that the real source of Allah’s preference is God-fearingness (taqwa) which result in the good deeds that people earn and that they are accounted for. So whoever sends forth good for himself, Allah has preferred him over those who have sent forth evil. As for the preference of an Arab over a non-Arab, and the preference of some Arabs over others, this is not a deed that one can earn. Rather, it is a bounty that Allah gives to whom He wills. So he may will something for these people, and there is no objection to your Lord’s rule. This is like the preference of some days over others, because the mind reasons that all days are the same in and of themselves, and there is no distinction that might appear between them. However, the mind can understand why something is better if there is not ……….. So the Sacred law came and affirmed the preference of some over others, and for some of those things there were reasons and wisdoms, such as the preference of the night of Power over others because the Majestic Qur’an was revealed during it. And in some of these things, the wisdom is not apparent to us and so this falls into the chapter of absolute obedience, such as the number of cycles (rak`ahs) in the prayer.
            It is obligatory on a Muslim to believe that Arabs are preferred over other nations because there is a proof for it. However, this is not one of the pillars of our religion such that if someone rejected this, they would be considered outside of Islam. But if one does reject this, one has sinned for not believing in it because it is an affirmed matter according to a clear rigorously authenticated hadith. Also, this issue is not something that is commonly known among most Muslims, so for this, one should not hasten to blame one who disagrees with it. It is necessary, rather, to tell him about the issue.
            And the fact that Arabs are preferred over others does not mean that a non-Arab can not have a higher merit in the religion than an Arab, because a person earns the good deeds that Allah has recommended we compete for. This is the highest merit of God-fearingness and this will be the basis upon which things are decided in the hereafter. However, the merit of the Arabs will still remain, in terms of their respect and exaltation being higher than others. And from this some hadiths have come to us about the Quraysh being put first for the caliphate before others, such as the hadith in Bukhari (#3500) on the authority of Mu`awiyah, may Allah be well pleased with him who said, ” I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘This matter of government belongs to the Quraysh. Anyone who takes a hostile attitude to them will be thrown on his face, as long as they are true to the faith.” And Bukhari also related (#3501) on the authority of Ibn `Umar from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace, that he said, “Government continues to belong to the Quraysh, even if they are (no more than) two.”
            So I say that the merit of God-fearingness is what counts, according to the rigorously authenticated hadith, “And he who is slow in doing good deeds, his noble lineage will not quicken him (into entering Paradise).

            الجواب: اصطفاء الله تعالى للعرب على غيرهم من الأجناس ثابتٌ بصحيح الأحاديث النبوية، وذلك ما رواه الإمام مسلم في “الصحيح” أول كتاب الفضائل برقم (5897)عن واثلة بن الأسقع قال : سمعتُ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول :” إن الله اصطفى كنانة من ولد إسماعيل، واصطفى قريشاً من كنانة، واصطفى من قريش بني هاشم، واصطفاني من بني هاشم “.
            فالحديثُ نصٌّ في تفضيل العرب على غيرهم، وتفضيلُ العرب بعضهم على بعض، وهذا ما قرَّره الأئمة في طيات كتبهم، بل وفي كتب مفردة، ككتاب القُرَب في فضل العرب للإمام الكبير الحافظ زين الدين العراقي، واختصاره لشيخ الإسلام ابن حجر الهيتمي، وغيرهما.
            ومسألةُ تفضيل العرب على غيرهم، وكذلك تفضيل بعض العرب على بعض داخلةٌ في باب التفضيل الثابت في الشرع؛ فقد فضَّل سبحانه بعض الشهور على بعض، وفضل بعض الأيام والليالي على بعض، وكذلك الأمكنة، ومن ذلك أيضاً تفضيله سبحانه وتعالى بعض البشر على بعض ففضَّل الأنبياء على غيرهم، بل فضَّل بعضَ النَّبيين على بعض، ولا اعتراضَ للمسلم على شيء من ذلك؛ لأن كلَّه راجع لحُكم الحكيم سبحانه الذي لا يُسأل عما يفعل وهم يسألون، فالمسلمُ بعد أن آمن بالله رباً حقاً لا إله غيره وعلم أنه ما من شأن من شؤون الحق تبارك وتعالى إلا وله فيه حكمة جليلة علمناها أو جهلناها مكلفٌ بالتسليم لحكمه تسبحانه، ومن جملة أحكامه تفضيلُ العرب على غيرهم، وتفضيل بعض العرب على بعض، كما بينه الحديث الصحيح المذكور، فلا يسوغ لأحد المخالفة فيه بعد صحة الدليل.
            ولا مخالفةَ بين ما تقدم وبين ما ورد في الكتاب العزبز والسنة الصحيحة
            من أن مرجعَ التفضيل عند الله تعالى يكون بالتقوى، لأن مرجع التفضيل بالتقوى هو الأعمالُ التي يكتسبها الإنسانُ ويُحاسب عليها فمن قدَّم الخير لنفسه فضَّله
            الله تعالى على غيره ممن قدم الشر. أما تفضيلُ العرب على العجم وتفضيل بعض
            العرب على بعض فليس مرجعُه ذلك أعني عملاً اكتسبوه، بل هو فضل الله تعالى الذي يُؤتيه من يشاء، وقد شاءه لهؤلاء فلا اعتراضَ على حكمك يارب، كتفضيل بعض الأيام على بعضٍ فالعقلُ يحكم باستواء الأيام من حيث الذات؛ إذ لا ميزة تظهر لبعضها على بعض، لكنه يجوِّز حصول التفضيل لعدم المحيل لذلك، فجاء الشرع فأثبت الفضيلة لبعض دون بعض، ظهر لبعضها عللٌ وحكم كتفضيل ليلة القدر على غيرها بسبب نزول القرآن العظيم فيها، ولم تظهر الحكمة لنا في بعضها، فيصير ذلك من باب التعبدات، كتعيين أعداد ركعات الصلاة.
            فالواجبُ على المسلم اعتقادُ أن العربَ أفضلُ من غيرهم من الأجناس لقيام الدليل
            عليه، لكن ليس ذلك من أصول ديننا التي يكفر جاحدُها لكنه يأثم لعدم اعتقاده
            بأمر ثبت بحديث صحيح صريح، وأيضاً هذه المسألة ليست مما تشتهر معرفتها لذا لا
            يبادر إلى تأثم المخالف، بل لا بد من بيان الأمر له.
            وتفضيلُ العرب على غيرهم لا يمنع من أن يكون لغير العرب فضيلة في الدين أعلى من فضيلة العرب بسبب ما يكتسبه الشخصُ من أعمال الخير التي ندب الله الخلق للتنافس فيها، فهذه أفضلية التقوى وعليها المعوَّل في الآخرة، لكن تبقى أفضليةُ الجنس للعرب من حيث التعظيم والاحترام لهم زيادةً على تعظيم غيرهم، ومن هنا جاءت بعضُ الأحاديث في الأمر بتقديم قريش في الخلافة على غيرها من العرب وغير العرب كحديث البخاري برقم (3500) عن معاوية رضي الله عنه قال :” سمعتُ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول :” إن هذا الأمرَ في قريش لا يعاديهم أحدٌ إلا كَبَّه على وجهه، ما أقاموا الدين “. وروى البخاري أيضاً برقم (3501) عن ابن عمر عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : ” لا يزال هذا الأمر في قريش ما بقي منهم اثنان “.
            وقلتُ : إن أفضلية التقوى هي التي عليها المعوَّل؛ للحديث الصحيح :” من أبطأ به
            عمله لم يسرع به نسبُه”.
            MMVIII © Qibla.
            All rights reserved
            No part of this article may be reproduced, displayed, modified, or distributed without the express prior written permission of the copyright holder. For permission, please submit a request at our Helpdesk.
            Now What?
            The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Knowledge is only through study.” While some knowledge can be gained from reading or casually listening to lectures, the best means to gain knowledge is through finding a qualified teacher and then setting up a systematic program of learning. Picking up a book or reading an article and trying to figure things out on our own is no substitute for learning from someone who has a direct link to our living tradition.

            Through joining an online class at Qibla, you can benefit from convenient, online courses that will give you access to reliable scholars and our popular curriculum learning tracks. Knowledge gained in these courses will both build your iman and assist you in putting into practice what you learn. Don’t give yourself less than you deserve, register today.
            Related Links:
            1. Why you’ll love our courses
            2. How Qibla courses work (video)
            3. What our students say
            4. Our current available courses
            Qibla
            9568 Wickham Way
            Orlando FL 32836 USA
            support@qibla.com

            MMXIII © Qibla. All rights reserved.

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