Muslims Reject Some Parts of Qur’an too?
to an Islamist)
Brother Ahmad Wahid Zaman (AWZ) one educated Islamists recently wrote
series of (4 volumes) very lengthy write-ups to undo those irrefutable
rebuttals made by me and Mr. Abul Kasem.
Our rebuttals were against Mr. Pervez (another Islamist from Florida) who
tried to justify Prophet Muhammad’s polygamous scandalous sex-life style
and also his marriage with the child bride Ayesha. But our knowledgeable
brother AWZ spent 6 long months, studied many books/references and finally
concluded (in his 4 volumes series) that---all those sahih (authentic)
hadiths and references that we have used in our write-ups were fraudulent
and not so sahih. This is of course a brilliant discovery by AWZ.
According to AWZ—in Islam anything goes negative to the best and
peaceful religion of Islam, got to be wrong and should be seen
suspiciously. That is, even the sahih (authentic) hadith is not sahih any
longer. A hadiths is sahih, as long as, it sings only the glory of Islam.
When any Hadiths (even labeled as
sahih) says negative things about Islam and Prophet Muhammad—is simply null and void.
As brother AWZ stated:
all the conditions, it can be safely be said that not all the narrations
in the biographies of the Prophet (SA) are authentic and trustworthy even
though written by famous Muslim historians or all are garbage. The
fabricated and authentic narrations all got their places in those books
written by those well-known writers.”
Brother AWZ’s above comments about 4 Giant historical scholars of
Islam is simplistic, and hilariously selfish. Let me put it in his (AWZ)
own words: “There are
hundreds of books on Sira (biography) of the Prophet Muhammad (SA), his
married life and his companions, now available but
the ultimate sources to which they are all indebted to, are: 1)
Muhammad ibn Ishaq or more correctly Ibn Hisham; 2) Muhammad
ibn Sa’d; 3) Muhammad ibn
Umar al-Waqidi al-Aslami; 4) Ibn Jarir at-Tabari.”
I wonder what can be
done about those “hundreds of books on Sira of the Prophet Muhammad”
written by many Islamic pundits who copied hadiths and Islamic history
from these four Islamic giants?
Nevertheless, brother AWZ needs
to reject some hadiths (interestingly
not all) narrated by these above Islamic giants. Now to criticize
these above giant scholars of Islam is simply blasphemous in proportion.
Had he criticized these famous Islamic scholars residing in any Islamic
paradise like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia or Iran---I am 100% sure, brother AWZ
would have received Islamic fatwa of stoning death. Of course, brother AWZ
would not mind if anybody quotes any saying of these four Islamic
scholars, as long as those quotes are positive in nature. What an
Islamic style of debate!
authority of ‘Ummul- Mumeenin’
Bibi Ayesha (Ummul- Mumeenin) herself narrated numerous very important sahi
hadiths which are considered most authentic and are readily believed by
all most 100% Mullahs/Maoulanas/Islamists of the whole world. Bibi Ayesha narrated several sahi hadiths regarding her own
marriage with Prophet Muhammad. One such important hadiths is as below:
Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith
Hadith 5.234 Narrated
Prophet engaged me when I was a girl
of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of
Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on
my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was
playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went
to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand
and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and
when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face
and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I
saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and
a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for
the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and
my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of
nine years of age.”
But this sahi
hadiths matters very little to brother AWZ. Because, AWZ must reject this
sahi Hadiths narrated by Ummul-Mumeenin just to save Islamic purity.
Question is what those devout mullahs of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,
Bangladesh, Iran, and Afghanistan etc. will do to brother AWZ for
rejecting a pure sahi hadith narrated by Ummul-Mumeenin? A
pure fatwa for severe Islamic lashings (Durrha
mara) for guaranteed.
ahadith of Ummul Mumenin, Bibi
Ayesha is the blasphemy of the highest order. No person on earth, living
or dead can be more authentic than Bibi Ayesha. Even Muhammad, himself has
said in ahadith that Umm Ayesha, Khadija and the wife of a Pharaoh are the
best women ever
Allah. So, if one rejects any hadis uttered by this perfect woman (Bibi
Ayesha), he is rejecting Muhammad's own 'character certificate.' In this
case AWZ has actually rejected most of the authentic ahadith. This is
indeed an incredible feat by such 'hugely' educated western residing
Mullah like AWZ.
Based on this
sahi hadiths alone, Islamic Sharia decided women’s maturity at 9 (Nine)
years. Marriageable age of Muslim woman is 9 years. Please go to Iran
(best Islamic paradise on earth) and ask about the age of woman’s
maturity! Entire flock of Muslim Mullahs do consider 9 year old girl as
matured woman on the basis of Bibi Ayesha’s marriage consummation with
the holy prophet of Allah (SBT). Could brother AWZ or any other erudite
Islamists deny this factual episode of Islam? My open challenge to brother
AWZ:—could you convince all the mullahs of the world to reject all those
hadiths that have been well established/rooted (for 1400 years) in the
mindsets of all Mullahs of world?
According to AWZ, many hadiths have flaws and contradictions, so some
hadiths (all negatives) should be discarded. But Quran is pure, according
to AWZ, hence Quran can be trusted in full strength. As brother AWZ says:
we can believe that several of the Islamic scholars like Imam Bukhari,
Muslim, Abu Dawud, and Tabari, missed the weakness of this Hadith through
Iraqis? To get the answer, we have to recognize the historical fact that
the compilation, preservation and authentication of Hadith were not done in a similar way like the
Qur’aan was compiled, authenticated and preserved.”
What shall you do with
Brother AWZ considers that some sahi hadiths may not have recorded
correctly, and should be considered unauthentic. How about the Quran? Was
the Quran recorded and compiled authentically? Holy Quran is riddled with
innumerous contradictions, ethical problems and dangerously flawed
scientific and political statements.
Let us examine only a few items in Quran. Let me take first the
Quranic verse cited by AWZ himself, so that, brother AWZ can not blame for
“mistranslation” or “misquote” as most Islamists try to do this
technique just to delude the readers. This Quranic verse is from AWZ’s
essay: “Read, in the Name
of your Lord who created, created man from a
clot, Read, and your Lord is the Most
Gracious, Who taught with the pen, taught man what he did not know. (Qur’aan
96:1-5)”. I am
(intentionally) quoting this above verse from AWZ’s essay, so that, AWZ can not
blame me for distorting the Quranic verse.
Below I am quoting more similar verses from Quran regarding human
creation by Allah.
Quran-75:38: Then he becomes a CLOT; then (Allah)
shaped and fashioned… Quran-
Quran-96:2: Created man, out of a mere clot of
Bengali translations (by many translators) of this
verse of the Quran is read like: “Zamaa’t
Raokto theeke Manoosh banieesi”.
Man is Created From Clotted blood?: Quran (Allah) is asserting us that He created us from the blood
clot. Is it scientifically
correct? Will any embryologist agree that humans are created from the
blood clot? There are serious scientific problems here. A blood
clot can not grow into anything.
Because blood clot is a pure dead mass. This idea came from the Greeks.
Aristotle erroneously believed that humans are originated from the action
of male semen upon female menstrual blood, which is absolutely an
incorrect assumption. The Quran’s assertion on the clot (alaqa) is
completely wrong about human development, since there is absolutely no
stage during which the embryo consists of a clot. The only situation in
which an embryo might appear like a clot is during a miscarriage, in which
case the clotted blood which is seen to emerge (much of which comes from
the mother) is solidified and by definition no longer alive. Therefore,
if ever an embryo appeared to look like a clot it would never develop any
further into a human; it would be
a dead mass of
bloody miscarriage. Since Prophet
Muhammad (pbuh) had some thirteen wives it is entirely possible that he
would be very familiar with miscarriages.
another scientifically flawed Quranic verse for human creation:
Quran-23:14: “Then fashioned We the drop (semen) a CLOT OF CONGEALED
BLOOD then fashioned We the clot a little lump (fetus), fashioned
We the little lump into bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, and then
produced it another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of
Modern science tells us that the formation of human
embryo is a seamless continuation from conception to birth, hence there are
no hard-and-fast boundaries of stages as the Quran described. The
Quran described 4 stages which match exactly with Galenic description of
the development of the human embryo (which was proved wrong by modern
bones and clothing of bones with flesh: According to modern
embryologists including Prof.
Moore of Canada, the tissue from which bone originates, known as
mesoderm, is the same tissue as that from which muscle (flesh) develops.
Thus bone and muscles begin to develop simultaneously, rather than
sequentially (as the Quran tells us). Moreover, most of the muscle tissue
that we human have is laid down before birth, but bones continue to
develop and calcify (strengthen with calcium) right into one’s teenage
years. So it would be more accurate if the Quran had said that
muscles started to develop at the same time as bones, but completed their
development earlier. The idea that bones are clothed with flesh is not
only scientifically completely wrong/false, but was directly copied from
the ancient Greek doctor Galen’s hypothesis.
Also, the idea
of saying: “made into bones and clothed the bones with muscle”
came from the technique of making animal statues
(Moorthy) by a
sculptor out of rod and cement or mud. Sculptor usually makes the skeleton
(out of rod or stick) first and, then covers it up with cement or mud.
This is scarcely a scientific description of embryonic development. It is
rather a description of a layman.
blatant and weired Contradictions in Quran:
Quran-2:256: “There is no Compulsion in religion….”
Quran-9:29: “Fight those who do not profess the true faith
(Islam) till they pay the
polltax (jiziya) with the hand of humility.”
(2) Quran-73:10 "Be patient with what they say,
and part from them courteously”
Quran-2:191 "kill them wherever you find them,
and drive them out from wherever they drove you out"
(3) Quran-20:103 “Therefore be patient with what
they say, and celebrate (constantly) the praises of thy Lord,”
Quran- 8: 65 “ O Prophet! rouse the Believers to
the fight. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they
will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of
the Unbelievers: for these are a people without understanding.”
(4) Quran-109:6 "To you be your religion, and to
me my religion"
Quran- 3:85"Whoso desires another religion than
Islam, it shall not be accepted of him; in the next world he shall be
among the losers."
Now one must
wonders what are the correct messages that Quran is advocating to it’s
followers? How many different faces Quran possesses?
Brother AWZ was very angry with us (I and Abul Kasem)
because we did use some sahi hadiths to defend our points in the Islamic
history. He also rebuked us with many vitriolic adjectives and angrily
rejected those hadiths because, according to him, hadiths were not
collected and recorded properly like Quran. I have showed him only some
utterly true and blatant contradictions and scientific flaws in Quran.
Quran is loaded with all sorts of contradictions and flaws in scientific
and ethical matters.
My question to brother AWz is: Should we also reject some parts of Quran?
For centuries we used to hear that everything in
Islam is a plain truth and nothing but the truth. Now a day, we are
hearing that some sahi hadiths may not be correctly recorded. Some erudite
Islamists even propagate the idea of totally rejecting all hadiths and go
with only Quranic Islam, even
though Islam without hadiths is
like a pond without water. This attitude of Islamists is a definite
positive sign; I mean a very good sign indeed.
I thank brother AWZ for his method of correcting
Islam by rejecting some of the sahi hadiths. Hopefully, we will put the
Islamists and mullahs in dire situation (by critiquing Islam) so that some
day in near future—Islamists will start suggesting overhauling holy
Qur’an also! Our write ups about Islam are surely paying off. Once again
I thank brother AWZ and other mullahs (who are giving second ideas about
Islam) whole heartedly for their quest of purifying Islam by rejecting
some sahi hadiths. This is obviously a very good change in the mindsets of Islamists.