I don't really believe in Sahih Bukhari
Submitted by Administrator on Mon, 09/28/2009 - 16:34
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
FFI received the following email from Mr. Saad Haqqui in response to him receiving our Newsletter #34
hi,
i just got the recent newsletter and reall took the time out to read it. as my understanding goes, u guys are accusing muslims on many fronts, i wont say u are doing wrong for from ur perspective it may seem just the way to drag people out of misunderstandings. but THIS i will say, i want to try to clear out the differences but there are just too many fronts, please either make a new post where u put your accusations one by one and we discuss em one by one till one party says that truly they were mistaken or a stalemate occurs.
and i would really love it if u guys could correspond with me through email on the subject, i mean we al know their is only one purely unchanged book in present that is as old as 1400 years old, the reason being countless people across the globe committing it to memory and yet you guys claim to know what truly happened then?
there are sects in islam who even deny the hadees, on the grounds that it too has been changed by many.
will await your reply asap
S.M Saad ul haq Haqqui
P.S. remember this is not gonna be a fight or war, just a discussion between two grown-up parties, where the defeated will accept his defeat humanely.
enlightening and peacefull comments from others will also be welcome
ciao
One of our editors responded to him with this email:
Dear sir,
Thank you for your email and for the civil and polite language you used.
I am one of the editors for FFI and would love to have an open discussion via email with you. I do appreciate your willingness to do that. We are used to receiving emails from Muslims who are angry and use the filthiest language available. So, you email felt like a cool breeze when we received it.
There are 2 things I would like to discuss with you:
1. You asked for a list of our accusations. Here is a link to one of the major lists we have:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/the-challenge/
We accuse Muhammad of many thing in the Challenge. Let's not tackle all at once since this is a huge task. One of our claims is that Muhammad was a pedophile. Please read about that in the above link, and tell us that we are wrong. I await to hear from you on this matter.
2. You also said, or seem to claim, that the Qur'an has not been changed. It is, word by word, the way it "came down" to Muhammad. I would like to provide you with a three-article sequence on the collection of the Qur'an and another on a San'a (in Yemen) discovery of some old manuscripts in an old Mosque. Please read all and tell me that the Qur'an has not been changed. Here are the links:
1.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/06/16/ancient-quranic-manuscripts-of-sanaa-and-divine-downfall/
2.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/02/12/collection-of-the-qur%E2%80%99an-1/
3.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/02/13/collection-of-the-qur%E2%80%99an-2/
4.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/02/16/collection-of-the-qur%E2%80%99an-%E2%80%93-3/
I should stop here. As it is, there is so much reading for you. I hope that does not overwhelm you. But let's start by discussing Muhammad's Pedophilia, and the authenticity of the Qur'an. Two topics are enough, I think, to start our discussion.
Please do take your time of research. And, again, thank you for your email. I hope that we will hear from you at a suitable time in the future.
Regards
Editor
Mr. Haqqui responded with this email:
*sigh*
this is gonna take long!
lets start with just the pedophilic thing.
this may seem like i am repeating my self but... i dont actually believe in the authenticity of those quotes, i live in a religious setting, densely muslim, and never once did i hear anyone saying that aeysha actually quoted to people what happened in-house.
i seriously doubt the authenticity of the hadith posted there. and as for what various mullah say about the happenning?
lets just say, that the most famous mulla, who is also the spearhead representative of islam is also reputed to be a mulla, osama. and lets not forget mulla umer too. these are the guys who actually birthed these misunderstandings in islam.
and tell u what there werent no mullahs in the era 1400 years ago.
and when i look back in history there is a time when suddenly mongols invaded muslims and burnt most of the muslims books, then their descendents, the mongols came and ruled the whole sub-continent and one of them actually made a new religion named deen-e-ilahi out of islam, hinduism and buddhism.
so yes i completely deny the claims in the post about either aeysha or that the agelimit being non-existent.
from what i know both parties should be of age according to the context and willing. please also note that the incident actually occurred before any revelation of relevent subject could occur, so looking at a guy who actually followed all the rules by word once they were revealed, i think this guy can be given a little waiver. about him actually consummating, that i will have to research more as to the exact age of aisha's consummation.
please do let me know if you have anything further to add up.
respectively
saad ul haq
The editor responded with this email:
Take your time brother. I will reply to you once I get a complete answer email. So, no worry. Take your time. Its a lot of reading and research, but that is how people get to the truth about things.
Have a good day.
Editor
It did not take long to hear from Mr. Haqqui:
dude i been through many sources, some claim that the marriage occurred at age 11, some claim it to be age 9 but none is certifiable. there is no proof of consummation too, besides they didnt get any children too, but this much i found out that aeysha herself willingly went to be married just like other 9 year olds who could best their elders in wrestling went to war.
This was the time to confront Mr. Haqqui with the truth about Muhammad’s pedophilia:
Thank you for your response.
Here is what my quick search of Sahih Hadith produced. Can you please read below, and tell me why I need to reject such authentic hadiths. If Aisha herself is telling you that she was six year old, why do we need to do any research acrobatics to deny that. :
Bukhari
Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234:
Narrated Aisha:
The 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 Allright, 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.
Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236:
Narrated Hisham’s father:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina.. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married ‘Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 118:
Narrated ‘Ursa:
Aisha said, “While the Ethiopians were playing with their small spears, Allah’s Apostle screened me behind him and I watched (that display) and kept on watching till I left on my own.” So you may estimate of what age a little girl may listen to amusement.
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 163:
Narrated ‘Aisha:
The Prophet was screening me with his Rida’ (garment covering the upper part of the body) while I was looking at the Ethiopians who were playing in the courtyard of the mosque. (I continued watching) till I was satisfied. So you may deduce from this event how a little girl (who has not reached the age of puberty) who is eager to enjoy amusement should be treated in this respect.
Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151:
Narrated ‘Aisha:
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)
Note that the second hadith tells you that Muhammad slept with her when she was nine years old (actually 8 years and nine months old, because they went by lunar calender back then).
As you see, I have very solid reasons to believe that Muhammad was a pedophile.
Regards
Editor
And here is Mr. Haqqui’s response:
boss i went through those and honestly, i dont really believe in sahih bukhari.
now if you would like to defend sahih bukhari's authenticity that is another matter. i dont think its pretty defendable, being the most authentic bok of hadith, it sure has many unauthentic ahadith, just as the book claims.
and come to think of this this is islam i came to defend here. not a singular muslim. do you find things in islam, at present that you think undermines its philosophy??? because the incident of pedeophiling is so far past no one can argue what is wrong and what is right now, for gods sake its been 1400 years!!
and there has been people trying to undermine it since the biggening.
lol, i even read an article from david icke where he claimed that islam is actually an offshoot of christianity commissioned by the pope to undermine the romans and egyptians.
Here is our editor’s response:
So, now you want to defend Islam. That is fine. Please note the following:
1. You deny authenitc Hadith. Thats okay, but many verses in the Koran will lose their meaning if we reject the hadith. If you want to accept some and reject some, there is really no criterion to decide on which hadith to accept.
2. Please note that hadith is more authentic than even the Qur'an. Read this:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/06/30/the-quran-and-hadith-which-is-more-authentic/
3. The Qur'an has many contradictions. Read this:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/06/02/some-myths-about-the-quranic-science/
4. The Koran is full of contradictions. There is a 10 articles series by Abul Kasem on this site on this matter. Aslo, Mumin Salih wrote many articles on the issue.
By the way, our site shows how evil Isalm and Muhammad are. You deny Hadith. That is fine. What about the Koran. Lets see a couple of things:
1. Koran claims its a clear book. The fact is it is a very ambiguous book. This is why you have many Tafsirs for Koran. If it was clear, then why do we need any tafsir book. This is actually a contradiction in the koran.
2. Are you familiar with the Jizya concept. Why do citizens of the same state have to pay different taxes because of their religious beliefs? this is evil at work. Please have a look at this article:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/02/07/analysis-of-the-jizya-concept/
Islam is Evil my friend. Muhammad was an evil man. It is natural to have an evil religion if its leader is an evil man.
There is nothing good in Islam. All good teachings that Islam teaches were common sense. His revelations were no more than delusions of a sick man. Our site provides thousands of objections to a religion that treats women like dirt, and puts non-muslims in a second class status as members of the same state.
I think our discussion becomes very general without being specific. Lets be specific: Koran 4:34 clearly sanctions a man beating a woman. Is this a decent teaching? off course not. Can you please tell me if you can defend this evil verse?
Regards
Editor
And here is Mr. Haqqui’s response:
1. please be clear on my perspective, i do not deny authientic hadith, just the fact that ehre aint no authentic hadith no more for no measures exceptt writing a book has been taken to protect hadith and i already told you what actually happened to the books muslims wrote. thus i say that hadis has been compromised.
besides many places it is thus claimed that wherever you find a clash in quran and hadis, go for what quran says. dude no such thing happened then!!
2. dude you forgot one main point, huffaz, in every era, there has been muslims who committed quran to their hearts since the bigenning. i would guess thats something that happened with no other revealed book. and as for revision, these are the guys who also follow the tradition of tarawieh every ramzan, reciting the whole quran in front of a collection of people that also contains other huffaz. now if you want to listen to history of that time also take note that as soon as a revelation came, oone or more scribe would write it on available material and then it was hung on a predetermined place. and people used to go there and actually commit the script to heart.
also please note that after the quran was completed, because of this very reason, it was revised during one whole month.
and as for hadith, so very awesome for those guys to take every measure but dude! it was too late by then, it was no scribe who wrote the hadis, rather sons of sons of sahabah who actually had to narrate them through dozens of people and then came mughals as a swarm and flooded it all. do you know that after the invasions of mongols there were a number of guys who re-wrote those books and u kno how they did it?
they wrote what was committed to their heart. so now it all comes down to whose memory you count sharper, millions of billions of muslims from time or a handful of people who each remembered more than hundred books. now he may have remembered the references correctly but what is to say that he remembered the actual content correctly???
9. quran, dude you honestly believe that a cosmic maker like, Allah would break the moon asunder and when he rebuilt it, will leave a flaw in it?? a maker who claims he will bring to life every man as he was in life??
as for moosi-oon, let me remind you that even a map seems but a collections of lines to one who dont want to think of it as a map, by making spacious, it could mean that we are yet to discover other habitable planets for all i know! and from what elementary arabic I know, la is not used for a promise, rather a no. so i would really appreciate what the whole arabic is. you guys are actually postmorteming a book essentially in arabic an english!!! dude a whale cant survive in fresh water!!
i would really discuss all the scripts you have chosen to criticize but i wanted to know where you stand? wether you actually believe in God or not? so what if some controversies soiled you heart towards islam, so what that the stinking behavior of muslims would make another to believe that a muslim is also a terrorist, so what? doesnt mean there aint no god? i have read philosophy as well as some history and know this and that about science too. i say there is still a God out there no matter how harsh your life is.
Here is the last, as of today, response to Mr. Haqqui by the editor:
Dear Sir,
Thank you for the email.
First, my current life is easy and simple. Second, my mother tongue is Arabic. Third, my believing in God or not has nothing to do with Islam. In fact, if one believes in God, the first thing to do is to reject Islam - an evil cult established by a gangster. Did you know that Muhammad, on average, while living in Medina, attacked a peaceful tribe every five weeks. He thrived on blood and on looting. Here is how Muhammad and his pirates did that: they would attack a peaceful tribe all of a sudden (or a commercial carabvan), kill all adult males, rape and enslave the women. Muhammad himself raped women, and sanctioned his so-called Sahaba (we call them bandits and rapists here at FFI) raping women. This is how that thug, Muhammad, made his living. Everything I mentioned to you is proven via Koran, Hadith, and Sirat. You can deny Hadiths and Sirat as much as you want but facts are facts. There are groups of Muslims who reject all Hadith. This is non-sense. Do you know why they reject Hadith? Because they know hadith shows the true colors of Muhammad and his bandits. This is the only reason they reject hadith. If we lived in a prior age where enslaving people was the accepted norm, you would not see such people reject Hadith.
In any case, Qur'an itself condemns Islam and Muhammad. I would like to narrow things down with you. I have given you a link to a three-part articles rreseach done by one of our researchers - Ibn Kammuna. From your writing, I gather you have not read his work. He is an Arab native, just like me and like one of our valued researchers - Mumin Salih. Please do read his work on the collection of the Koran. You will see that far from being the exact words of Muhammad to his scribes (there were forty of them by the way), the Koran underwent many changes in the early history of Islam.
However, even with that, let me take it that you will not dispute the Koran. Hadith won't be helpful for our discussion since you will reject the hadiths you find damaging to Muhammad and his band of thugs, and you will accept the "good" hadiths. So, let us concentrate our discussion on the Koran as this seems to be the only authoritative source we can agree on. I will list my inquiries in numerical order. Please respond in a similar way, so that we do not lose track of the topic being discussed. Unfortunately this is what we have been doing so far. Let me start in this email with just one verse:
1. Qur'an 4:34 clearly sanctions hitting a woman, by the divine ordinance of Allah. Do you accept that verse as divine. Do you think that the almighty creator will sanction a man beating his wife? Now, verse 4:34 is one of the most evil verses in the Koran in my view. Do not try to claim that the hitting should be done with a feather or a Siwak. That is nonsense. Pleas watch this:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/09/25/hit-them-quran-434/
and this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=CA&hl=en&v=iWGA8i6scYY
Now, tell me that verse 4:34 is not an evil verse "coming down" from an evil prophet.
I have other verses for you, but I want to start with this verse. I await your response. No need for you to discuss other things in your email other than this verse. I hope that you are an honest person in your search for the truth, and not just trying to defend a man who does not deserve to be defended.
Thank you
Editor
We will update our readers as this email exchange is still ongoing
[Editor’s Addendum: We hope to narrow things down in this email exchange, so that specific Koranic verses can be analyzed. One of the issues that keep repeating in discussing matters with Muslims is rejecting Hadiths that incriminate Muhammad and his pirates. While a Hadith “pick and choose” approach does condemn Islam, this editor believes that using certain verses in the Koran wil show how evil Muhammad’s mentality was. It will also show the great multiplicity of contradictions in the Koran. Our own Abul Kasem have shown a vast number of contradictions in the Koran. His series of articles on this topic are readily available on this site]
"being the most authentic bok
"being the most authentic bok of hadith, it sure has many unauthentic ahadith, just as the book claims."
Would it be possible to get mr Haqqui to elaborate on how he knows that Sahih Hadith collections contain "many" unauthentic hadiths?
"please be clear on my perspective, i do not deny authientic hadith,"
Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim are believed to be authentic hadiths throughtout the muslim world both among muslims as well as scholars.
Could you ask, what authentic hadiths mr Haqqui believes in? And how does he determine what is authentic and what is not? if he believes only in hadiths which are linked to the quran, the how does he know how to do the salah/prayer?
"just the fact that ehre aint no authentic hadith no more for no measures exceptt writing a book has been taken to protect hadith and i already told you what actually happened to the books muslims wrote. thus i say that hadis has been compromised."
Does he then mean all hadiths to be compromised because all hadiths were compiled by people and narrated through generations by people. So is he a hadith rejector?
"besides many places it is thus claimed that wherever you find a clash in quran and hadis, go for what quran says"
The Quran does actually stipulate that a man can marry a girl who has not yet reached puberty. This is in the Al Talaq (divorce) chapter of the Quran. So the Quran does not appear to negate child brides.
Interesting debate though.
I doubt that Mr.Haqqui is
I doubt that Mr.Haqqui is going to respond to sura4:34.
He knows that there's no justification for that verse & if he does try to defend that verse,he'll just make himself look like an ass.
I don't understand why you
I don't understand why you didn't point out the famous verse of sword 9:5 and similar verses from surah 9 which tells Muslims to kill non-Muslims, subjugate Christians & Jew until they feel humilated. According to Quran, this should be done until all men become Muslims.
To Hyder Ali thank you
To Hyder Ali
thank you borther for the suggestion. It is on my mind (and many other verses too). But Mr. Haqqui keeps trying to loosen things and talk in general terms without being specific. If you read what he wrote about Sahih Hadiths, you can see that. So, I made a decision to confront him with just one verse at a time. Other verses including 9:5 will follow.
thanks again for your comment Hyder
Editor
It probably would be best if
It probably would be best if one issue is dealt with at a time.
Admin I hope you can also mention the Quran verse which stipulates that a wife can be both a woman who has reached puberty and one who has not. And so that the hadiths pertaining to the age of Ayesha/Aisha is not in conflict with the Quran.
"Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs), their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy. "
chapter 65 Al talaq, verse 4.
In fact you can communicate the questions I asked above to mr Haqqui. As I find the statements kinda of conflicting.
Actually I would also like to
Actually I would also like to know what mr Haqqui thinks of hadith rejectors like Quran only muslims.
Its difficult for muslims to
Its difficult for muslims to leave this cult, as since childhood they have been fed on lies of koran and hadiths and other ideas, thus 'lies' becomes 'truth' for them and only way they can respond you is calling names. You kuffrs, you zionist, you crusaders etc etc.
two points tafseer for this
two points
tafseer for this verse explains that it was originated by a woman getting punched in the face and going to muhammad for justice. Muhammad "received this revelation" so that husbands can beat their wives. So the woman had to go away without receiving any justice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKHn92no_8c
Muhammed himself beat his child wife Ayesha. Muhammed went in the middle of the night to a cemetery and Ayesha followed in secret. When Muhammad realized she was following, Ayesha says "He struck me on the chest which caused me pain" Sahih Muslim vol. 2:2127
So Muhammed also followed his qur'an.
Mr. Haqqui: "and when i look
Mr. Haqqui:
"and when i look back in history there is a time when suddenly mongols invaded muslims and burnt most of the muslims books, then their descendents, the mongols came and ruled the whole sub-continent and one of them actually made a new religion named deen-e-ilahi out of islam, hinduism and buddhism"
I Say:
Why would you bring "deen-e-ilahi" here? We are discussing True Islam(by Saudi Arabians) not the Islam followed by Converted Muslims in south Asia (Birth of rapes, forceful marriages or Jizia taxes) and the books followed by true Muslims in Saudi Arabia.
Mr Haqqani: : Allah sends
Mr Haqqani: : Allah sends humans a in full packages. he does not send legs hands, head stomach and other parts in pieces and expects the mother expecting her to to join them together later. Then why didnt he send a fully printed complete ,clear and bounded Quran via Gibraeel to Mohammed? Would not that be the proper way?. Would you buy a book which is sold in thousands of vague ,haphazzard pieces ? Why do you believe in ridiculous fairy tales ranted by a sick schitzraphenic epileptic man without a single witness but doubt history as seen by thousands and chronicled by hundreds and compiled by honest scholars.
If all the 100 or so sects of muslims dispute all the hadiths and siras, why did the quran say Mohammed is your role model and follow what he did making hadiths ans sira as important as quran itself?
one thing at a time so as to
one thing at a time so as to not clutter the moslem's brain!
QRAN TEACHES YOU TO KILL KAFIRS! Approve of it or not? I do not like to be a moslem as I have brains to think and have a perfect control on my dik and brain! I do not like the thought of sexing it with daughter in law following the foot steps of the most perfect example of the rapist pedophile rasool
I am least worried whether
I am least worried whether gibreel or kubril gave message of god. I am not here to accept. I lead a decent and normal life and follow some basic principles. Let me take god on the day of last judgement as bluffed by the prophetic religions, I dont want any of these prophets to intercede for me. Bye Bye
Quote from this so-called
Quote from this so-called Muslim defender: "please also note that the incident actually occurred before any revelation of relevent subject could occur, so looking at a guy who actually followed all the rules by word once they were revealed, i think this guy can be given a little waiver."
No pious Muslim that I know, and I know many being a former Muslim, would refer so disrespectively to his prophet Muhammad as a "guy." As for the rest of his incoherent garbage who gives a c**p. A baby would babble more sense than his puerile"ain'ts" and ''dudes".
Websites like
Websites like www.islam-watch.org and www.faithfreedom.org need to be translated into Arabic, Urdu, Hindi etc as these are the populations which need to be targeted.
I second Ashish's opinion.
I second Ashish's opinion. Many of the Muslims in India are good people who believe that islam brought monotheism in real sense and brought India out of dark ages. Allthough virtually the invading Muslims killed/converted peaceful people and brought them under a darker ambit. World's 70% of muslims live in India and countries which were once India or in indian influence. These are Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia. The Muslims here are slowly fed a deep sense of prejudice and victimised feeling. Some of these over the time have become true. For instance Hindus now do view in India Muslims with suspicion. I am writing an article about why Islam is a religion of fear. It was born in fear and it continues to cause terror because of that fear. I was getting too many hate messages. I dont fear them but I think I will relax for a while. However, to the ex muslims why do I still feel hurt at times when the prophet is accused or Islam is accused. It suddenly brings me back to defense. I guess for many of the Muslims thats why its so difficult to leave Islam.
Kamran, I do agree that
Kamran,
I do agree that there can be a sense of belonging when in fact one does not wish to belong or has doubts. This is not unique to islam. But if Islam can not be blamed (well I prefer to use the word criticized rather than blamed), then how can reform take place? How can there be change, if people should keep silent and Islam have special immunity when other religions don't?
This would have and does have grave impact on the girls who are married off when underage and just children, who are then subjected to sexual intercourse (rape of a minor as the child has no say and can not fight off an adult man), all because scholars maintain (rightfully) that Aisha too was a child yet married to the prophet Muhammad. This is one example. Others include stoning or lashings because a person is "convicted" of fornication/adultery (most are rape victims or just falsely accused) again due to the Hadd punishments as prescribed in the Quran and hadiths. Girls are forced to veil themselves, when in fact this should be voluntary, but again hadiths and the quran are dragged into the quation.
Does that not hurt you? Because I feel hurt when another human suffers, be that a palestinian in Gaza, a Muslim in Gujarat, a Kurd in Turkey, a coptic Christian in Egypt, a Philipino maid in Saudi Arabia, a Shia Muslim in Iraq, a gay in Iran, a woman in Afghanistan - the list is long. Religion plays a role.
However I will not accuse the messenger, Muhammad, as the message is the problem. Messenger only convey a message be that Moses, David, Jesus or Muhammad. However, Christianity has also changed a lot and today the spiritual aspect may play a role in the judicial or social system but no divine punishments are carried out against adulterers, gays, people of other faiths etc. Persecution in that sense has come to an end. Even in Israel you have orthodox jews but their influence is small, and no punishments are carried out as prescribed in the Torah. In fact the jewish state is not even based on the Torah.
The same reform has to take place in Islam or else the problems will remain and only increase. Overall Islam is not worse or better than Christianity or Judaism. But it does lack a check with reality or perhaps a balance, as one can not implement 7th century rules in 2009. If one does, then there will be consequences and the critics will rise.
Remember the criticism on present day Islamic interpretation and practice is not coming from just outsiders (non-muslim critics, academics, scientists, ex-muslims) but also from within Muslims. But they can not speak openly so words must be covered up and made more edible. Or else they would be accused of apostacy or treason.
didnt actually read all these
didnt actually read all these posts but read enough to get the drift.
first its haqqui, not haqqani... least a guy has a right of right pronouncement of his name.
and as a matter of fact i did answer to that verse, check out the video yourself.
and i am willing as well as prepared to answer all your civil queries and all that in due time, but you will have to make do with the long time in-netween my posts and me not being able to read all your posts.
you guys can mail me directly to my hotmail id corresponding with saaduh@hotmail.
and for those who didnt get
and for those who didnt get the drift, i said i believe hadis to be compromised through time.
i will take the most used book, sahih bukhari for example, this is what i learned about it, sorry for not using the original text, this is just so u guys get the drift..
imam bukhari, wasnt even a grandson of a sahabi, he was actually born around 200 hijri, almost 160 years after muhammad's death. so lets say that he began writing his famous book sahih bukhari almost 160 years after the death of mohammad. now as the word goes he actually travelled round the globe many times in his quest for sahih ahadis, which he logically couldnt because traven it that time was on camel or horseback and the way was riddled with deserts, pirates and many other calamities.
now supposing he actually pulled the trick, he went to every narrator of hadis and from thence he went to the one this certain narrator heard this hadis originally from. thus probably travelling pretty long distances to hear someone finally say ' i heard from 1 who heard from 2 who heard from 3 who actualy heard from muhammad'.
then the saying goes that he used to travel home, especially cast wuzu, offer 2 rakat nafil and then and only then he would write the hadis.
pretty funky of you guys to believe this book more authentic than quran, aint it??
remember!
saaduh@hotmail
"and for those who didnt get
"and for those who didnt get the drift, i said i believe hadis to be compromised through time."
You said no such thing, so there is no drift to catch, unless you are operating under more than one nickname which would appear strange.
"pretty funky of you guys to believe this book more authentic than quran, aint it"
Have you tried asking muslim scholars that question? Or just average muslims? All the historical claims aside - are you saying you are a hadith rejector? (If you are no problem.)
Or else your claim makes little sense.
Also one does not need to be Ahul Bayat or related to the prophet to be considered a reliable sahabah.
and as for quran teaching to
and as for quran teaching to kill kafirs, grow up man!!!
i live in pakistan, a muslim majority country supposedly found in the name of islam!!
WE got christians and hindus and what-not in our localities, WE DONT KILL THEM!!!!
as for you guys trying to get peoples attention toward women who dont want to wear burqah, please explain what is happening in an already understood european country where women are actually fighting for the right to wear burqa??
you say people are killed and raped in the name of islam?
grow up
open your eyes
most of these guys dont actually give explainations for their dip-shit behaviour, its the media that says' oh, it must be a muslim'
you think muslims get exceptionally good behaviour?
think again.
kashmir, gaza, palastine even afghanistan and iraq and maybe so many more.
you think muslims began all this?
taking afghanistan for instance,
let me first tell you guys that usama bin laden and mulla umer actually head two very different associations
one al-qaida the other taliban.
whan taliban was ruling afghanistan,take it from a guy who actually lives in the neighbouring country, drug growth was zero, there was peace in the country, relatively speaking.
then came 9/11
america claimed afghanistan have al-qaeda like iraq had chemical weapons and attack.
now there is a muppet government in afghanistan.
drug growth at its peak
and occasionally afghanistan fires up on either india, china or pakistan, its noticable neighbours.
look to history...
at one time christians also believed in their religion, and thus began crusades
you think the powers that be will let islam alone? it is a mine-ful of potential blow-up-myself guys.
please go research the history of how the word 'assassin' actually formed up and you will get the drift
OH MY GOD!! i feel like
OH MY GOD!!
i feel like bumpping my head on the wall.
after all this educated discussion a guy comes up and asks me wether i believe or not....
and dude you guys tried asking muslim scholars and look where that got you???
atheist..
no thank you, i am better without it
in fact i could get you a fatwa claiming anything to be halal or allowable in islam
all it needs is some money in an envelop
that is how cool our mullah are.
and the real guys who actually took the time to read all the books and are truly working to clarify, you wont agree to contact, cus its unconventional
instead people prefer 'disco mullah'
so rock on guys
and ciao, meet you again tomorrow if my country's electric company wont thingk that the same time tomorrow is ideal for load shedding(they think its ALWAYS the best time for load shedding:-( )
saaduh@hotmail
Mr Editor, One point at a
Mr Editor,
One point at a time is good debating. It prevents frivolous matters creeping in into the debate.
As you rightly pointed out to Mr. Saad Haqqui, his cherry-picking of hadiths is not going to work. If Mr. Saad Haqqui rejects hadiths, he can't even perform his prayers.
Muslims alone have been the exclusive custodians of Qur'an, hadiths and sirat and attribution of their being anything non-authentic therein by Mr. Saad Haqqui is pertinently a devious strategy to save face of ugly Islam.
"atheist"? Are you mentally
"atheist"?
Are you mentally challenged? It is clearly impossible for you to speak to people even remotely politely.
Truth be told, I don't believe you are a muslim. Because Islam teaches about how to address people, even when you disagree. Now you know why people don't reply you.
Also I NOWHERE stated I was an atheist. So namecalling and making suspicious assumptions, won't lead you anhywhere. Just shows you have no solid argument or answer. Funny that. But not surprising!
Also sounds like you have a problem with ateists seeing as you are using it for namecalling. How sad. I pity you.
Instead of all this mumbo jumbo you spewed - how about you just answer straight forward: Do YOU reject ahadith? Yes or No.
Simple as that.
Why don't you answer instead of replying with questions which make no sense at all?
You have not posted in this thread before. I do not see your nickname anywhere until #24405 and #24407.
So either you are lying or just using multiple nicknames. You have not replied before, so why are you surprised when somebody asks you a simple question?
So for you especially I shall repeat my questions:
“and for those who didnt get the drift, i said i believe hadis to be compromised through time.”
You said no such thing, so there is no drift to catch, unless you are operating under more than one nickname which would appear strange.
“pretty funky of you guys to believe this book more authentic than quran, aint it”
Have you tried asking muslim scholars that question? Or just average muslims? All the historical claims aside – are you saying you are a hadith rejector? (If you are no problem.)
Or else your claim makes little sense.
It is a commonly held belief nowhere what muslim group you may ask, that ahadith are integral to understanding the Koran.
"and as for quran teaching to
"and as for quran teaching to kill kafirs, grow up man!!!"
I doubt you have even read the Koran. Reciting the koran in your native language without understanding the content does not equate to reading the koran.
"WE got christians and hindus and what-not in our localities, WE DONT KILL THEM!!!!"
Well you (not you personally but your denying does not help either) do rape them. Christian minorities in Pakistan live under fear. churches get burnt, christian girls get abducted and raped and force converted to islam under threats. There have been several church attacks, and guess what? People died in those.
"whan taliban was ruling afghanistan,take it from a guy who actually lives in the neighbouring country, drug growth was zero, there was peace in the country, relatively speaking."
Sure. Nobody denies that. But you forgot to mention the human rights breaches which take place. Or does that not count in your book? Women being confined to their homes and removed from schools and work places. Vhild brides being married off to men 3,4,5 times their age? People living under sharia punishments like stoning and lashings in constant fear. Recently a 17 y.o. girl was lashed in Swat valley (part of Pakistan? now under Taliban rule).
While understanding your outrage, you do have a selective approach. You weed out all the negative things and claim they don't exist by not mentioning them.
It is also a fact that religious minorities in Pakistan are persecuted ranging from Christians, Shia/Ismailis, to Ahmadiyya Muslims. Even Pakistan's human rights organization and advocates confirms this.
For somebody who lives in Pakistan, you seem awfully unenlightened about what is going on there.
However I must say, you talk
However I must say, you talk honestly about the scholars and imams there.
Light, I think you kicked his
Light,
I think you kicked his butt real hard. LOL
I must agree with kokamal
I must agree with kokamal here.
Cherry-picking hadith is the most dishonest position to take.
I can accept the views of either those who accept the Sahih Hadith as "reliable", or the position of those who reject all Hadith as unreliable (though I might question exactly what is meant by "unreliable" in this context).
Both positions have their own problems (many pointed out above), but the cherry-pickers are seeking to both "have their cake and eat it" and accept/reject Hadith on an entirely arbitary basis.sinking 5-billion
Jonc and kokamal, I agree
Jonc and kokamal,
I agree with both of you on the cherry-picking of hadith.
Jonc, you asked what is meant by reliable. Well, reliable is down the "scholars" concensus on what constitutes reliable hadith. There are 7 collections (multiple volumes) and Sahih Bukhari ranks the highest, followed by Sahih Muslim, Trimidhi/Trimizi, Sunan Abu Dawud etc). These collections are reliable.
Then you have some (incomplete) narrations and collections seen as unrealible. They can be unreliable for various reasons, but of course 99% does not know why something is reliable or unreliable. They just take the "scholars" words for it and cite from that blindly
The "scholars" use selective hadith citing too i.e. they neglect to mention certain controversial hadiths, if they want to promote a specific image and will flat out lie about such existance. Or they will cite weak and thus unreliable hadith to prove a point (the infamous scarf issue).
All muslims who believe in hadiths, have not studied the volumes or any of the full collections. Most knowledge is gained from hearsay when growing up and from friends and imams. One might ask how one can then adhere to something, which one has not studied.
Many hadith apologets wil start casting doubt on otherwise reliable hadiths by by starting to question the isnad (chain of narrators) and/or translation of the content by claiming inaccuracy. Some of the most far out and ridiculous explanations have been "well it was meant as a joke/jest" when in fact the hadith in question, states nothing of that sort.
However some hadith are seen as reliable and no question. When a scholar cites it, it is fine. But when the same hadith is cited by a critic, there is disbelief. The reliable collections form the Sharia.
Many hadith either contradict each other flat out or contradict the Quran. Yet nobody raises an eye brow but apologets will then claim that only hadith which verify the Quran should be followed. But this is as good as rejecting hadith and one needs to be honest about this stance.
However, I did read an article which explained that one could not dismiss any hadith classified as weak/unreliable, as it would depend on WHY it was regarded as weak. Narrators or content or other?
So usage/practical application hadiths themselves are subject to cherry-picking but so is the explanations and interpretations. People use them to prove their own point and agenda.
But as you rightly stated, one can not have ones cake and eat it too.
Wanderer: Actually I queried
Wanderer:
Actually I queried what "unreliable" meant to those who cherrypick and/or reject wholesale (sorry I wasn't clearer).
I know the criteria for the scholarly assignment of the status of "reliable" to a Hadith and I concur with your assessment of Bukhari et al.
I think a case can be made for even Bukhari and Muslim reflecting 3rd Islamic century Moslem thinking rather than (neccessarily) the thinking of the prophet (though that does NOT apply to Malik's "40 Hadith" since he was a 3rd(?) generation muslim).
However, if the hadith are dismissed (as above) then that simply begs the question as to why muslim thought had become so altered, as well as destroying Sharia Law and the schools of Fiqh andf Mahdab outright.
Further, the Koran becomes virtually un-intelligible since it has nothing to contextualise it, no way to recognise abrogated/abrogating verses or any other meter-stick to judge what verses are "for all time" and which (might) apply only to certain circumstances since the only "history" to the Koran is in Hadith and Sunnah.
If we look outside the "conventional" Islamic sources can we find evidence of a "primitive Islam" (Islam before Hadith and Sunnah) that taught something different?
Personally I doubt it - traditional Islam will have thoroughly suppressed those writings and for the first century or so post the arrival of Islam, there appears to be little reference to it in (surviving) non-muslim writings.
*Does anyone know of any? References appreciated.*
This should not surprise us: Islam considers the times before its founding as the "time of ignorance" ("jahilliaya" - pardon the spelling) and either ignored it or at times, actively suppressed it. For a modern example of this consider the destruction of the Afghan buddhas (not Islamic - not worth preserving, blown up).
Ironically we do know quite a lot about sources for the Koran (many articles here - see under Quran, and a number of published books also) and find that it was apocryphal/heretic and late Christian writings as well as Jewish Mishnah(?) fables amongst others, but this is because the stories in the Koran have either been imported complete or with minor garbling that can be unpicked to identify the source.
Sorry, I've drifted a bit from the content of the original article.
In summary I have to say that I do believe Bukhari etc, though whether I believe that they reflect mohammed's thought or the thought of 3rd Islamic centrury Moslems is by no means certain.
In a sense that is also irrelevant - traditional Islam believes in the Hadith and Sunnah and the Sharia, Fiqh and Mahddab that arose from and along with them; and it is that that gives rise to terrorism, oppression of non-muslims etc.
the next reply from this guy
the next reply from this guy will be like this;'sorry mr.sina according to koran we r not supposed to discuss deeper on this subject, so as koran abiding muslim i will stop here.a typical muslim escape excuse.
Wanderer & jonc have come up
Wanderer & jonc have come up with some gems, nay, real cherries. Thank you both.
This freedom of cherry-picking cannot be allowed or conceded to a believer of Mohammad. It is fraught with far more serious consequences for the mankind. Believers cannot have the cake with cherry toppings and eat it too.
For, if the propagandists of Islam [wanderer used the term "scholars"] are allowed to cherry-picking, then
1. We'll have a mountain of rot, in the form of not-so-weak and not-so-unreliable hadiths, left open in the wide only to cause more rot [read havoc among people] !
2. The causative factors of not-so-weak and not-so-unreliable hadiths will remain open awaiting future rot by propagandist[s] of Islam.
This brings us to another interesting aspect of the credibility of Islam and its allah [small a intended]; and it it is thus:
a. Don't hadiths put a big interrogation mark on COMPLETENESS OF ALLAH'S VERBATIM MESSAGE -- Qur'an itself?
b. Don't reliable or not-so-weak or not-so-unreliable hadiths render Qur'an meaningless and beyond comprehension and implementation?
So much for the Final word of wisdom from Creator allah!
By the way, if any of you is familiar with any cherries in Islam, pass on to me please! Thanks.
Very interesting and
Very interesting and informative posts of Kokamal, Wanderer and Jonc, as usual.
I agree completely that cherry-picking of Hadiths is dishonest, or at least lazy thinking. But science and critical thinking people search for the truth, and that is hard, never-ending work. Theories of necessity must evolve and change, even if cherished for a life-time.
The total of Hadiths taken together should be examined by good historians and judged only on whether they contain truthful information about mankind’s history by the best logical criteriums mankind can think of.
If Muslims “cherry-pick” only those hadiths that confirm Islam, they are not really searching for the truth anymore. They have then started out with an immovable theory-assumption that Allah intervened in human history through Mohammed with the Quran and from there they only seek confirmation. But there is arguably no proof that Mohammed spoke the truth and the Quran is from Allah or even that it WAS only Mohammed (and thus Allah) that spoke and inspired. There are many indications against that. So it is entirely probable Islam was just man-made.
Why do people believe or say they believe in Islam in the 1st place? It seems because many see Islam as some kind of identity, the belief that fitted their family and country best, not necessarily the belief that was most true. Just as their gender or race identified them from birth. It often seems to me that those people really say: To hell with the Truth, I just like Islam, I just want to honour my parents, community, country. And parents, community, nation often unconsciously or conscious demand religion-loyalty. Thus loyalty to community often supersedes loyalty to relentlessly searching for the truth. But then people won’t admit that, saying they believe Islam is true.
I have also heard that only after BELIEVING you see Islam is true and many say they “feel” Islam is true, but this feeling is subjective, not verifyable. Many just play Pascal’s Wager, afraid to gamble and lose in the afterlife, getting in Hell-fire, or missing out on a great Heaven.
Subsequently in life, when such persons grow up, they are searching for the truth in most other matters, and highly critical of most stories they hear from the news of people around them. Often rejecting them with great logic, but not anymore using the same logic with their faith.
But by not relentlessly seeking the truth and settling for a gamble, aren’t they being dishonest to themselves? And when trying to convince other people of the truth of Islam, don’t they see that by just cherry-picking supportive hadith and rejecting/ ignoring contradicting hadith, they are offering a biased, prejudiced version of the available historical information, which is contrary to being as truthfull as they can be?
I just got strucked wth this
I just got strucked wth this point: "Muhammed went in the middle of the night to a cemetery and Ayesha followed in secret". Then Mohammad get very angry with her.
Knowing Ayesha was a quite smart girl and Mohammad was caught once (!) having sex with a dead corpse, let's guess what happened there.
Demsci: An excellent post (as
Demsci:
An excellent post (as ever), though I beg to differ with one point.
You wrote "cherry-picking of Hadiths is... lazy thinking."
I disagree totally!
I do not think it is lazy thinking AT ALL.
I think it is usually done very carefully indeed to allow a case to be made. It is very easy to find Hadith that support a given position and to ignore those that contradict it.
Thus I believe that the "cherry pickers" are being very carefully selective for their own ends, which are various and variable.
I do agree that this comes from a set of pre-existing assumptions.
An obvious example is those who dismiss any Hadith that shows Mo in a bad light. the assumption here is obvious: "Mo was the best man EVER, so anything that indicates otherwise is wrong."
I have always admired the honesty of the Hadith compilers. They may have had a restricted (or even possibly false) set of criteria (basically the strength of the narration chain) for a hadith, but once this was established they did not shy away from Hadith that paint Mohammed in a poor light.
You have to respect that I think.
Jonc, "I have always admired
Jonc,
"I have always admired the honesty of the Hadith compilers. They may have had a restricted (or even possibly false) set of criteria (basically the strength of the narration chain) for a hadith, but once this was established they did not shy away from Hadith that paint Mohammed in a poor light.
You have to respect that I think."
Maybe they were'nt really honest. Everything they compiled met the moral standards of that culture. It is possible that Mohammad committed what was considered to be crimes even for that primitive brutal culture, but the compilers conveniently left them out.
mr light, by atheist, i didnt
mr light, by atheist, i didnt mean a swear word but a state of belief in mind, no need to be riled up.
and believe me, the news you get about pakistan are awefully wrong, christians DONT live in fear in pakistan nor do any other minority. they are free to practice their religion, even acces to alcohol is allowed if you have a certificate claiming you arent a muslim.
please quote some church-burning incidents that occurred in the last two years in pakistan so we can know how un-enlightened i am of my own country.
another thing, please dont confuse peoples evil deeds with peoples religious deeds.
i will agree that young girls are married to elder guys but in my line of defence i will say to it that all of it isnt done under islams umbrella, these guys do it and thats it..
period
they dont give excuses from religion for it and so must you not join those deeds to islam.
though i have not personally met the guy, you would want to go have an on-screen manaazra with mr, Zakir Naaik, he has an open challenge to people to come and prove him wrong. dunno why you guys just sit here and dont actually go challange him???
and jonc you raised a very good point, my suggestion would be, that the primitive islam was actually based on belief, of Allah being the one and only and Muhammad being his LAST messenger.
now guys please be assured that the code of conduct came after all that.
and sunnah came after that.
the reason i say this is, you guys may have met muslims claiming that you have to have a beard if you wanna be muslim, or things like that.
Mr kokamal, your conjection
Mr kokamal, your conjection may be true but just one flaw in it, quran really is a complete book. no one needs hadis to interpret it. and yet one's mind must be clear before interpreting it for even in english many interpretations can be made from even simple sentences. same lies true for quran's arabic.
demsci! good thinking...
let me tell you i am a born muslim. but the islam i learnt on my mothers lap was very different than what i now believe in now. see i had the fortune of studying philosophy as well as a bit of history. so i can say that islam is not just an identity. i would say islam is earth, being the object that keeps me from floating off in the blackness of diverging thoughts.
islam is actually a guiding code not a binding code, it is not so extreme as your media dictates.
and if a have not cleared myself in my previous posts, here it is again...
i do not believe in the righteousness of any hadith.
when i went to school, there was a famous hadith in my school textbook,' ilm haasil kero chaahe us k liyay tumhai china hee kiuu na jana peray' (get knowledge even if you have to travel to china).
no such thing in any of the suhah sitta, but everybody believes in it nevertheless.
this is how people sabotage true beliefs through time.....
"please quote some
"please quote some church-burning incidents that occurred in the last two years in pakistan so we can know how un-enlightened i am of my own country."
I don't know what you mean about the past 2 years? So you mean if 3 years ago is justified then? just google it.
"i will agree that young girls are married to elder guys but in my line of defence i will say to it that all of it isnt done under islams umbrella, these guys do it and thats it.."
The only reason they can do that because of religious sanction. If your quran forbid it, they wouldn't do it. Is that clear? So it's done under islamic law.
"they dont give excuses from religion for it and so must you not join those deeds to islam.
though i have not personally met the guy, you would want to go have an on-screen manaazra with mr, Zakir Naaik, he has an open challenge to people to come and prove him wrong. dunno why you guys just sit here and dont actually go challange him???"
Debate with muslim on screen and LIVE? Do you ever know the consequence of that? If i'm not mistaken, Ali Sina had already challenged him but he refused and raised the bet to $ 1 million. But if you think logically, it's easy for him to debate Ali Sina. Just use pseudonym and log on this site and post the rebuttal. Why he didn't do this simple task? The same applied to that atlas man, harun yahya
"the reason i say this is, you guys may have met muslims claiming that you have to have a beard if you wanna be muslim, or things like that."
Many muslim believe that growing beard is a holy thing and pleased allah. I repeat it, MANY.
"Mr kokamal, your conjection may be true but just one flaw in it, quran really is a complete book. no one needs hadis to interpret it."
Oh, really. And why the stoning punishment is not there? You rely on hadith to know that.
"islam is actually a guiding code not a binding code, it is not so extreme as your media dictates."
That's not the case in reality. Muslim world is full of binding rules. Don't obey it? prepare to go to jail. I saw the news about an arab journalist thrown to prison because he didn't agree with Saudi government about islamic new year.
"when i went to school, there was a famous hadith in my school textbook,’ ilm haasil kero chaahe us k liyay tumhai china hee kiuu na jana peray’ (get knowledge even if you have to travel to china)."
Muslim in my country believe it and often preach about it. That's why they respect Chinese now.
mr moo, you are seriously
mr moo, you are seriously confused, just because islam is practised in pakistan doesnt mean all pakistanis actions are sanctioned and based on islam.
take kaor-karee for instance.
all these bad practices are done by people and there only explanation is that they have seen their ancestors do the same, and last i checked, that isnt exactly what islam preaches.
as for burning churches, i know what you meant, one church even accidently burned by stray matchstick in a muslim country and AHA!!!! muslims burned it.
and dozens of masjids burned, indian temples built upno them and thousands of muslims killed many of them burned in their homes as they sleep at night and 'surely they have done something to deserve it'
thats how your media works.
and as for freedom of thought, you are doing the same, cant see the tree in front of your eye and point at the twig in anothers.
you gave an example of a guy?
we got 1/4 of our countries populace committing eids and ramadans as per saudi calender, even though pakistan is geographically one day behind saudi arabia.
another very important point i would like to add is that saudi arabia is actually a kingdom, ruled by a king. what else will you expect of someone directly disobeying the king?
just so you know islam doesnt preach sovereign kingdom, it teaches a lawful society which is governed, not ruled by a unity, and all that based on the teachings of islam.
now mr moo, please reconsider what you have said.
and for all you know i am zakir nayek
but its a lot more easy and profilic to come up front, show your faces and face zakir nayeks challenge in his own pond like i am doing here in yours.
saaduh Definition of
saaduh
Definition of conjecture:
–noun
1. the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
2. an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.
3. Obsolete. the interpretation of signs or omens.
–verb (used with object)
4. to conclude or suppose from grounds or evidence insufficient to ensure reliability.
–verb (used without object)
5. to form conjectures.
Is it a conjecture that "Qur'an is incomplete without hadiths"?
Please describe the process, periodicity, frequency and timing of offering namaaz -- praying using Qur'an.
You wrote:
"and dozens of masjids burned, indian temples built upno them and thousands of muslims killed many of them burned in their homes as they sleep at night and ’surely they have done something to deserve it’
thats how your media works."
My comment:
Just name the places and date of such occurrences AND your source of information.
You see, I got my information too -- FIRST HAND!
Before you write, a word of caution though, your late Prime Minister Benazeer Bhutto tried it in an Islamic country and drew flakes!
But, your grouse is not about those flattened masjids or the people killed in the riots, it is "why doesn't western media publish or telecast your poppycock."
You get billions of US dollars as aid from the same West. And what you don't get by way of alms, you steal it -- nuke technology, for example. Thievery isn't a crime in Islam if the owner is a non-Muslim.
You mentioned a false hadith about going to China and were honest enough to call it a false one.
I have heard this hadith before from Muslims. Incidentally, the Muslims who quoted this didn't realize that Mohammad and his alter ego allah were clueless about people of India, China and rest of the world beyond Arabian peninsula.
Thanks to the Christians and Jews killed by Mohammad and his goons that Mohammad and his alter ego allah came to know of Judaism and Christianity.
However, the biggest flaw by Mohammad was Qur'an's language which was limited to a small land-mass. This is the best proof that Mohammadanism wasn't meant to be universal or for the mankind.
Your guts are admirable though your falsehoods and accusations don't cover much ground!
Awaiting more from you.
first off i would like to
first off i would like to inform you that what you know about pakistan is so untrue.
the country pakistan was found on the basis so as to allow everyone to follow their religion with freedom, the muslims being the most needy of that commodity in the subcontinent. please note that even though in the designated area of pakistan, muslims were in majority, the concept wasnt to form a country where muslims could follow their religion.
this country was named pakistan. not any khilafat state and it was intended to be ruled the republican way.
in a more recent past, mr murtaza bhutto renamed the country to islamic republic of pakistan.
but rest assured, there is no concept of a republican rule in islam, only the concept of soveriegn government GOVERNED by a muslim, not ruled.
and yes, i meant the 2002 event which happened in gujrat.
as for musjud burning? i know what you mean, a more recent example is of lal masjid, by mr perwaiz musharraf.
and as for us aid? let me assure you it is actually a loan not aid, it is only called aid because it is given in tim eof need.
furthermore let me tell you that like imf, pakistan's decisions are also heavily weighed by americans, its their money speaking. let me also tell you that all this aid given to pakistan is given against the condition that pakistan will reduce its subsidy.
please google all i said so far and you will understand what i mean.
so i meant to say that pakistani govt's desicions do not actually follow quran or even islam.
pakistani govt is actually trying to kill off muslims in pakistan through many means.
@Saaduh "and yes, i meant
@Saaduh
"and yes, i meant the 2002 event which happened in gujrat." - I suspect you are talking superficially. Tell me what you know that has happened in Gujarat in 2002. A Lie told by many thousands of people cannot become true.
Explain what Pakistan thinks about what happened in Gujarat in 2002.
saaduh Comment ID
saaduh Comment ID #25565
"jonc you raised a very good point, my suggestion would be, that the primitive islam was actually based on belief, of Allah being the one and only and Muhammad being his LAST messenger. ... the code of conduct came after all that ... and sunnah came after that."
What do you mean here? Is the 'code of conduct 'the Sharia or do you mean the Hadith or even the Koran itself?
The order of formation is Koran - Sirat (Ibn Ishaq AH 85 )- Hadith (Bukhari etc 250 AH) and finally Sharia (in its developed form).
---
"just so you know islam doesnt preach sovereign kingdom, it teaches a lawful society which is governed, not ruled by a unity..."
What then of the Caliphate? Which is far from a truly represenational system.
saaduh, "mr moo, you are
saaduh,
"mr moo, you are seriously confused, just because islam is practised in pakistan doesnt mean all pakistanis actions are sanctioned and based on islam."
You are the confused one here because you're missing my point. Muslim live and act according to islam, if he/she wanted to do something, he would look at his/her quran and hadith to seek either halal or haram or between both. If a man attracted to children he would look inside quran to know wether this practice is halal or haram. Child marriage is......? This practice is not exclusively pakistani, ok.
"as for burning churches, i know what you meant, one church even accidently burned by stray matchstick in a muslim country and AHA!!!! muslims burned it."
Do you really google it? Do it again. They burned not only church but homes also. This church burning is not exclusively pakistani either. Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and even minority islamic sects are suffering and under constant fear in muslim countries.
"and dozens of masjids burned, indian temples built upno them and thousands of muslims killed many of them burned in their homes as they sleep at night and ’surely they have done something to deserve it’"
Most of indian deeds are retaliation of muslim's deeds. The one that attacked (in history of conquest) India is muslim.
"and as for freedom of thought, you are doing the same, cant see the tree in front of your eye and point at the twig in anothers."
That's the beauty of freedom. You can freely criticize someone to make improvement and stay alive, In your country this is impossible. I suggest you do the same, because it's obvious that you are very subjective.
"we got 1/4 of our countries populace committing eids and ramadans as per saudi calender, even though pakistan is geographically one day behind saudi arabia."
You're missing my point. This eid conflict is happened in all islamic countries. In my country too this happen (the method). My point is each and every one of sects/person is accusing other sects/person wrong.
"another very important point i would like to add is that saudi arabia is actually a kingdom, ruled by a king. what else will you expect of someone directly disobeying the king?"
So what? islamic caliphate too is another form of kingship. May i remind you that this internal conficts (eid, hadith, spirituality, sects, etc) between sects aren't happening in saudi arabia only, it's everywhere within muslim world. Jail, anarchy, and killing is the result.
"but its a lot more easy and profilic to come up front, show your faces and face zakir nayeks challenge in his own pond like i am doing here in yours."
You're either ignorant or deceitful (about "show your faces" thing). This is not my pond, but FFI's pond. Do Ali Sina's challenge.
@Saaduh Your Saudi Arabian
@Saaduh
Your Saudi Arabian government is sponsoring concocted lies and I know that elements like Tehelka, Teesta Seetalvad are paid by the Islamic government to fabricate stories about incidents.
have a open mind and visit the site quoted below :
http://www.gujaratriots.com/category/12-concocted-lies-and-myths-by-the-...
Like all other Muslims, don't fall into the well and think that my well is the deepest, largest etc. from within the well.
saaduh Comment ID #25786 I
saaduh
Comment ID #25786
I am sorry. you may be a fine man but your comment is full of lies and flight of your uncontrolled hallucinations and illusions. You don't know Islam, Pakistan and what they do.
Pakistan was never meant to be a faith-free state. It was created out of British India as a country for Muslims who apprehended persecution and rule of Hindus over them -- the victorious brigades of Islam.
Last 62 years prove it -- no supporting proof is called for.
Gujrat 2002 cases are being processed under scrutiny of the Supreme Court of India and no less. Hence, your reference is irrelevant and immaterial.
Lal masjid has been a plant of producing Islamic terrorists and if Pakistanis haven't had enough of Talibaan, they may restore Lal Masjid.
Lal masjid's products are male and female jehadists. It is located in Pakistan and not India.
The money that Pakistan receives from the US is NOT a loan but a grant or a loan converted into grant at a later stage.
What Pakistan does within its borders is Pakistan's business. However, Pakistan has 120,000 JeM /JuD mujahideen ready to attack India. There may be millions more. Jihadists in Pakistan multiply everyday. One cannot keep count of them. Talibaan are already threatened by ISI to invade Kashmir or go to jails.
If you look carefully, all mujahideen and Pakistan's military regime are using Islam to their benefit.
Islam is the cause of it. If there were no Islam, all this would not be happening.
It is up to you -- a violent life under Islam OR a peaceful life without Islam.
Wish you well and peace.
ha ha... this is my point all
ha ha...
this is my point all along, media all over the world is trying to disgrace islam by first disgracing muslims.
muslims are already the most disgraceful and cheating people in the world, probably myself included, but that does not necessarily mean that islam is too.
check this link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djMSyLWNJfM
and mr kokamal you must also know that the money pakistan is recieving is actually meant for war against terror?
this is the reality of war against terror.
dude i had personal
dude i had personal experience with the lal masjid incident, the coffins were heavy for one single body and before the weaponry was put out for the media, the whole area was cleared so no one can tell wether the weapons were planted by the government.
besides the quality of the weaponry didnt match with the quality of weaponry fired outside, plenty of stray shells fell in outlying homes.
and as for using islam for benefit in war is no new practice, it happened to christians in the crusades too.
and sorry for missing a point in a previous post, there is no sure way to determine the correct time procedure etc of prayers, as you well know every different sect in islam has its own way of prayer. but though prayer is farz, still if a muslim were to die, be he not a practitionar though a believer, sooner or later he is bound for heaven.
so i would say the belief in islam is the most important aspect and we should discuss that.
why is that once you recieve an answer to a certain query you move to another without acknowledging that you stand corrected? its not manlike.
grow some guts guys.
saaduh You chose Islam. Very
saaduh
You chose Islam. Very well.
You have it. Talibaan are there to teach you what Islam is all about. Talibaan are products of madrasas and masjids; hence, Talibaan are REAL Muslims. They follow written Islam and not the one you have tried to present here.
Most Pakistanis were and ARE scared to death of Talibaan.
May be you'd like to call Talibaan for dinner! :-)
http://www.gujaratriots.com/2
http://www.gujaratriots.com/27/myth-2-muslims-were-%E2%80%98butchered%E2...
This link is a must-read. There have been convictions of Muslims for attacking and killing Hindus AFTER GODHRA.