Full Info visit here 
Muslim Response Ali Sina: Why I left Islam
In this article, we'll examine some of the facts which lead Ali Sina to leave Islam. I'll refute his silly arguments and show that he often appeals to emotions.
Before I begin, there are few common things to note about supposedly Muslim leaving Islam:
1) Most of them hardly know anything about Islam
2) Most of them actually never offered salah in their whole life before apostatizing or hardly offer the five daily salah
3) They start attacking the Islam immediately, which is fine because every ignorant thinks that he knows everything. So at the end of the day, they help us by giving us the opportunities to expose them their ignorance and gross errors.
Now, why do I say they are supposedly Muslims: it is because someone who never prayed salah or hardly prayed salah is already out of Islam. The evidence for this is the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in which he said: "The covenant that stands between us and them (non-Muslims) is prayer; whoever gives up prayer is a kafir." [Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2621; al-Nasaa'i, 431; Ibn Maajah, 1079; classed as sahih by Shaykh al-Albani (May Allah have mercy on him) in Sahih al-Tirmidhi, 2113]
Now, that is aside let's go through one of the incidents which encouraged Ali Sina to leave Islam. His whole testimony of leaving Islam can be found here. I personally do not advise my fellow Muslims, who have weak imaan or never have confronted the suspicious arguments of enemies of Islam, to visit his website.
I seek refuge in Allah Ta'ala from my nafs and the cursed Shatan. With the Name Of Allah, Ar-Rahman (The Bestower Of Mercy), Ar-Raheem (The Most Merciful), I start writing; Seeking His Help and His Blessings.
Indeed, the stories you are going to mention are very disturbing but it depends from which point of view you are talking about. For example, Muslims may find it disturbing because why would someone, who was protected in the Islamic State established by al-habib (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), suddenly start insulting the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) when he didn't do anything to her. There are couple of problems with his last statement:
1) I would have expected something far better from scholar like Mr Sina other than emotional ranting. Mr Sina and his goons will always rant about logic and this and that but here Mr Sina himself committing logical fallacy: appealing to emotions!
2) Like I mentioned before, the stories will be disturbing for people depending on their perspective, so they will be disgust and therefore according to you they are all humans. Thus, your argument is pointless and it nullifies your attack to claim that Muslims need to become actual humans.
This hadith is acceptable so let's not go into saying that it is fabricated or weak etc. Let me summarize the whole story in few points
1) A slave woman of a blind companion (May Allah be pleased with her) used to insult the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam).
2) The blind man forbade her but she didn't stop and one day he killed her
3) The Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) found out next morning and gathered the people
4) The Blind man came forward and told the whole story and the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) didn't take any action against him
Now, it is not surprising that the attackers like Mr. Sina would choose few points of the story and attack the noble character of al-habib (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) or omit the reasons why there was no action taken against the blind man. All the attackers will omit the important points which only proves the justice of the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam). Shaykh Muhammad Salih Al-Munajjid says:
Now, regarding the last statement of Mr. Sina's scholarly misinterpretation of the hadith and lack of knowledge: Mr. Sina, where does the hadith say that she was pregnant or foetus dropped out of her belly? If you would have read the other versions of this narration reported in Tabarani and Bayhaqi, you would not have got yourself into this mess. Let's quote the Shaykh again:
So here, readers can see your academic dishonesty. I would love to see your authentic source which says that she was the maid slave of our mother Hafsa (May Allah be pleased with her).
As already explained above, she broke the law and hence deserved the punishment. Actually, dealing with the insulting issue lightly in secular system leads to many worst results. For example, bullying children physically or verbally could make them commit suicide. I'm sure we can find examples of this here or there. I'm not implying that we kill them but only pointing the negative consequences of insulting.
First, there is no evidence for this. Second, if we assume that he was lying then he committed a grave sin and will get what he deserves on the day of judgement and the woman will receive the justice. Since there was no evidence against what the blind man said and the blind man himself confessed, it was dealt accordingly. If the death plenty would have been carried on him unjustly, who would have taken care of his children? Would you then have ranted about the "unjust" of Prophet Muhammad (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam)? How many times have you spoken or written against many judges in our times issuing unjust punishment against the supposedly criminals? First bring an evidence and then we can talk about it!
Again, she broke the covenant under which she was protected and thus dealt according to the law for breaking the law. Unless, someone thinks like one of Mr. Sina's fans: First, I ask this genius: How carrying out the punishment for a crime is an emotional fallacy? so yeh, according to this guy, we should just let people do whatever they want, but when it comes to Muslims or their Prophet (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), then do not hold back the ranting about injustice etc.
too bad for you Mr. Sina! As far concerning your last statement, you may want to brush up your basic of 'uloom-al hadith (science of hadith). I know it is too hard to comprehend but basics should be fine for a scholar like yourself. Now, for the benefits of the readers: Why can't a non-Muslim forge these stories and attribute to a trust worthy companion? This is the reason why we have the science of hadith in Islam to evaluate the authenticity of a narration.
First, Mr. Sina, one side you, over and over again, tell Muslims to leave their religion if they want to become humans. Other side, you say faith is a personal matter. So which one is it? Second, again, Mr. Sina, you are either displaying your lack of historical knowledge or committing academic dishonesty. Let me give you a history lesson: Did the Messenger of Allah (salla-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) kill or order to kill the people of Taif when they ordered the kids to torture him? Did he kill or order to kill the woman who used to throw garbage at him? Did he kill or order to kill the woman who insulted him when he was carrying her stuff (helping her)? The list is long but we'll end with these and leave the readers with something to think about.
Wallahu a'alim (and Allah knows best)
alhamdulillah, this concludes my critically analysis of part of his testimony. Mr. Sina several times displayed his ignorance, academic dishonesty and committed logical fallacy, appealing to emotions. All kinds of comments are welcome, just make sure that you don't break any of our rules.
http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/faithfreedom-wikiislam/ali-sina-left-islam-275#post674
Muslim Response Ali Sina: Why I left Islam
In this article, we'll examine some of the facts which lead Ali Sina to leave Islam. I'll refute his silly arguments and show that he often appeals to emotions.
Before I begin, there are few common things to note about supposedly Muslim leaving Islam:
1) Most of them hardly know anything about Islam
2) Most of them actually never offered salah in their whole life before apostatizing or hardly offer the five daily salah
3) They start attacking the Islam immediately, which is fine because every ignorant thinks that he knows everything. So at the end of the day, they help us by giving us the opportunities to expose them their ignorance and gross errors.
Now, why do I say they are supposedly Muslims: it is because someone who never prayed salah or hardly prayed salah is already out of Islam. The evidence for this is the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in which he said: "The covenant that stands between us and them (non-Muslims) is prayer; whoever gives up prayer is a kafir." [Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2621; al-Nasaa'i, 431; Ibn Maajah, 1079; classed as sahih by Shaykh al-Albani (May Allah have mercy on him) in Sahih al-Tirmidhi, 2113]
Now, that is aside let's go through one of the incidents which encouraged Ali Sina to leave Islam. His whole testimony of leaving Islam can be found here. I personally do not advise my fellow Muslims, who have weak imaan or never have confronted the suspicious arguments of enemies of Islam, to visit his website.
I seek refuge in Allah Ta'ala from my nafs and the cursed Shatan. With the Name Of Allah, Ar-Rahman (The Bestower Of Mercy), Ar-Raheem (The Most Merciful), I start writing; Seeking His Help and His Blessings.
Indeed, the stories you are going to mention are very disturbing but it depends from which point of view you are talking about. For example, Muslims may find it disturbing because why would someone, who was protected in the Islamic State established by al-habib (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), suddenly start insulting the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) when he didn't do anything to her. There are couple of problems with his last statement:
1) I would have expected something far better from scholar like Mr Sina other than emotional ranting. Mr Sina and his goons will always rant about logic and this and that but here Mr Sina himself committing logical fallacy: appealing to emotions!
2) Like I mentioned before, the stories will be disturbing for people depending on their perspective, so they will be disgust and therefore according to you they are all humans. Thus, your argument is pointless and it nullifies your attack to claim that Muslims need to become actual humans.
This hadith is acceptable so let's not go into saying that it is fabricated or weak etc. Let me summarize the whole story in few points
1) A slave woman of a blind companion (May Allah be pleased with her) used to insult the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam).
2) The blind man forbade her but she didn't stop and one day he killed her
3) The Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) found out next morning and gathered the people
4) The Blind man came forward and told the whole story and the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) didn't take any action against him
Now, it is not surprising that the attackers like Mr. Sina would choose few points of the story and attack the noble character of al-habib (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) or omit the reasons why there was no action taken against the blind man. All the attackers will omit the important points which only proves the justice of the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam). Shaykh Muhammad Salih Al-Munajjid says:
This story is indicative of the justice with which the Muslims dealt with the people of the Book, which was enjoined in the sharee'ah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), who was a mercy to the worlds. The rights of the Jews who are under Muslim rule are guaranteed and protected, and it is not permissible to transgress against them by causing them any annoyance or harm. Hence when the people found a Jewish woman who had been killed they were alarmed and referred the matter to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), who had made the covenant with them and guaranteed them security, and who did not take the jizyah from them. He got angry and adjured the Muslims by Allah to find out who had done this deed, so that he could determine his punishment and judge his case. But when he found out that she had transgressed the covenant several times by reviling the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and impugning him, she forfeited all her rights and deserved the hadd punishment of execution which is imposed by sharee'ah on everyone who reviles the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), whether he is a Muslim, a dhimmi or a mu'aahid (non-Muslim living under Muslim rule), because impugning the status of the Prophets is kufr or disbelief in Allah the Almighty, and a transgression of every sacred limit and right and covenant, and a major betrayal which deserves the greatest punishment.
This is the correct understanding of this story. It is not as many of those who hate and revile sharee'ah rule and slander the character of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) say. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not choose to kill her in this manner, but because she deserved to be executed as a hadd punishment for breaking the covenant and reviling the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), he did not demand qisaas from her killer. She had said to him many things reviling the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), time after time, and he told her to stop but she did not stop, and he rebuked her but she paid no heed, until he could no longer bear it and he silenced the voice that insulted his religion and his Prophet.
As for killing a dhimmi unlawfully, it is major sin, and the warning concerning that is very stern, as was proven in Saheeh al-Bukhaari (3166) from 'Abd-Allah ibn 'Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) who narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Whoever killed a mu'aahid will not smell the fragrance of Paradise, although its fragrance may be detected from a distance of forty years' travel." Imam al-Bukhaari included this report in a chapter in his Saheeh entitled "Chapter: the sin of one who kills a mu'aahid unlawfully."
Source
So, the woman wasn't killed merely due to the reason she insulted the Prophet (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa salam), rather due to the reason she broke the covenant. Thus, as shaykh mentions, she forfeited her rights of protection and broke the law. How do you expect the Messenger of Allah (sall-allhu 'alayhi wa salam) to punish the blind man, who dealt according to the law to his slave woman, who broke the law? At least, try to make some sense Mr. Sina! This is the correct understanding of this story. It is not as many of those who hate and revile sharee'ah rule and slander the character of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) say. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not choose to kill her in this manner, but because she deserved to be executed as a hadd punishment for breaking the covenant and reviling the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), he did not demand qisaas from her killer. She had said to him many things reviling the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), time after time, and he told her to stop but she did not stop, and he rebuked her but she paid no heed, until he could no longer bear it and he silenced the voice that insulted his religion and his Prophet.
As for killing a dhimmi unlawfully, it is major sin, and the warning concerning that is very stern, as was proven in Saheeh al-Bukhaari (3166) from 'Abd-Allah ibn 'Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) who narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Whoever killed a mu'aahid will not smell the fragrance of Paradise, although its fragrance may be detected from a distance of forty years' travel." Imam al-Bukhaari included this report in a chapter in his Saheeh entitled "Chapter: the sin of one who kills a mu'aahid unlawfully."
Source
Now, regarding the last statement of Mr. Sina's scholarly misinterpretation of the hadith and lack of knowledge: Mr. Sina, where does the hadith say that she was pregnant or foetus dropped out of her belly? If you would have read the other versions of this narration reported in Tabarani and Bayhaqi, you would not have got yourself into this mess. Let's quote the Shaykh again:
There is nothing in the report to indicate that there was a foetus in the Jewish woman's womb. The one who understands that from the context is mistaken. As for the words in some versions of the report, "a child fell between her legs, and became covered with blood", this does not indicate that in any way whatsoever, rather it seems that it was one of her two children whom he described as being "like pearls", who came to his mother because he felt sorry for her then got covered with blood. The evidence for that is that the version of the hadeeth that was narrated by al-Tabaraani says "Her two children came between her legs and became covered with blood." In the version narrated by al-Bayhaqi it says: "Her two children fell between her legs covered with blood."
This is also indicated by what it says in Su'aalaat al-Aajurri Aba Dawood al-Sijistaani (p. 201): Abu Dawood said: I heard Mus'ab al-Zubayri say: 'Abd-Allah ibn Yazeed al-Khatami was not a companion of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). He said: He is the one whose mother was killed by the blind man, he is the child who fell between her legs, (the woman) who reviled the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).
Source
Slavery in Islam is another day's topic but let me expose him. Get your facts straight Mr. Sina. I know you, like the other haters, are very quick at distorting the facts and trapping the ignorants but let me give you a history lesson: 1) There is dispute among Muslim scholars whether Mariyah al-Qibtiyyah (May Allah be pleased with her) was the mothers of believers, meaning she was his wife or his concubine. 2) Those scholars who say that she was his concubine agree on the fact she was given to him by the ruler of the Egypt. This is also indicated by what it says in Su'aalaat al-Aajurri Aba Dawood al-Sijistaani (p. 201): Abu Dawood said: I heard Mus'ab al-Zubayri say: 'Abd-Allah ibn Yazeed al-Khatami was not a companion of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). He said: He is the one whose mother was killed by the blind man, he is the child who fell between her legs, (the woman) who reviled the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).
Source
So here, readers can see your academic dishonesty. I would love to see your authentic source which says that she was the maid slave of our mother Hafsa (May Allah be pleased with her).
As already explained above, she broke the law and hence deserved the punishment. Actually, dealing with the insulting issue lightly in secular system leads to many worst results. For example, bullying children physically or verbally could make them commit suicide. I'm sure we can find examples of this here or there. I'm not implying that we kill them but only pointing the negative consequences of insulting.
First, there is no evidence for this. Second, if we assume that he was lying then he committed a grave sin and will get what he deserves on the day of judgement and the woman will receive the justice. Since there was no evidence against what the blind man said and the blind man himself confessed, it was dealt accordingly. If the death plenty would have been carried on him unjustly, who would have taken care of his children? Would you then have ranted about the "unjust" of Prophet Muhammad (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam)? How many times have you spoken or written against many judges in our times issuing unjust punishment against the supposedly criminals? First bring an evidence and then we can talk about it!
Again, she broke the covenant under which she was protected and thus dealt according to the law for breaking the law. Unless, someone thinks like one of Mr. Sina's fans: First, I ask this genius: How carrying out the punishment for a crime is an emotional fallacy? so yeh, according to this guy, we should just let people do whatever they want, but when it comes to Muslims or their Prophet (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), then do not hold back the ranting about injustice etc.
too bad for you Mr. Sina! As far concerning your last statement, you may want to brush up your basic of 'uloom-al hadith (science of hadith). I know it is too hard to comprehend but basics should be fine for a scholar like yourself. Now, for the benefits of the readers: Why can't a non-Muslim forge these stories and attribute to a trust worthy companion? This is the reason why we have the science of hadith in Islam to evaluate the authenticity of a narration.
First, Mr. Sina, one side you, over and over again, tell Muslims to leave their religion if they want to become humans. Other side, you say faith is a personal matter. So which one is it? Second, again, Mr. Sina, you are either displaying your lack of historical knowledge or committing academic dishonesty. Let me give you a history lesson: Did the Messenger of Allah (salla-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) kill or order to kill the people of Taif when they ordered the kids to torture him? Did he kill or order to kill the woman who used to throw garbage at him? Did he kill or order to kill the woman who insulted him when he was carrying her stuff (helping her)? The list is long but we'll end with these and leave the readers with something to think about.
Wallahu a'alim (and Allah knows best)
alhamdulillah, this concludes my critically analysis of part of his testimony. Mr. Sina several times displayed his ignorance, academic dishonesty and committed logical fallacy, appealing to emotions. All kinds of comments are welcome, just make sure that you don't break any of our rules.
http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/faithfreedom-wikiislam/ali-sina-left-islam-275#post674
Last edited:
