** THE MISCONCEPTIONS THREAD **(about Islam/Quran etc..)

[sirajstc]

WHY DON’T MUSLIMS IN INDIA FOLLOW THE ISLAMIC CRIMINAL LAW?



Question

When Muslims in India insist on having a separate Muslim Personal Law for themselves, why don’t they also insist on implementing the Islamic Criminal Law for the Muslims; for example implementing the rule that the robber’s hands should be chopped off if a Muslim robs?

Answer:



1. Muslim Personal Law
Personal Law is a law concerning an individual person and the persons closely related to him, e.g. laws relating to marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc. It includes laws which are mutually agreed upon by a group of people. This law does not include any crime or an act that will harm the society directly.

2. India is Secular And Democratic
In any country, the Personal Law may differ for different groups of people and for different communities. Since India is a secular and democratic country it allows different groups of people to follow their own personal law if they wish.

3. Islamic Personal Law is the Best
Muslims believe that compared to all the different types of personal laws available in the world, the best and the most result oriented is the Islamic Personal Law. Muslims of India prefer following the Muslim personal law also because of their own belief in Islam.

4. Criminal Law
Criminal law is that law which is associated with a crime or an act which directly affects the society e.g. robbing, raping, murdering, etc.

5. The Criminal Law should be the same for all people
In any country, the criminal law unlike the Personal Law cannot be different for different groups of people. It has to be same for all people of different groups and different religions e.g. In Islam if a person robs, his hands are chopped off. This punishment is not prescribed in Hinduism. If a Hindu robs a Muslim, what would be the robber’s punishment? The Muslim would want the hands of the robber to be chopped, while the Hindu Law would not agree.

6. The Muslims in India alone cannot separately follow the Islamic Criminal Law without involving the Non-Muslims
Even if a Muslim agrees, that as far as he commits a crime he should be given the punishment according to Islamic Criminal Law, it would not be practical. In case an allegation is made against a Muslim for robbery and if the witnesses are Non-Muslims, and if each one follows his own Criminal Law, the punishment in Islam for bearing false witness is 80 lashes, whereas in the Indian Crimial Law, a person giving false witness can easily escape. Thus, for a non-Muslim to falsely accuse a Muslim of any crime is very easy, if both follow their own criminal law. However, if both follow the Indian Law where the punishment is lenient for false witnesses and robbers, it will encourage both the robber to rob as well as encourage the witnesses to give false witness for their own benefit.

7. The Muslims in India would prefer the Islamic Criminal Law to be implemented on all Indians
We Muslims would prefer that in India the Islamic Criminal Law be implemented on all the Indians, since, chopping the hands of a thief will surely reduce the rate of robbery in India. Similarly, 80 lashes for giving false testimony will prevent a person from giving false witness.

8. Islamic Criminal Law is Most Practical
Islam besides pointing out a crime, it also gives you a solution showing how to prevent the crime e.g. chopping the hands of a robber, death penalty for the rapist. The punishment is so severe that it is a deterrent for the criminal to commit the crime. He will think a hundred times before committing a crime.

Thus if crime has to be reduced or stopped in India the best solution is to implement ‘The Common Islamic Criminal Law’.

ARE RAM AND KRISHNA PROPHETS OF GOD?


Question:

If according to Islam, messengers or prophets were sent to each and every nation of the world, then which prophet was sent to India? Can we consider Ram and Krishna to be messengers of God?

Answer:



1. Prophets sent to every nation

a. The Glorious Qur’an mentions in Surah Fatir, chapter 35 verse 24

". . . And there never was a people, without a warner
having lived among them (in the past)."
[Al-Qur’an 35:24]

b. A similar message is repeated in Surah Rad, chapter 13 verse 7

". . . and to every people a guide."
[Al-Qur’an 13:7]

2. Stories only of some prophets narrated in the Qur’an

a. Allah (swt) says in Surah Nisa, chapter 4 verse 164

"Of some messengers We have already told thee the story; of others we have not."
[Al-Qur’an 4:164]

b. A similar message is repeated in Surah Ghafir chapter 40 verse 78

"We did aforetime send messengers before thee: of them there are some whose story We have related to thee, and some whose story We have not related to thee. . ."
[Al’Qur’an 40:78]

3. 25 Prophets of God are mentioned by name in the Qur’an
By name, only 25 Prophets of God are mentioned in the Qur’an e.g. Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammed (pbut)

4. More than 1,24,000 prophets of God
According to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), there were more than 1,24,000 prophets sent to this world.

5. All previous prophets sent only for their people
All the prophets that came before Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) were only sent for their own people and were to be followed only for a particular period of time.

Surah Ali Imran, chapter 3 verse 49

"And (appoint him) a messenger to the Children of Israel, . . ."
[Al-Qur’an 3:49]

6. Muhammad (pbuh), the last messenger of God
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the last and final messenger of Almighty God. It is mentioned in

Surah Ahzab, chapter 33 verse 40

"Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things."
[Al-Qur’an 33:40]

7. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), sent for whole Humankind

Since Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the last and final messenger, he was not sent only for the Muslims or the Arabs, but he was sent for the whole of humankind.

a. It is mentioned in

Surah Anbiya, chapter 21 verse 107

"We sent thee not, but as a mercy for all creatures."
[Al’Qur’an 21:107]

b. A similar message is repeated in

Surah Saba, chapter 34 verse 28

"We have not sent thee but as a universal (Messenger) to men, giving them glad tidings, and warning them (against sin), but most men understand not."
[Al Qur’an 34:28]

c. It is mentioned in

Sahih Bukhari, volume 1, Book of Salaah, chapter 56 hadith no. 429

Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah: Allah’s Messenger said,

"Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind."

8. Which prophet was sent to India?
Regarding the question of which prophet of God was sent to India, and can we consider Ram or Krishna to be prophets of God, there is no text in the Qur’an or Sahih Hadith mentioning the name of the prophet that was sent to India. Since the names of Ram and Krishna are nowhere to be found in the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith, one cannot say for sure whether they were prophets of God or not. Some Muslims, especially certain Muslim politicians who try to appease the Hindus, say Ram Alai-his-salaam, i.e. Ram, may peace be on him. This is totally wrong, since there is no authentic proof from the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith that he was a prophet of God. However, a person may say that perhaps they may have been the prophets of God.

9. Even if Ram and Krishna were prophets, today we have to follow the last Prophet of God i.e. Muhammad (pbuh)
Even if Ram and Krishna were prophets of God, they were only meant for people of that time and were to be followed only for that particular period of time. Today, all the human beings throughout the world, including India should only follow the last and final prophet and Messenger of God – prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

 

[sirajstc]

ARE THE VEDAS A REVELATION OF GOD?



Question:

If Allah has sent His books and revelations in every period, then which revelation was sent to India? Can we consider the Vedas and other Hindu scriptures to be the word of God?

Answer:



1. Revelation sent in every period
The Glorious Qur’an mentions in Surah Rad, chapter 13 verse 38

"For each period is a book (revealed)."
[Al-Qur’an 13:38]

2. Four revelations of God mentioned by name in Qur’an

By name, only four revelations of God are mentioned in the Qur’an i.e. Torah, Zaboor, Injeel and the Qur’an
Torah is the revelation which was given to Moses (pbuh)

Zaboor is the revelation which was given to David (pbuh)

Injeel is the revelation which was given to Jesus (pbuh)

and Qur’an is the last and final revelation which was given to the last and final Messenger Muhammad (pbuh).

3. All the previous revelations sent only for their people
All the revelations that came before Qur’an were only sent for their own people and were to be followed only for a particular time period.

4. The Qur’an sent for whole humankind
Since the Qur’an is the last and final revelation, it was not sent only for the Muslims or the Arabs but it was sent for the whole of humankind. It is mentioned in:

a. Surah Ibrahim, chapter 14 verse 1

"Alif Lam Ra. A book which We have revealed unto thee, in order that thou mightest lead mankind out of the depths of darkness into light . . ."
[Al-Qur’an 14:1]

b. A similar message is repeated in Surah Ibrahim chapter 14 verse 52

"Here is a Message for mankind: let them take warning therefrom, and let them know that He is (no other than) One God: let men of understanding take heed."
[Al-Qur’an 14:52]

c. Qur’an mentions in Surah Baqarah chapter 2 verse 185

"Ramadan is the (month) in which was sent down the Qur’an, as a guide to mankind, also clear (Signs) for guidance and judgement (between right and wrong)."
[Al-Qur’an 2:185]

d. A similar message is repeated in Surah Zumur chapter 39 verse 41

"Verily We have revealed the Book to thee in Truth, for (instructing) mankind."
[Al-Qur’an 39:41]

5. Which revelation sent to India?
The question that arises is "which revelation of God was sent to India and whether we can consider the Vedas and the other Hindu Scriptures to be the revelations of God?" There is no text in the Qur’an or Sahih Hadith mentioning the name of the revelation that was sent to India. Since the names of the Vedas or other Hindu scriptures are no where to be found in Qur’an and Sahih Hadith, one cannot say for sure that they were the revelations of God. They may be the revelation of God or may not be the revelation of God.

6. Even if the Veda was the word of God today you have to follow the Qur’an
Even if the Vedas and the other scriptures were the revelations from God, they were only meant for people of that time and were to be followed only for that particular period of time. Today all human beings through out the world including India should only follow the last and final Revelation of God, i.e. the Qur’an. Moreover since all the previous revelations were not meant to be followed for eternity, Almighty God did not preserve them in their original form. There is not a single religious scripture of any of the major religions which claims to be the word of God and has maintained its pure original text and is free from alteration, adulteration and interpolation. Since the Glorious Qur’an is to be followed for eternity, Allah (swt) has taken upon Himself to maintain its original purity and guard it from corruption. Allah says in Glorious Qur’an.

Surah Hijr chapter 15 verse 9

"We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption)."
[Al-Qur’an 15:9]

QUR’AN PLAGIARIZED FROM THE BIBLE :


Question

Is it not true that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) has copied the Qur’an from the Bible?

Answer

Many critics allege that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) himself was not the author of the Qur’an but he learnt it and/or plagiarised (copied or adapted) it from other human sources or from previous scriptures or revelations.

1. MUHUMMAD LEARNT THE QUR’AN FROM A ROMAN BLACKSMITH WHO WAS A CHRISTIAN

Some Pagans accused the Prophet of learning the Qur’an from a Roman Blacksmith, who was a Christian staying at the outskirts of Makkah. The Prophet very often used to go and watch him do his work. A revelation of the Qur’an was sufficient to dismiss this charge - the Qur’an says in Surah An-Nahl chapter 16 verse 103:

"We know indeed that they say, ‘It is a man that teaches him,’ The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear."
[Al-Qur’an 16:103]

How could a person whose mother tongue was foreign and could hardly speak little but of poor broken Arabic be the source of the Qur’an which is pure, eloquent, fine Arabic? To believe that the blacksmith taught the Prophet the Qur’an is some what similar to believing that a Chinese immigrant to England, who did not know proper English, taught Shakespeare.

 

[sirajstc]

MUHUMMAD (PBUH) LEARNT FROM WARAQA - THE RELATIVE OF KHADIJAH (RA)


Muhummad’s (pbuh) contacts with the Jewish and Christian Scholars were very limited. The most prominent Christian known to him was an old blind man called Waraqa ibn-Naufal who was a relative of the Prophet’s first wife Khadijah (r.a.). Although of Arab descent, he was a convert to Christianity and was very well versed with the New Testament. The Prophet only met him twice, first when Waraqa was worshipping at the Kaaba (before the Prophetic Mission) and he kissed the Prophet’s forehead affectionately; the second occasion was when the Prophet went to meet Waraqa after receiving the first revelation. Waraqa died three years later and the revelation continued for about 23 years. It is ridiculous to assume that Waraqa was the source of the contents of the Qur’an.

PROPHET’S RELIGIOUS DISCUSSIONS WITH THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS


It is true that the Prophet did have religious discussions with the Jews and Christians but they took place in Madinah more than 13 years after the revelation of the Qur’an had started. The allegation that these Jews and Christians were the source is perverse, since in these discussions Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was performing the roles of a teacher and of a preacher while inviting them to embrace Islam and pointing out that they had deviated from their true teachings of Monotheism. Several of these Jews and Christians later embraced Islam.
\THE PROPHET LEARNT THE QUR’AN FROM THOSE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS THAT HE MET OUTSIDE ARABIA


All historical records available show that Muhummad (pbuh) had made only three trips outside Makkah before his Prophethood:

1.

At the age of 9 he accompanied his mother to Madinah.
2.

Between the age of 9 and 12, he accompanied his uncle Abu-Talib on a business trip to Syria.
3.

At the age of 25 he led Khadija’s Caravan to Syria.

It is highly imaginary to assume that the Qur’an resulted from the occasional chats and meetings with the Christians or Jews from any of the above three trips.

 

[sirajstc]

5. LOGICAL GROUNDS TO PROVE THAT THE PROPHET DID NOT LEARN THE QUR’AN FROM JEWS OR CHRISTIANS

1. The day-to-day life of the Prophet was an open book for all to see. In fact a revelation came asking people to give the Prophet (pbuh) privacy in his own home. If the Prophet had been meeting people who told him what to say as a revelation from God, this would not have been hidden for very long.
2. The extremely prominent Quraish nobles who followed the Prophet and accepted Islam were wise and intelligent men who would have easily noticed anything suspicious about the way in which the Prophet brought the revelations to them - more so since the Prophetic mission lasted 23 years.
3. The enemies of the Prophet kept a close watch on him in order to find proof for their claim that he was a liar - they could not point out even a single instance when the Prophet may have had a secret rendezvous with particular Jews and Christians.
4. It is inconceivable that any human author of the Qur’an would have accepted a situation in which he received no credit whatsoever for originating the Qur’an.

Thus, historically and logically it cannot be established that there was a human source for the Qur’an.

6. MUHUMMAD (PBUH) WAS AN ILLITERATE

The theory that Muhummad (pbuh) authored the Qur’an or copied from other sources can be disproved by the single historical fact that he was illiterate.

Allah testifies Himself in the Qur’an
In Surah Al-Ankabut chapter no.29 verse 48

"And thou was not (able) to recite a Book before this (Book came), nor art thou (able) to transcribe it with thy right hand: in that case, indeed, would the talkers of vanities have doubted."
[Al-Qur’an 29:48]

Allah (swt) knew that many would doubt the authenticity of the Qur’an and would ascribe it to Prophet Muhummad (pbuh). Therefore Allah in His Divine Wisdom chose the last and final Messenger to be an ‘Ummi’, i.e. unlettered, so that the talkers of vanity would not then have the slightest justification to doubt the Prophet. The accusation of his enemies that he had copied the Qur’an from other sources and rehashed it all in a beautiful language might have carried some weight, but even this flimsy pretence has been deprived to the unbeliever and the cynic.

Allah reconfirms in the Qur’an in Surah Al A’raf chapter 7 verse 157:

"Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures) in the Law and the Gospel"

The prophecy of coming of the unlettered Prophet (pbuh) is also mentioned in the Bible in the book of Isaiah chapter 29 verse 12.

"And the book is delivered to him that is not learned."
[Isaiah 29:12]

The Qur’an testifies in no less than four different places that the Prophet (pbuh) was illiterate. It is also mentioned in Surah A’raf chapter 7 verse 158 and in Surah Al-Jumu’a chapter 62 verse 2.

7. ARABIC VERSION OF THE BIBLE WAS NOT PRESENT

The Arabic version of the Bible was not present at the time of Prophet Muhummad (pbuh). The earliest Arabic version of the Old Testament is that of R. Saadias Gaon of 900 C.E. - more than 250 years after the death of our beloved Prophet. The oldest Arabic version of the new Testament was published by Erpenius in 1616 C.E. - about a thousand years after the demise of our Prophet.

8. SIMILARITIES IN THE QUR’AN AND THE BIBLE DUE TO COMMON SOURCE

Similarities between the Qur’an and the Bible does not necessarily mean that the former has been copied from the latter. In fact it gives evidence that both of them are based on a common third source; all divine revelations came from the same source - the one universal God. No matter what human changes were introduced into some of these Judeo-Christian and other older religious scriptures that had distorted their originality, there are some areas that have remained free from distortion and thus are common to many religions.

It is true that there are some similar parallels between the Qur’an and the Bible but this is not sufficient to accuse Muhummad (pbuh) of compiling or copying from the Bible. The same logic would then also be applicable to teachings of Christianity and Judaism and thus one could wrongly claim that Jesus (pbuh) was not a genuine Prophet (God forbid) and that he simply copied from the Old Testament.

The similarities between the two signify a common source that is one true God and the continuation of the basic message of monotheism and not that the later prophets have plagiarised from the previous prophets.

If someone copies during an examination he will surely not write in the answer sheet that he has copied from his neighbour or Mr. XYZ. Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) gave due respect and credit to all the previous prophets (pbut). The Qur’an also mentions the various revelations given by Almighty God to different prophets.

9. MUSLIMS BELIEVE IN THE TAURAH, ZABOOR, INJEEL AND QUR’AN

Four revelations of Allah (swt) are mentioned by name in the Qur’an: the Taurah, the Zaboor, the Injeel and the Qur’an.

Taurah, the revelation i.e. the Wahi given to Moosa (a. s.) i.e. Moses (pbuh).
Zaboor, the revelation i.e. the Wahi given to Dawood (a.s.) i.e. David (pbuh).
Injeel, the revelation i.e. the Wahi given to Isa (A.S.) ie. Jesus (pbuh).
‘Al-Qur’an’, the last and final Wahi i.e. revelation given to the last and final Messenger Muhammad (pbuh).

It is an article of faith for every Muslim to believe in all the Prophets of God and all revelations of God. However, the present day Bible has the first five books of the Old Testament attributed to Moses and the Psalms attributed to David. Moreover the New Testament or the four Gospels of the New Testament are not the Taurah, the Zaboor or the Injeel, which the Qur’an refers to. These books of the present day Bible may partly contain the word of God but these books are certainly not the exact, accurate and complete revelations given to the prophets.

The Qur’an presents all the different prophets of Allah as belonging to one single brotherhood; all had a similar prophetic mission and the same basic message. Because of this, the fundamental teachings of the major faiths cannot be contradictory, even if there has been a considerable passage of time between the different prophetic missions, because the source of these missions was one: Almighty God, Allah. This is why the Qur’an says that the differences which exist between various religions are not the responsibility of the prophets, but of the followers of these prophets who forgot part of what they had been taught, and furthermore, misinterpreted and changed the scriptures. The Qur’an cannot therefore be seen as a scripture which competes with the teachings of Moses, Jesus and the other prophets. On the contrary, it confirms, completes and perfects the messages that they brought to their people.

Another name for the Qur’an is the ‘The Furqan’ which means the criteria to judge the right from the wrong, and it is on the basis of the Qur’an that we can decipher which part of the previous scriptures can be considered to be the word of God.

10. SCIENTIFIC COMPARISON BETWEEN QUR’AN AND BIBLE

If you glance through the Bible and the Qur’an you may find several points which appear to be exactly the same in both of them, but when you analyse them closely, you realise that there is a difference of ‘chalk and cheese’ between them. Only based on historical details it is difficult for someone who is neither conversant with Christianity or Islam to come to a firm decision as to which of the scriptures is true; however if you verify the relevant passages of both the scriptures against scientific knowledge, you will yourself realize the truth.

1.

Creation of the Universe in Six Days
As per the Bible, in the first book of Genesis in Chapter One, the universe was created in six days and each day is defined as a twenty-four hours period. Even though the Qur’an mentions that the universe was created in six ‘Ayyaams’, ‘Ayyaam’ is the plural of years; this word has two meanings: firstly, it means a standard twenty-four hours period i.e. a day, and secondly, it also means stage, period or epoch which is a very long period of time.

When the Qur’an mentions that the universe was created in six ‘Ayyaams’, it refers to the creation of the heavens and the earth in six long periods or epochs; scientists have no objection to this statement. The creation of the universe has taken billions of years, which proves false or contradicts the concept of the Bible which states that the creation of the Universe took six days of twenty-four hour durations each.
2.

Sun Created After the Day
The Bible says in chapter 1, verses 3-5, of Genesis that the phenomenon of day and night was created on the first day of creation of the Universe by God. The light circulating in the universe is the result of a complex reaction in the stars; these stars were created according to the Bible (Genesis chapter 1 verse 14 to 19) on the fourth day. It is illogical to mention the result that is the light (the phenomenon of day and night) was created on the first day of Creation when the cause or source of the light was created three days later. Moreover the existence of evening and morning as elements of a single day is only conceivable after the creation of the earth and its rotation around the sun. In contrast with the contents of the Bible on this issue, the Qur’an does not give any unscientific sequence of Creation. Hence it is absolutely absurd to say that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) copied the passages pertaining to the creation of the universe from the Bible but missed out this illogical and fantastic sequence of the Bible.
3.

Creation of the Sun, The Earth and the Moon
According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 9 to 13, the earth was created on the third day, and as per verses 14 to 19, the sun and the moon were created on the fourth day. The earth and the moon emanated, as we know, from their original star, the Sun. Hence to place the creation of the sun and the moon after the creation of the earth is contrary to the established idea about the formation of the solar system.
4.

Vegetation Created on the third day and Sun on the fourth day
According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 11-13, vegetation was created on the third day along with seed-bearing grasses, plants and trees; and further on as per verses 14-19, the sun was created on the fourth day. How is it scientifically possible for the vegetation to have appeared without the presence of the sun, as has been stated in the Bible?

If Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) was indeed the author of the Qur’an and had copied its contents from the Bible, how did he manage to avoid the factual errors that the Bible contains? The Qur’an does not contain any statements which are incompatible with scientific facts.
5.

The Sun and the Moon both Emit light
According to the Bible both the sun and the moon emit their own light. In the Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verse 16 says, "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night".

Science tells us today that the moon does not have its own light. This confirms the Qur’anic concept that the light of the moon is a reflected light. To think that 1400 years ago, Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) corrected these scientific errors in the Bible and then copied such corrected passages in the Qur’an is to think of something impossible.

 

[sirajstc]

11. ADAM (PBUH), THE FIRST MAN ON EARTH, LIVED 5,800 YEARS AGO

As per the genealogy of Jesus Christ given in the Bible, from Jesus through Abraham (pbuh) to the first man on earth i.e. Adam (pbuh), Adam appeared on the earth approximately 5800 years ago:

1. 1948 years between Adam (pbuh) and Abraham (pbuh)
2. Approximately 1800 years between Abraham (pbuh) and Jesus (pbuh)
3. 2000 years from Jesus (pbuh) till today

These figures are further confused by the fact that the Jewish calendar is currently on or about 5800 years old.

There is sufficient evidence from archaeological and anthropological sources to suggest that the first human being on earth was present tens of thousands of years ago and not merely 5,800 years ago as is suggested by the Bible.
The Qur’an too speaks about Adam (pbuh) as the first man on earth but it does not suggest any date or period of his life on earth, unlike the Bible - what the Bible says in this regard is totally incompatible with science.

12. NOAH (PBUH) AND THE FLOOD

The Biblical description of the flood in Genesis chapter 6, 7 and 8 indicates that the deluge was universal and it destroyed every living thing on earth, except those present with Noah (pbuh) in the ark. The description suggests that the event took place 1656 years after the creation of Adam (pbuh) or 292 years before the birth of Abraham, at a time when Noah (pbuh) was 600 years old. Thus the flood may have occurred in the 21st or 22nd Century B.C.

This story of the flood, as given in the Bible, contradicts scientific evidence from archaelogical sources which indicate that the eleventh dynasty in Egypt and the third dynasty in Babylonia were in existence without any break in civilisation and in a manner totally unaffected by any major calamity which may have occurred in the 21st century B.C. This contradicts the Biblical story that the whole world had been immersed in the flood water. In contrast to this, the Qur’anic presentation of the story of Noah and the flood does not conflict with scientific evidence or archaeological data; firstly, the Qur’an does not indicate any specific date or year of the occurance of that event, and secondly, according to the Qur’an the flood was not a universal phenomenon which destroyed complete life on earth. In fact the Qur’an specifically mentions that the flood was a localised event only involving the people of Noah.

It is illogical to assume that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) had borrowed the story of the flood from the Bible and corrected the mistakes before mentioning it in the Qur’an.

13. MOSES (PBUH) AND PHARAOH OF THE EXODUS

The story of Moses (pbuh) and the Pharaoh of the Exodus are very much identical in the Qur’an and the Bible. Both scriptures agree that the Pharaoh drowned when he tried to pursue Moses (pbuh) and led the Israelites across a stretch of water that they crossed. The Qur’an gives an additional piece of information in Surah Yunus chapter 10 verse 92:

"This day shall We save thee in thy body, that thou mayest be a sign to those who come after thee! But verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Signs!"
[Al-Qur’an 10:92]

Dr. Maurice Bucaille, after a thorough research proved that although Rameses II was known to have persecuted the Israelites as per the Bible, he actually died while Moses (pbuh) was taking refuge in Median. Rameses II’s son Merneptah who succeeded him as Pharaoh drowned during the exodus. In 1898, the mummified body of Merneptah was found in the valley of Kings in Egypt. In 1975, Dr. Maurice Bucaille with other doctors received permission to examine the Mummy of Merneptah, the findings of which proved that Merneptah probably died from drowning or a violent shock which immediately preceeded the moment of drowning. Thus the Qur’anic verse that we shall save his body as a sign, has been fulfilled by the Pharaohs’ body being kept at the Royal Mummies room in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.

This verse of the Qur’an compelled Dr. Maurice Bucaille, who was a Christian then, to study the Qur’an. He later wrote a book ‘The Bible, the Qur’an and Science’, and confessed that the author of the Qur’an can be no one else besides God Himself. Thus he embraced Islam.

14. QUR’AN IS A BOOK FROM ALLAH

These evidences are sufficient to conclude that the Qur’an was not copied from the Bible, but that the Qur’an is the Furqaan - ‘the Criteria’ to judge right from wrong and it should be used to decipher which portion of the Bible may be considered as the Word of God.

The Qur’an itself testifies in Surah Sajda chapter 32 verse 1 to 3

Alif Laam Meem.

(This is) the revelation of the Book in which there is no doubt – from the Lord of the Worlds.

Or do they say, ‘He has forged it’? Nay, it is the Truth from thy Lord, that thou mayest admonish a people to whom no warner has come before thee: in order that they may receive guidance."
[Al-Qur’an 32:1-3]

 

[sirajstc]

7. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MARY AND MIRIAM

Question

It is mentioned in your Qur’an that Mary was the sister of Aaron (pbuh). Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who wrote the Qur’an did not know the difference between Miriam the sister of Aaron (pbuh) and Mary the Mother of Jesus (pbuh), the time span between both of them was about a thousand years.

Answer

1. IN THE SEMITIC LANGUAGES SISTER ALSO MEANS DESCENDANT

The Qur’an mentions in Surah Maryam, Chapter 19 verses 27-28

"At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: ‘O Mary! Truly an amazing thing hast thou brought!

O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!’"
[Al-Qur’an 19:27-28]

Christian missionaries say that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did not know the difference between Mary the mother of Jesus (pbuh) and Miriam the sister of Aaron (pbuh). The time span between both was more than a thousand years.

In the Arabic construction of the sentence, sister is also considered as a descendant. Thus, when the people said to Mary, Ukhta Haroon i.e. ‘sister of Aaron’ it actually means descendant of Aaron (pbuh).

2. SON ALSO MEANS DESCENDANT

It is mentioned in the Gospel of Mathew, Chapter 1 verse 1

"Jesus Christ, the son of David,....".
[Mathew 1:1]

Gospel of Luke Chapter 3, verse 23

"And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, ....."
[Luke 3:23]

DID JESUS (PBUH) HAVE TWO FATHERS?

What do you call a person who has two fathers? The explanation of the phrase that Jesus (pbuh) was the son of David (pbuh), is that Jesus (pbuh) was a descendant of David (pbuh). ‘Son’, here means a descendant.



8. JESUS (PBUH) DID NOT DIE

Question

Is it not true that your Qur’an mentions in Surah Maryam, Chapter 19 verse 33 that Jesus (pbuh) died and was resurrected?

Answer

JESUS (PBUH) SAID, "THE DAY THAT I DIE", NOT "THE DAY THAT I DIED"

It is mentioned in Surah Maryam, Chapter 19 verse 33

"So Peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die and the Day that I shall be raised up to life (again)".
[Al-Qur’an 19:33]

The Qur’an mentions that Jesus (pbuh) said "Peace is on me the Day I was born, the day that I die". It is not stated "the day that I died". It is in the future tense and not in the past tense.

1. JESUS (PBUH) WAS RAISED UP ALIVE

The Qur’an further says in Surah Nisa, Chapter 4 verse 157-158:

"That they said (in boast), ‘We killed Jesus Christ the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah’ – But they killed him not, Nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not –

Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is exalted in Power, Wise."
[Al-Qur’an 4:157-158]

9. JESUS IS "A WORD" OF ALLAH AND A "SPIRIT" FROM ALLAH

Question

Does not your Qur’an mention that Jesus is Kalimatullah –"The Word of Allah (swt)", as well as Ruhullah – "The Spirit of Allah", indicating his Divinity?

Answer
1. JESUS (PBUH) "IS A WORD FROM ALLAH" NOT "THE WORD OF ALLAH"

The Qur’an mentions in Surah Ali ‘Imran Chapter 3 verse 45

"Behold! The angels said: O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus. The son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those Nearest to Allah.
[Al-Qur’an 3:45]

Jesus (pbuh) is referred in the Qur’an as a word from Allah and not as ‘the word of Allah’.

"A word" of Allah means a message of Allah. If a person is referred to as "a word" from Allah, it means that he is a Messenger or a Prophet of Allah.

2. THE TITLE OF A PROPHET (PBUH) DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT EXCLUSIVELY BELONGS TO THAT PROPHET (PBUH)

Different titles are given to different prophets (pbut). Whenever a title is given to a prophet (pbuh), it does not necessarily mean that the other prophets do not have the same characteristic or quality. For e.g. Prophet Abraham (pbuh) is referred to in the Qur’an as Khaleelullah, a friend of Allah. This does not indicate that all the other Prophets (pbuh) were not the friends of Allah. Prophet Moses (pbuh) is referred to in the Qur’an as Kaleemullah, indicating that God spoke to him. This does not mean that God did not speak to others. Similarly when Jesus (pbuh) is referred to in the Qur’an as Kalimatullah, "a word from Allah", it does not mean that the other Prophets were not "the word," of Allah.

3. JOHN THE BAPTIST (PBUH) IS ALSO CALLED "A WORD" OF ALLAH

Yahya (pbuh) i.e. John the Baptist (pbuh) is also referred to in the Qur’an as Kalimatullah i.e. a word of Allah in Surah Ali ‘Imran, Chapter 3, verses 38-39

"There did Zakariya Pray to his Lord, saying: "O my Lord! Grant unto me from Thee a progeny that is pure: for Thou art He that heareth prayer!

While he was standing in prayer in the chamber, the angels called unto him: "Allah doth give thee glad tidings of Yahya, witnessing the truth of a Word from Allah, and (be besides) noble, chaste, and a Prophet – of the (goodly) company of the righteous."
[Al-Qur’an 3:39]

4. JESUS (PBUH) REFERRED AS RUHULLAH – A SPIRIT OF ALLAH

Jesus (pbuh) also never referred to as Ruhullah "a spirit of Allah" but as a spirit from Allah in Surah Nisa Chapter 4 verse 171

"O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Jesus Christ the son of Mary was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah, And His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not ‘Trinity’: desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is One God: glory be to Him: (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs."
[Al-Qur’an 4:171]

5. SPIRIT OF ALLAH IS BREATHED IN EVERY HUMAN BEING

A spirit from Allah does not indicate that Jesus (pbuh) is God. The Qur’an mentions in several places that Allah breathed into the human beings "His Spirit" in Surah Al-Hijr, chapter 15 verse 29 in Surah Sajdah, chapter 32 verse 9

Surah Al Hijr Chapter 15 verse 29

"When I have fashioned him (in due proportion) and breathed into him of My spirit, fall ye down in obeisance unto him."
[Al-Qur’an 15:29]

Surah Sajdah Chapter 32 verse 9

"But He fashioned him in due proportion, and breathed into him something of His spirit. And He gave you (the faculties of) hearing and sight and feeling (and understanding): little thanks do ye give!"
[Al-Qur’an 32:9]


10. IS NOT THE QUR’AN WRITTEN BY SATAN?

Question

The Qur’an is not the Word of God but on the contrary the handiwork of Satan.

Answer

In reply to a similar allegation put forward by the pagans of Makkah, that the prophet (pbuh) received the revelations from Satan, the following verses were revealed:

Surah Waqiah, chapter 56 verses 77-80

"That this is indeed
A Qur’an most honourable,

In a Book well-guarded,

Which none shall touch
But those who are clean:

A Revelation from the Lord
Of the Worlds."

Kitabim Maknoon means a book well guarded or a protected book, referring to Lauh-e-Mahfooz in the heaven, which none shall touch except the Mutahhareen. i.e. those who do not have any uncleanliness or impurity or evil like sin. This refers to the angels. The satan is absolutely prohobited.

Thus since it is impossible for satan to come anywhere close to it or touch it, the question of him writing the verses of the Glorious Qur’an does not arise.

It is further mentioned in Surah Shura, chapter 26 verse 210-212

"No evil ones have brought
Down this (Revelation):

It would neither suit them
Nor would they be able (To produce it).

Indeed they have been removed
Far from even (a chance of)
Hearing it."

Many people have a wrong concept of satan. They think that satan can probably do everything, except a couple of things that God can do. According to them, satan is slightly below God in power. Since the people do not want to accept that the Qur’an is a miraculous revelation, they say that it is satan’s handiwork.

1.

If satan would have written the Qur’an, he would not have mentioned in the same Qur’an in Surah Nahl, chapter 16 verse no. 98

"When thou does read
The Qur’an, seek Allah’s protection from Satan the Rejected One."

Is this how you feel satan would write a book? Does he tell you; "Before you read my book ask God to save you from me?"


2.

There are several verses in the Qur’an which will give enough evidence that satan is not the author of the Qur’an.

In Surah Al Aaraf chapter 7 verse 200

"If a suggestion from Satan assail your (mind),
seek refuge with Allah; for He hears and knows
(all things).

Why would satan tell his followers, that whenever he gives any suggestions to them, they should seek refuge in Allah (swt) to whom he is an avowed enemy.


3.

In Surah Baqarah, chapter 2 verse 168

"O ye people!
Eat of what is on earth, lawful and good;
and do not follow the footsteps of the Evil one,
For he is to you an avowed enemy."


4.

In Surah Yasin, chapter 36 verse 60

"Did I not enjoin on you,
O ye children of Adam,
that ye should not worship Satan;

for that he was to you an enemy avowed?"

Satan is intelligent, no wonder that he can put this idea into the minds of people that he himself wrote the Qur’an. Compared to Almighty God, Satan is insignificant, and Allah (swt) is far more intelligent. He knows satan’s evil intentions and hence no wonder that He has given the reader of the Qur’an several proofs to show that Qur’an is God’s word, and not satan’s word.

The Bible mentions in the Gospel of Mark, chapter 3, verses 24-26

"And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that
kingdom cannot stand."

"And if a house be divided against itself,
that house cannot stand."

"And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end."

 

[sirajstc]

10 Reasons why Jesus is not God!

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showpost.php?p=195436&postcount=77

 

[sirajstc]

Christianity is NOT a way of Life, But Islam is


Recently Pope Benedict came out warning drug dealers, telling them God will hold them to account and will punish them. Off course such a statement is nice, but this statement shows how weak Christianity is. Christianity holds absolutely no rules or regulations concerning sex, adultery, alcohol, and drug dealing. All The New Testament says is that such things are evil and if someone would commit such evils would be guilty of sin. However so this is no practical at all, simply saying such things are sins is not good enough, there must also be a rule stipulating a punishment for such acts, and Christianity offers non, basically in Christianity you can commit sins at free will with no consequences in this life, and this produces a backward immoral corrupt society, for proof of that just look at the west today.



This is very much on a different level than Islam, where in Islam not only are such acts condemned, but such acts are also punished in this life, the sinner is not simply let off the hook to go on carrying his sin, and then one day he goes to Church and acts like everything is okay. It is like parents and their kids, a parent disciplines his child when he does wrong, this will teach the kid to not do it anymore, and it will make the child think twice before he does something wrong. If a parent takes no action, and simply tells his child that what he's doing is wrong the child will simply carry on doing what he is doing! And this is what Christianity is, no punishments, no discipline, hence this leaves society bankrupt!



This in itself is enough to disprove Christianity; this in itself is enough to prove that Christianity a religion made up by man, for man! How convenient, Paul made a religion which has no legal rulings, no punishments, no nothing, you can basically do as you please, oh yes you will only get a sin for being bad, but hey just repent to Jesus one day and its all good!


(And indeed Allah Knows Best!)

 

[sirajstc]

Surah 9:29 Discussed

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day



Opponents of Islam claim that Islam is not a religion of peace, that it is in fact a religion of violence, terrorism, and a faith that advocates wars against those who do not believe in this religion. One of the most common text they bring up to support their claim is that of Surah 9:29 (Surah Taubah). They claim this verse advocates violence, and war, against all those who do not believe in Islam, hence they conclude that Islam is an intolerant religion. Before refuting their claims, and their gross ignorance, let us first quote this passage:



YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.



PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.



SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.


To begin with, let us expose the Christian double standard, why do they firstly assume that fight has to completely mean physical only? Fighting those who do not believe in Islam can done in many other forms other than a physical fight or conflict, fighting someone can be done with the tongue, you refute and crush the persons lies, and you preach the truth to them until they repent of their ways and come to the truth. There is not a single objection any Christian or other can bring against this point, because they have deceptively interpreted this verse to mean physical altercation only, in fact what will Christians say to this verse from their Bible:

Mat 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword

Christians will interpret this verse saying that sword doesn't actually mean a physical sword, rather it is metaphorical language referring to the tongue, that by the tongue Christians shall spread the truth and crush the lies that have been propagated by satan. Therefore I must ask why don't Christians leave this interpretation open to the Quran as well? Why do they immediately assume that Surah 9:29 must ONLY refer to physical altercation? If a Christian objects to my claim that Surah 9:29 can also mean fighting unbelievers by the tongue, then it also throws out their own interpretation of Matthew 10:34 which means they no longer have any argument! So it is up to the Christian, if they want to argue honestly, or if they want to argue deceptively using double standards in interpretation.

Now let us examine the historical context of this verse, since Christians never want to take anything into context, they just quote and scream victory. We shall quote Maududi's excellent commentary of the verse's background and context:

more

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showpost.php?p=195443&postcount=79

 

[sirajstc]

CONTINUED...^^


So as you can see, it was a direct act of war by the neighbouring Christians that resulted with this verse, they killed innocent Muslim messengers who were simply passing a letter from the prophet Muhammad to them, and back then it was an international ruling and law that simple messengers carrying messages to other rulers would not be targeted or killed.

Secondly, during the war, Caesar killed an Arab commander for the Roman empire Favrah for converting to Islam, he was given an ultimatum to either leave Islam or die, he choose Islam and hence was martyred, this act shows the Romans evil hatred towards the Muslim nation that they would kill you for being Muslim!

So what do our Christian friends expect? Do they expect the Muslims to simply sit down and let this happen? God revealed this verse so that the Muslims could defend themselves against the onslaught of one of the worlds greatest empire at the time which were the Romans, Allah gave the Muslims permission to attack them, as they say, the best defence is an offence. The Muslims were forced to act, the Muslims did not start the war, the Christians did, and they lost, the Muslims managed to take control of several areas which were held by the Romans, and these new captured lands were now part of the Islamic state and the inhabitants would have to pay the jizyah. If Christians have a problem with this, then they should have never started the war with the Muslims, as they say, don't start something you cant finnish, Muslims are not mere European Pagans who Christians could pick on, the Muslims had God on their side so the Christians picked on the wrong people to make war with.

Saifur Rahman al-Mubarakpuri in his work of Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum
(THE SEALED NECTAR) Memoirs of the Noble Prophet [pbuh] writes:

The invasion and the conquest of Makkah was considered a decisive one between the truth and the error. As a result of which, the Arabs had no more doubt in Muhammad's mission. Thus we see that things went contrary to the pagans' expectations. People started to embrace Islam, the religion of All⨬ in great numbers. This is manifested clearly in the chapter ? The delegations, of this book. It can also be deduced out of the enormous number of people who shared in the Hajjatul-Wad⦣145; (Farewell Pilgrimage). All domestic troubles came to an end. Muslims, eventually felt at ease and started setting up the teachings of All⨦#146;s Laws and intensifying the Call to Islam.




The underlying Reasons


The Byzantine power, which was considered the greatest military force on earth at that time, showed an unjustifiable opposition towards Muslims. As we have already mentioned, their opposition started at killing the ambassador of the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh], Al-Harith bin ?Umair Al-Azdi, by Sharhabeel bin ?Amr Al-Ghassani. The ambassador was then carrying a message from the Prophet [pbuh] to the ruler of Busra. We have also stated that the Prophet consequently dispatched a brigade under the command of Zaid bin Haritha, who had a fierce fight against the Byzantines at Mu'tah. Although Muslim forces could not have revenge on those haughty overproud tyrants, the confrontation itself had a great impression on the Arabs, all over Arabia.

Caesar ? who could neither ignore the great benefit that Mu'tah Battle had brought to Muslims, nor could he disregard the Arab tribes' expectations of independence, and their hopes of getting free from his influence and reign, nor he could ignore their alliance to the Muslims ? realizing all that, Caesar was aware of the progressive danger threatening his borders, especially Ash-Sham-fronts which were neighbouring Arab lands. So he concluded that demolition of the Muslims power had grown an urgent necessity. This decision of his should, in his opinion, be achieved before the Muslims become too powerful to conquer, and raise troubles and unrest in the adjacent Arab territories.

To meet these exigencies, Caesar mustered a huge army of the Byzantines and pro-Roman Ghassanide tribes to launch a decisive bloody battle against the Muslims.



General News about the Byzantines and Ghassanide Preparations for War


No sooner news about the Byzantine's preparations for a decisive invasion against Muslims reached Madinah than fear spread among them. They started to envisage the Byzantine invasion in the least sound they could hear. This could be clearly worked out of what had happened to ?Umar bin Al-Khattab one day.

The Prophet [pbuh] had taken an oath to stay off his wives for a month in the ninth year of Al-Hijra. Therefore, he deserted them and kept off in a private place. At the beginning, the Companions of the Messenger of All⨠were puzzled and could not work out the reason for such behaviour. They thought the Prophet [pbuh] had divorced them and that was why he was grieved, disturbed and upset. In ?Umar's version of the very story he says: "I used to have a Helper friend who often informed me about what happened if I weren't present, and in return I always informed him of what had taken place during his absence. They both lived in the high part of Madinah. Both of them used to call at the Prophet alternatively during that time of suspense. Then one day I heard my friend, knock at the door saying: "Open up! Open up!" I asked wondering, "What's the matter? Has the Ghassanide come?" "No it is more serious than that. The Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] has deserted his wives." [Sahih Al-Bukhari 2/730]

In another version, ?Umar said, "We talked about Ghassanide preparations to invade us. When it was his turn to convey the news to me, he went down and returned in the evening. He knocked at the door violently and said ?Is he sleeping?' I was terrified but I went out to meet him. ?Something serious had taken place.' He said. ?Has the Ghassaindes arrived?' Said I. ?No,' he said, ?it is greater and more serious. The Messenger of All⨍ [pbuh] has divorced his wives.'" [Sahih Al-Bukhari 1/334]
This state of too much alertness manifests clearly the seriousness of the situation that Muslims began to experience. The seriousness of the situation was confirmed to a large degree by the hypocrites behaviour, when news about the Byzantines' preparations reached Madinah. The fact that the Messenger of All⨍ [pbuh] won all the battles he fought, and that no power on earth could make him terrified, and that he had always proved to be able to overcome all the obstacles that stood in his way - did not prevent the hypocrites, who concealed evil in their hearts, from expecting an affliction to fall upon the Muslims and Islam.

They used to harbour evil and ill-intentions against the whole process of Islam and the Muslims. On grounds of illusory hopes of destroying this great religious edifice, they erected a hotbed of conspiracy and intrigue in the form of a mosque ? Masjid-e-Darar (the mosque of harm). They approached the Prophet [pbuh] with the request that he should come and consecrate the place by praying in it himself. As he was at the moment about to start for Tabuk, he deferred compliance with their request till his return. Meanwhile he came to know through Divine Revelation that it was not a Mosque for devotion and prayer but a meeting place for the anti-Islamic elements. On his return, therefore, the Prophet [pbuh] sent a party to demolish the new structure.




Particular News about the Byzantine and Ghassanide Preparations for War

A magnified image of the prominent danger threatening the Muslims life was carried to them by the Nabateans who brought oil from Ash-Sham to Madinah. They carried news about Heraclius' preparations and equipment of an enormous army counting over forty thousand fighters besides Lukham, Judham and other tribes allied to the Byzantines. They said that its vanguard had already reached Al-Balq⦣146;. Thus was the grave situation standing in ambush for the Muslims. The general situation was aggravated seriously by other adverse factors of too much hot weather, drought and the rough and rugged distance they had to cover in case they decided to encounter the imminent danger.

The Messenger of All⨦#146;s [pbuh] concept and estimation of the situation and its development was more precise and accurate than all others. He thought that if he tarried or dealt passively with the situation in such a way that might enable the Byzantines to paddle through the Islamic controlled provinces or to go as far as Madinah, this would ? amid these circumstances ? leave the most awful impression on Islam as well as on the Muslims' military credibility.

The pre-Islamic beliefs and traditions (Al-Jahiliyah) which were at that time dying because of the strong decisive blow that they had already had at Hunain, could have had a way to come back to life once again in such an environment. The hypocrites who were conspiring against the Muslims so that they might stab them in the back whereas Byzantines would attack them from the front. If such a thing came to light and they succeeded in their evil attempts, the Prophet and his Companions' efforts to spread Islam would collapse and their profits which were the consequences of successive and constant fights and invasions would be invalidated. The Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] realised all that very well. So ? in spite of the hardships and drought that Muslims were suffering from ? the Prophet [pbuh] was determined that the Muslims should invade the Byzantines and fight a decisive battle at their own borders. He was determined not to tarry at all in order to thwart any Roman attempt to approach the land of Islam.

When the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] had made up his mind and took his final decision, he ordered his Companions to get ready for war and sent for the Makkans and the other Arab tribes asking for their assistance.

Contrary to his habit of concealing his real intention of the invasion by means of declaring a false one, he announced openly his intention of meeting the Byzantines and fighting them. He cleared the situation to his people so that they would get ready, and urged them to fight in the way of All⨮ On this occasion a part of Surat Bara'a (Chapter 9 ? The Repentance) was sent down by All⨬ urging them to steadfastness and stamina.

On the other hand, the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] cherished them to pay charities and to spend the best of their fortunes in the way of All⨮

No sooner had the Muslims heard the voice of the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] calling them to fight the Byzantines than they rushed to comply with his orders. With great speed they started getting ready for war. Tribes and phratries from here and there began pouring in Madinah. Almost all the Muslims responded positively. Only those who had weakness at their hearts favoured to stay behind. They were only three people. Even the needy and the poor who could not afford a ride came to the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] asking for one so that they would be able to share in the fight against the Byzantines. But when he said:


"...?I can find no mounts for you' they turned back while their eyes overflowing with tears of grief that they could not find anything to spend (for Jihad)." [Al-Qur'an 9:92]

The Muslims raced to spend out money and to pay charities to provide this invasion. ?Uthman, for instance, who had already rigged two hundred, saddled camels to travel to Ash-Sham, presented them all with two hundred ounces (of gold) as charity. He also fetched a thousand dinars and cast them all into the lap of the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh], who turned them over and said: "From this day on nothing will harm ?Uthman regardless of what he does." [Jami' At-Tirmidhi 2/211 (The virtues of 'Uthman)] Again and again ?Uthman gave till his charity toped to nine hundred camels and a hundred horses, besides the money he paid.

Abdur Rahman bin ?Awf, on his side, paid two hundred silver ounces, whereas Abu Bakr paid the whole money he had and left nothing but All⨠and His Messenger as a fortune for his family. ?Umar paid half his fortune. Al-?Abbas gifted a lot of money. Talhah, Sa?d bin ?Ubadah and Muhammad bin Maslamah, gave money for the welfare of the invasion. ?Asim bin ?Adi, on his turn, offered ninety camel-burdens of dates. People raced to pay little and much charities alike. One of them gave the only half bushel (or the only bushel) he owned. Women shared in this competition by giving the things they owned; such as musk, armlets, anklets, ear-rings and rings. No one abstained from spending out money, or was too mean to grant money or anything except the hypocrites:


"Those who defame such of the believers who give charity (in All⨦#146;s cause) voluntarily, and those who could not find to give charity (in All⨦#146;s cause) except what is available to them, so they mock at them (believers)." [Al-Qur'an 9:79]




The Muslim Army is leaving for Tabuk

Upon accomplishing the equipment of the army, the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] ordained that Muhammad bin Maslamah Al-Ansari should be appointed over Madinah ? in another version Siba? bin ?Arftah. To ?Ali bin Abu Talib he entrusted his family's safety and affairs and ordered him to stay with them. This move made the hypocrites undervalue ?Ali, so he followed the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] and caught up with him. But the Prophet made ?Ali turn back to Madinah after saying: "Would it not suffice you to be my successor in the way that Aaron (Harun) was to Moses'?" Then he proceeded saying: "But no Prophet succeeds me."

On Thursday, the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] marched northwards to Tabuk. The army that numbered thirty thousand fighters was a great one, when compared with the previous armies of Islam. Muslims had never marched with such a great number before.

Despite all the gifts of wealth and mounts the army was not perfectly equipped. The shortage of provisions and mounts was so serious that eighteen men mounted one camel alternatively. As for provisions, members of the army at times had to eat the leaves of trees till their lips got swollen. Some others had to slaughter camels ? though they were so dear ? so that they could drink the water of their stomach; that is why that army was called "The army of distress".

On their way to Tabuk, the army of Islam passed by Al-Hijr ? which was the native land of Thamud who cut out (huge) rocks in the valley; that is "Al-Qura Valley" of today. They watered from its well but later the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] told them not to drink of that water, nor perform the ablution with it. The dough they made, he asked them to feed their camels with. He forbade them to eat anything whatsoever of it. As an alternative he told them to water from that well which Prophet Salih's she-camel used to water from.

On the authority of Ibn ?Umar: "Upon passing by Al-Hijr the Prophet [pbuh] said:

"Do not enter the houses of those who erred themselves lest what had happened to them would afflict you, but if you had to do such a thing let it be associated with weeping."

Then he raised his head up and accelerated his strides till he passed the valley out." [Sahih Al-Bukhari 2/637]

Shortage of water and the army's need to it made them complain to the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] about that. So he supplicated All⨬ who sent a rainful cloud. It rained and so all people drank and supplied themselves with their need of water.

When they drew near Tabuk, the Prophet said: "If All⨠will, tomorrow you will arrive at Tabuk spring. You will not get there before daytime. So whoever reaches it should not touch its water; but wait till I come." Mu?adh said: "When we reached the spring it used to gush forth some water. We found that two men had already preceded us to it. The Messenger of All⨍ [pbuh] asked them: ?Have you touched its water?' They replied: ?Yes'. He said what All⨠inspired him to say, then he scooped up little water of that spring, thin stream which gathered together, he washed his face and hand with it and poured it back into it; consequently plenty of water spouted out of it so people watered. ?Mu?adh', said the Messenger of All⨬ ?if you were doomed to live long life you will see in here fields full of vegetation.'" [Sahih Muslim 2/246]

On the way to Tabuk, or as soon as they reached Tabuk, the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] said: ?Severe wind will blow tonight, so none of you should stand up. Whoever has a camel should tie it up.' Later on when the strong wind blew, one of the men stood up and the wind carried him away to Tai' Mountain. [ibid. Sahih Muslim 2/246]

All the way long the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] was intent on the performance of the combined prayer of noon and the afternoon; and so did he with sunset and evening prayers. His prayers for both were either pre-time or post-time prayers.




The Army of Islam at Tabuk

Arriving at Tabuk and camping there, the Muslim army was ready to face the enemy. There, the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] delivered an eloquent speech that included the most inclusive words. In that speech he urged the Muslims to seek the welfare of this world and the world to come. He warned and cherished them and gave them good tidings. By doing that he cherished those who were broken in spirits, and blocked up the gap of shortage and mess they were suffering from due to lack of supplies, food and other substances.

Upon learning of the Muslims' march, the Byzantines and their allies were so terrified that none of them dared set out to fight. On the contrary they scattered inside their territory. It brought, in itself, a good credit to the Muslim forces. That had gained military reputation in the mid and remote lands of Arabian Peninsula. The great and serious political profits that the Muslim forces had obtained, were far better than the ones they could have acquired if the two armies had been engaged in military confrontation.

 

[sirajstc]

The Head of Ailah, Yahna bin Rawbah came to the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh], made peace with him and paid him the tribute (Al-Jizya). Both of Jarba' and Adhruh peoples paid him tribute, as well. So the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] gave each a guarantee letter, similar to Yahna's, in which he says:

"In the Name of All⨬Ah the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.

This is a guarantee of protection from All⨠Ah and Muhammad the Prophet, the Messenger of All⨬Ah to Yahna bin Rawbah and the people of Ailah; their ships, their caravans on land and sea shall have the custody of All⨠Ah and the Prophet Muhammad, he and whosoever are with him of Ash-Sham people and those of the sea. Whosoever contravenes this treaty, his wealth shall not save him; it shall be the fair prize of him that takes it. Now it should not be lawful to hinder the men from any springs which they have been in the habit of frequenting, nor from any journeys they desire to make, whether by sea or by land."

The Messenger of All⨠ah[pbuh] dispatched Khalid bin Al-Waleed at the head of four hundred and fifty horsemen to ?Ukaidir Dumat Al-Jandal and said to him: "You will see him hunting oryxes." So when Khalid drew near his castle and was as far as an eye-sight range, he saw the oryxes coming out rubbing their horns against the castle gate. As it was a moony night Khalid could see Ukaidir come out to hunt them, so he captured him ? though he was surrounded by his men ? and brought him back to the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh], who spared his life and made peace with him for the payment of two thousand camels, eight hundred heads of cattle, four hundred armours and four hundred lances. He obliged him to recognize the duty of paying tribute and charged him with collecting it from Dumat, Tabuk, Ailah and Taima'.

The tribes, who used to ally the Byzantines, became quite certain that their dependence oinn their former masters came to an end. Therefore they turned into being pro-Muslims. The Islamic state had therefore enlarged its borders to an extent that it, touched the Byzantines' and their agents' borders. So we see that the Byzantine agents role was over.




Returning to Madinah

The Muslim army returned from Tabuk victoriously, undeceived or wronged. That was because All⨠had sufficed them the evils of fight.

On the way back and at a mountain road, twelve hypocrites sought the Prophet's life and that was while he was passing along that mountain road with only Ammar holding the rein of his she-camel and Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman driving it, at the time that people had already gone down into the bottom of the valley.

The hypocrites seized that opportunity to seek the Prophet's life. As the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] and his two companions were moving along, they heard thrusts of people coming towards him from behind with their faces veiled. Hudhaifa, who was sent by the Prophet to see what was going on, saw them and stroke their mounts' faces with a crook in his hand and All⨠cast fear into their hearts. They fled away and overtook their people.

However, Hudhaifa named them to the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] and informed him of their intentions. So that was why Hudhaifa was called the "confidant" of the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh]. About this event All⨬ the Exalted says:

"And they resolved that (plot to murder Prophet Muhammad [pbuh]) which they were unable to carry out." [Al-Qur'an 9:74]

When his headquarters, Madinah, began to loom at the horizon, the Prophet [pbuh] said: "This is a cheerful sight. This is Uhud, which is a mountain, we like it and it likes us." When the Madinese learnt of their arrival they set out to meet the army. Women, youths, youngsters and small children went out of town to celebrate their home-return wholeheartedly singing:

"The full moon shone down upon us, through the traits of Al-Wada? Mountain.
Thanks is due to us, as long as a supplicator invokes to All⨮."

The Messenger of All⨠[pbuh] 's march to Tabuk was in Rajab and his return in Ramadan. So we see that this Ghazwah took fifty days, twenty days of which were spent in Tabuk and the others on the way to and fro. Tabuk Invasion was the last one made by the Prophet [pbuh].

The Invasion of Tabuk and its Far-Reaching Ramifications

The effect of this invasion is great as regards extending and confirming the Muslims' influence and domination on the Arabian Peninsula. It was quite obvious to everybody that no power but Islam's would live long among the Arabs. The remainders of Jahiliyin and hypocrites ? who used to conspire steadily against the Muslims and who perpetually relied on Byzantine power when they were in need of support or help ? these people lost their expectations and desires of ever reclaiming their ex-influence. Realizing that there was no way out and that they were to submit to the fait accompli, they gave up their attempts.

From that time on, hypocrites were no longer treated leniently or even gently by the Muslims. All⨠not only bade Muslims to treat them severely but He also forbade them to take their gift charities or perform prayer on their dead, or ask All⨦Ah #146;s forgiveness for them or even visit their tombs. All⨠bade the Muslims to demolish the mosque, which they verily appointed and used as a hiding place where they might practise their plots, conspiracy and deceit. Some Qur'⮩c verses were sent down disclosing them publicly and utterly so that everybody in Madinah got to know their reality.

The great impact that this invasion produced could be perceived in of the great number of delegations who came successively to meet the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh]. Naturally, deputations used to come to meet him at the end of an invasion particularly after Makkah Conquest [Ibn Hisham 2/515-537; Za'd Al-Ma'ad 3/2-13; Sahih Al-Bukhari 2/633,635-637, 1/252, 414; Fath Al-Bari 8/110-126; Mukhtasar Seerat Ar-Rasool p.391-407] but they were not as many as these nor were they as frequent as they were then in the wake of Tabuk event. It was certainly the greatest.




The Qur'⮩c Verses Relating to this Invasion

Many a verse of Bara'a (Tauba) Chapter handling the event of Tabuk were revealed. Some verses were revealed before the march, while others after setting out for Tabuk, i.e. in the context of the battle. Some other verses were also revealed on the Prophet's arrival in Madinah. All of which covered the incidents that featured this invasion: the immanent circumstances of the battle, exposure of the hypocrites, the prerogatives and special rank earmarked for the strivers in the cause of All⨬ acceptance of the repentance of the truthful believers who slackened and those who hung back, etc.



This all refutes the assertions made by Christians and anti-Islamic's, the Muslims were forced to act, and they did, Christians only attack this verse because they're angry that they lost the wars. And it also seems that Christians think its okay for their people to kill and having the intention to destroy the Islamic nation, but when Muslims react we become criminals and an intolerant faith! How convenient!

And indeed Allah Knows best!

 

[sirajstc]

The Illogical Trinity


Indeed one of the most illogical doctrines to have been invented is non other than the trinity, and no it is not a mystery, it just an illogical doctrine, not a mystery of God. Trinity is three persons, yet they say these three persons are one, that is not a mystery, that is simply bad math and bad logic and made up logic! Three is three, four is four, and one is one, three persons are three persons, three persons are not person, I, Umar, and Bassam are three different persons, we are not one person! If you saw three of us standing outside a shop would you say we are one person or three? Three off course! So the same thing with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, they are three persons and not one.



To further show how illogical the Trinity is, Jesus the Son dies, and as you know Jesus is God, but if God does then logically who runs the universe and the universal affairs? Now since Trinity believes in three persons they will say the Father does, but that is very illogical indeed! So when Jesus dies the Father starts running things, so therefore part of God dies?! One God dies, and the other one continues to run the affairs of the universe while the other one is dead?! So while the Father runs the universe, you have the son Jesus laying dead and buried! Let us make it simple:



Muslim: Is Jesus God?



Christian: Yes



Muslim: Did Jesus die?



Christian: Yes



Muslim: And Jesus is God?



Christian: Yes



Muslim: So Jesus died and Jesus is God so this mean God died



Christian: erm



Muslim: So who ran the world when Jesus died?



Christian: I believe in Trinity



Muslim: And?



Christian: Well I believe in three persons, the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit



Muslim: And Jesus is the Son right?



Christian: Correct



Muslim: And the Son died



Christian: Yes, and while the son was dead the Father and Holy Spirit were still alive and so they continued to run the affairs of the world



Muslim: So Jesus who is God is lying dead and buried, while the Father and Holy Spirit who are also God are running the universe?



Christian: Yes



Muslim: So one God is dead, and the other 2 run the affairs of the universe, may I know how this is all one God?



Christian: It is a mystery!



And that basically sums it up! While one God is dead, the other 2 run the universe! What an illogical insulting doctrine against the true monotheistic God! This is no different than pagans who had many different Gods for many different purposes, one God was for rain, one for sun, one for night etc etc, here we have the same thing, one God (Jesus) dies and the other 2 Gods carry on running the universe while the Son God is dead.


And Allah Knows Best

Doubts about what the Qur’aan says about ‘Eesa (peace be upon him)

Question:
How can you expect non-Muslims to believe what your Book says about ‘Eesa, and to reject the story of his crucifixion and deny that he is the son of God, when the Bible affirms these things?.

Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.

We may be repeating ourselves here if we point out that the Gospels, or the Bible, of which we are speaking, that is extant among the people nowadays, is something other than that which was revealed from Allaah to His slave and Messenger ‘Eesa ibn Maryam (Jesus son of Mary – peace be upon him). With regard to what was revealed from Allaah, no one's faith is valid if he disbelieves in it or in any part of it. We have warned against that in question no. 47516.

But for reasons of divine wisdom, that book continued to be distorted and misinterpreted from ancient times until its divine origin was lost and disappeared. All that the people have in their hands now is no more than a mixture of the darkness of shirk and trinity with the glimmer of the light of Tawheed, an accumulation of lies and distortions mixed with the remnants of the truth and knowledge of the Prophets.

Now, after so many centuries of tampering, it is impossible for anyone to be certain whether any part of the Bible is true or false, unless it is checked in the light of the truth that confirms that which went before, the divine light of which has not been extinguished by the darkness of ignorance and whims and desires, and whose pure truthfulness has not been contaminated with even a single lie or mistake. That can be nothing other than the Holy Qur’aan which Allaah has guaranteed to preserve, as He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily, We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur’aan) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption)”

[al-Hijr 15:9]

Even though one of the greatest Christian scholars and defenders of the Bible, namely Norton, tried to defend the Bible against the criticism of Ackharn the German, he was forced to admit that distinguishing truth from lies nowadays is very difficult.

From this we reach the matter asked about in the question. We say that whoever does not believe in the Qur’aan will never have any valid book in which to believe, and whoever casts aspersions upon the truthfulness of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the validity of the Islamic religion, will not be able to offer any proof that the religion which he follows is valid.

The point is that whoever casts aspersions upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the things that he said about his Prophethood and the Revelation that he received from heaven, even though miracles happened at his hands that confirmed the veracity of what he said, and all his life he continued to challenge his enemies to produce the like of the Book which he attributed to the revelation of his Lord, and even challenged mankind and the jinn together to cooperate and produce something like this Qur’aan, as Allaah said:

“Say: “If the mankind and the jinn were together to produce the like of this Qur’aan, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another”

[al-Isra’ 17:88]

But they were not able to do that and produce anything like it, throughout history and until now, in spite of the numerous enemies who opposed him and wished that they could prove that he was lying. But there is no way they can do that!

Moreover, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) continued to prevail over his enemies and they were unable to prove him wrong. They were never able to prove that he was lying in anything he said, even in the regular kind of talk that people engage in amongst themselves, let alone telling lies about his Lord Who had sent him.

I wonder, if they reject all that evidence, how they could have any evidence of the soundness of the idea of “divine inspiration” which forms the foundation of their belief in their books, in spite of the fact that they do not claim that the Gospel was revealed to Jesus, or that he wrote it or dictated it, or even that the Gospels were written during his lifetime!

Moreover, there is no sound evidence concerning the personalities of the four men who wrote the Gospels: who they were, how they lived their lives, and whether what they wrote came from divine revelation or divine inspiration, as they claim, or it was only their own ideas or what was inspired to them by their devils. Horn, one of the greatest exegetes of the Bible, says: “If it is said that the Bible was revealed from God, that does not mean that every single word or phrase of it is inspired by God. Rather we know from the statements of those who wrote the Bible, from the differences in their styles, that they were permitted to write according to their own natures, customs and understanding. It is unimaginable that they could have been inspired in everything they described or in every ruling they stated.”

The Encyclopaedia Britannica refers to the different opinions among Christian scholars and researchers concerning the matter of divine inspiration and whether every phrase of the Bible is divinely inspired or not. Then it comments on that in one article (19/20) where it says: “Those who say that every phrase is divinely inspired cannot prove their claims with any ease.”

We say: and they cannot do so even with difficulty!

There are dozens of places where the Gospels contradict one another, and dozens of historical errors and false prophecies that never materialized. Frederick Grant stated that “The New Testament is not homogeneous because it is a compilation of scattered elements. It does not represent a single point of view or style from beginning to end, rather it represents different points of view.

The American Encyclopaedia states that there is a serious problem that results from the contradictions that appear in different places throughout the fourth Gospel and the three synoptic Gospels. The differences between them are so great that if you accept the synoptic Gospels as sound and correct, this will lead to the conclusion that the Gospel of John is not sound.

It is worth noting that the Gospel of John is the one which focuses the most on their doctrine of trinity; indeed they admit that it was written to establish this doctrine, which the other three Gospels failed to do, and to put an end to the dispute concerning this matter.

The Catholic Church, which strongly adheres to the idea of divine inspiration as the origin of the Bible, confirmed that in a meeting of the Vatican in 1869-1870. But a century later it revised its opinion and admitted, in Vatican II (1962-1965) that these books contain a great deal of defects and some falsehoods, according to what was reported by the French Catholic researcher Dr Maurice Bucaille, who later became a Muslim.

Moreover, if a person disbelieves in any of the miracles of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or any aspects of his life story that point to his truthfulness, how can he prove the miracles of these so-called apostles who wrote the Gospels, or prove that their claim to divine inspiration is correct?

For them, the idea of divine inspiration is correct on the basis of what is written in the Bible, and the miracles mentioned therein, and the Bible is sound and correct because it is divinely inspired!

Thus their evidence ends in a vicious circle, as was mentioned in the Encyclopaedia by some researchers: “So the Bible is sound because it is divinely inspired and their inspiration is proven because the Bible testifies to that!”

If a person disbelieves in the Qur’aan, which was transmitted by means of tawaatur (a process in which something is narrated from so many by so many that it is inconceivable that they could all agree upon a lie), throughout the Muslim world, east and west, generation after generation, by memory and in writing, with no variant copies and no contradictions, how can he prove the Gospels to be sound or rely on them, when there is no shred of evidence, not even a hint, that they existed any earlier than two hundred years after the death of Christ, according to what Norton quoted from Ackharn the German? Then there were the calamities that befell the Christians in the fourth century CE, when their churches were destroyed and their books were burned, which makes one lose confidence in any of their books that appeared after that. When did they appear and in whose possession were they during that period of persecution and hiding? How did they reach us?… There are many questions about this problem as was expressed in the Encyclopaedia Britannica where it says:

“We have no certain knowledge of the way in which the canonical soundness of these four Gospels was established, nor where or when this decision was made.”

With regard to not knowing who translated it from the language in which it was originally written, how reliable his knowledge was and how qualified he was for this task, and how we can be certain that he translated it in the proper manner, that is a whole other issue!

For more details on what we have mentioned in summary in this answer, please see: Izhaar al-Haq by Shaykh Rahmat-Allaah al-Hindi. And Munaazarah bayna al-Islam wa’l-Nasraaniyyah by Shaykh Muhammad Jameel Ghaazi et al.

May Allaah guide us and you to the Straight Path.

 

[sirajstc]

A serious dialogue with a Christian

Question:
hi, I was taking a look at your web page . I am interested in it because I am in a Religious Studies class and I am interested in learning more. I just wanted to know your response to this,
if I am correct in saying this...
In Islam heaven is thought of as paradise of wine, women and song. It is achieved by living a life in which, ironically, one abstains from the things with which he or she will be rewarded in paradise. In addition to this abstentiion, one must follow the five Pillars of Islam.
It seems to me that the Islamic faith is a do-it-yourself proposition.
Follow this "way of life", they say, and you will gain favor with God and eventually achieve salvation. There is NO assurance. I would hate to live like that. I realize that Muslims do not believe in "original sin", but regardless of wether or not a man is born sinful or not, would you not agree that every man/woman is sinful? How does one pay for his/her sin?
I understand repentance. I agree with that...but it seems as though one can NEVER do enough to win favor with God. That is why He sent his Son to die for us. All of our sins past present and future.
There is no possibility of assurance in the Islamic faith. I think that would be an awful way to live knowing that I was never gonna make it...not knowing of my salvation until the "day of judgement" whether or not I have done enough "goodworks" or prayed enough...etc.
I have asked a couple of Muslims in my class whether or not they were for sure if they were going to "paradise" or "heaven" when they died. I have not yet had one reply in the affirmative. Rather, they referred to the imperfection of their lives as being a barrier to this realization. THERE IS NO ASSURANCE IN ISLAM, BECAUSE THERE IS NO ATONEMENT, AND SALVATION DEPENDS WHOLLY ON THE INDIVIDUAL'S GAINING ENOUGH "MERIT"
Aslo, if I wanted to become a Muslim, I couldn't. If Muslims think that they are the "chosen people" then why aren't they spreading their faith.
Do you just have to be lucky enough to be born Muslim? If a person wants to become a Christian they can. ANYONE can become a Christian in a matter of seconds. All they have to do is confess that Jesus Christ is who He said He was and repent and believe...that is all a lot easier said than done. But basically that is it. I wasn't born Christian...or raised Christians assert that Jesus Chrit is the only way to God because
Scritpture says, "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved. (Acts 4:12) Jesus Christ said himself
"I am the way the truth and the life, NO ONE comes to the Father except through me..."
He didn't say, I am one way or a way or one truth etc....THE WAY!!!
I and the Father are ONE! Jn 5:18
I just don't understand how anyone could be blind to these facts. Unless they are never told. Which was me.
I would just like a little feed back

Answer:

Praise be to Allaah.

We appreciate your question concerning the ideas that you have about Islam, and we hope to discuss what you have written and correct some of your ideas, so as to arrive at a firm conviction of the truth of the matter.

What you have mentioned about the Islamic belief about Paradise, and the enjoyment of wine, women and song therein, falls wide of the mark. The pleasures of Paradise are not merely physical in nature, they also include the joy of feeling safe and secure, and of being content with God and being close to Him. The greatest joy of all in Paradise will be seeing God, may He be glorified and exalted. When the people of Paradise see the Holy Face of God, they will forget all other kinds of pleasures that they have enjoying. There is in Paradise everything that will delight the heart and eye; no dirty or evil talk is heard there, nor sinful speech. “No person know what is kept hidden for them of joy as a reward for what they used to do.” [al-Sajdah 32:17 – interpretation of the meaning]. What I am trying to say is that the delights of Paradise are not limited to the kind you refer to in your question. They are far greater than that.

You mention the idea that entrance to Paradise will only be granted to those who heed certain prohibitions, which things they will enjoy in Paradise in the Hereafter as a reward for avoiding it in this life. This generalization is not correct at all. Islam is a religion which commands action, not just abstinence. Salvation can only be attained through fulfilling commands, not just by avoiding things that are forbidden. Moreover, not every luxury in Paradise will consist of something that was forbidden in this world and is now being given as a reward. Some of the delights of Paradise will be things that were allowed in this world, such as marriage, good fruits like pomegranate and figs, etc., drinks like milk and honey, and so on. All of these are permitted in this world, and will be delights to be enjoyed in Paradise. The bad qualities of things that are forbidden in this world will not be present in their heavenly forms. For example, the wine of Paradise, as Allaah tells us, causes neither ghoul (any kind of hurt, abdominal pain, headache, sin, etc.) nor intoxication (see al-Saffaat 37:47). It does not rob a person of his mental faculties, or cause headaches and stomachaches. It is quite different from its earthly counterpart. The point I am making is that the delights of Paradise do not consist only of allowing things that were forbidden in this world. It is also worth pointing out that there are cases where abstention from prohibited things will not be rewarded by being given their equivalent in the Hereafter, whether those prohibited things are food, drinks, deeds or words. Poison, for example, will not be given as a luxury in Paradise, although it is forbidden in this world. The same applies to sodomy, incest and other things which will not be allowed in the Hereafter although they are forbidden in this world. This matter is quite clear, praise be to Allaah.

The idea of being guaranteed Paradise, and that a person’s life will be as horrible and unbearable as you describe if he has no such guarantee, is a misconception which itself leads to the results you mention. If you were to say that every person has a guarantee of Paradise, this would be utterly disastrous, because then everyone would commit all kinds of forbidden acts, feeling safe because of this guarantee. Many of the crimes committed by Jews and Christians have been done on the basis of this guarantee, with documents of forgiveness from their priests. Allaah has told us about such people (interpretation of the meaning):

“And they say, ‘None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian.’ Say, ‘Produce your proof if you are truthful.’”

[al-Baqarah 2:111]

For us Muslims, Paradise is not the matter of our own desires or the desires of anyone else, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“It will not be in accordance with your desires (Muslims), nor those of the People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians); whoever works evil will have the recompense thereof, and he will not find any protector or helper besides Allaah.” [al-Nisa’ 4:123]

There follows a brief summary of the Islamic view regarding a guarantee of one’s destiny.

Islam offers a guarantee to every sincere Muslim who obeys Allaah and remains in this state of devotion until he dies, that he will definitely enter Paradise. Allaah says in the Qur’aan (interpretation of the meanings):

“But those who believe and do deeds of righteousness, We shall admit them to the Gardens under which rivers flow (i.e., in Paradise), to dwell therein forever. Allaah’s promise is the truth, and whose words can be truer than those of Allaah? (Of course, none).” [al-Nisa’ 4:122]

“Allaah has promised those who believe and do deeds of righteousness, that for them there is forgiveness and a great reward (i.e., Paradise).” [al-Maa’idah 5:9]

“(They will enter) ‘Adn (Eden) Paradise (everlasting Gardens), which the Most Beneficent (Allaah) has promised to His servants in the unseen: verily, His promise must come to pass.” [Maryam 19:61]

“Say: ‘Is that (torment) better, or the Paradise of Eternity promised to the muttaqeen (pious and righteous persons)? It will be theirs as a reward and final destination.” [al-Furqaan 25:15]

“But those who fear Allaah and keep their duty to their Lord (Allaah), for them are built lofty rooms, one above another, under which rivers flow (i.e., Paradise). (This is) the Promise of Allaah, and Allaah does not fail in (His) promise.” [al-Zumar 39:20]

Islam also guarantees the disbeliever who ignores the commands of Allaah that he will definitely enter Hell. Allaah says (interpretation of the meanings):

“Allaah has promised the hypocrites, men and women, and the disbelievers, the Fire of Hell, therein shall they abide. It will suffice them. Allaah has cursed them and for them is the lasting torment.” [al-Tawbah 9:68]

“But those who disbelieve, for them will be the Fire of Hell. Neither will it have a complete killing effect on them so that they die, nor shall its torment be lightened for them. Thus do We requite every disbeliever!” [Faatir 35:36]

Allaah will say to the disbelievers on the Day of Judgement (interpretation of the meaning):

“This is Hell which you were promised! Burn therein this Day, for that you used to disbelieve!” [Yaa-Seen 36:63-64]

Allaah will not go back on His promise to either the believers or the disbelievers. He describes how both of them will be at the end of the Day of Judgement (interpretation of the meaning):

“And the dwellers of Paradise will call out to the dwellers of the Fire (saying): ‘We have indeed found true what our Lord had promised us; have you also found true, what your Lord promised (warnings, etc.)?’ They shall say, ‘Yes.’ Then a crier will proclaim between them: ‘The Curse of Allaah is on the zaalimeen (polytheists and wrongdoers, etc.).” [al-A’raaf 7:44]

Everyone who believes and does righteous deeds, and dies in this state, will definitely enter Paradise. Everyone who disbelieves and does evil deeds, and dies in this state, will definitely enter Hell.

One of the great guiding principles of Islam is that the believer should tread a path between fear and hope. He should not take it for granted that he will enter Paradise, because this will make him complacent, and he does not know in what state he will die. Nor should he assume that he is going to Hell, because this is despairing of the mercy of Allaah, which is forbidden. So the believer does righteous deeds, and hopes that Allaah will reward him for them, and he avoids evil deeds out of fear of the punishment of Allaah. If he commits a sin, he repents in order to gain forgiveness and protect himself from the punishment of Hell. Allaah forgives all sins and accepts the repentance of those who repent. If a believer fears that the good deeds he has sent on before him are not enough, as you suggest, then he will increase his efforts, in fear and hope. No matter how many righteous deeds he has sent on before him, he cannot rely on them and take them for granted, or else he will be doomed. He keeps striving and hoping for reward, and at the same time he fears lest his deeds be contaminated with any element of showing off, self-admiration, or anything that will lead to them being rejected by Allaah. Allaah describes the believers (interpretation of the meaning):

“… those who give that (their charity) which they give (and also do other good deeds) with their hearts full of fear (whether their alms and charity, etc.) have been accepted or not), because they are sure to return to their Lord (for reckoning).” [al-Mu’minoon 23:60]

So the believer keeps on striving, fearing and hoping, until he meets his Lord, believing in Tawheed (Divine Unity) and doing righteous deeds, and earns the pleasure of his Lord and Paradise. If you think about the matter, you will realize that these are the right motives for action, and that righteousness cannot be achieved in this life in any other way.

As regards what you say about original sin, this matter needs to be approached from several angles.

Firstly: The Islamic belief concerning human sin is: the individual bears the responsibility for his own sin; no one else should bear this burden for him, nor should he bear the burden for anyone else. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden…” [Faatir 35:18]. This refutes the idea of original sin. If the father commits a sin, what fault is that of his children and grandchildren? Why should they bear the burden of a sin that someone else committed? The Christian belief that the descendents should bear the sin of their father is the essence of injustice. How can any sane person say that the sin should be carried down the centuries by all of humanity, or that the children, grandchildren and subsequent descendants should be tainted because of their father’s sin?

Secondly, making mistakes is a part of human nature. Our Prophet

(peace and

 

[sirajstc]

blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “Every son of Aadam is bound to commit sins…” (reported by al-Tirmidhi, 2423), but Allaah has not left man unable to do anything about the mistakes that he makes. He gives man the opportunity to repent, and so the hadeeth (words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) quoted above concludes: “…and the best of those who commit sins are those who repent.” The mercy of Allaah is clear in the teachings of Islam, as Allaah calls His servants (interpretation of the meaning): “Say, ‘O My servants who have transgressed against themselves (by committing evil deeds and sins)! Despair not of the Mercy of Allaah, verily Allaah forgives all sins. Truly, He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” [al-Zumar 39:53]

This is human nature, and this is the solution to the problem of sin. But to make this human nature, which is bound to make mistakes, a barrier between the servant and his Lord which will prevent him from ever earning the pleasure of God, and to say that the only way to reach God is through His sending His (so-called) son down to earth to be humiliated and crucified while his father looks on, so that mankind could be forgiven, is an extremely odd idea. Just describing it sounds so unlikely that there is no longer any need to refute it in detail. Once, when discussing this issue with a Christian, I said, “If you say that God sent down His son to be crucified to atone for the sins of the people alive at his time and afterwards, what about those who had come before and died as sinners before the time of Christ, and had no opportunity to know about him and believe in the Crucifixion so that their sins might be forgiven?” All he could say was: “No doubt our priests have an answer to that!” Even if they do have an answer, it is bound to be concocted. There is no real answer.

If you really examine the Christian teaching on human sin with an open mind, you will see that they say that God sacrificed His only son to atone for the sins of mankind, and that this son was a god. If it was true that he was a god who was beaten, insulted and crucified, and died, then this doctrine contains elements of blasphemy because it accuses God of weakness and helplessness. Is God really incapable of forgiving the sins of all His servants with just one word? If He is Able to do all things (and the Christians do not dispute this fact), then why would He need to sacrifice His son in order to achieve the same thing? (Glorified and exalted be He far above what the wrongdoers say about Him!)

“He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. How can He have children when He has no wife? He created all things and He is the All-Knower of everything.” [al-An’aam 6:101 – interpretation of the meaning]

An ordinary man would not accept anyone harming his child; he would come to his defence, and would never hand him over to an enemy who would insult him, let alone leave him to face the worst kind of death. If this is the attitude of a mere created being, what then of the Creator?

Thirdly, the Christian doctrine of original sin has a negative effect because, as you have mentioned, it does not require any duties of man other than to believe that God sent His son to this earth to be crucified and to die to atone for the sins of mankind. Thus a person becomes a Christian and is to earn the pleasure of God and be admitted to heaven. Moreover, the Christian believes that everything that happened to the son of God was only to atone for his sins, past present and future, so there is no need to wonder why Christian societies have seen such an increase in murder, rape, robbery, alcoholism and other problems. After all, did not Christ die to atone for their sins, and haven’t their sins been wiped out, so why should they stop doing these things? Tell me, by your Lord, why do you sometimes execute murderers, or put criminals in jail, or punish them in other ways, if you believe that the criminal’s sins have all be atoned for and forgiven through the blood of Christ? Is this not a strange contradiction?

You ask why, if the Muslims are the chosen people of mankind, they do not spread their religion. The fact of the matter is that sincere Muslims have always sought to do just that. How else could Islam have spread from Makkah to Indonesia, Siberia, North Africa, Bosnia, South Africa and all parts of the world, East and West? The faults in the behaviour of some modern Muslims cannot be blamed on Islam; those faults are the result of going against Islamic teachings. It is not fair to blame the religion for the faults of some of its adherents who have gone against it or gone astray. Are Muslims not being more just than Christians when they affirm that the sinner is threatened with the punishment of Allaah unless he repents, and that for some sins there is a deterrent, a punishment to be carried out in this world as an expiation for the Hereafter, as in the case of the punishments for murder, theft, fornication/adultery, etc.?

What you say about it be so easy to become a Christian, as compared to becoming a Muslim, is clearly mistaken. The key to Islam is no more than two simple phrases: “Ash-hadu an laa ilaaha ill-Allaah wa anna Muhammadan Rasool-Allaah (I bear witness that there is no god except Allaah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah).” With these few words, a person enters Islam in a matter of seconds. There is no need for baptism or priests, or even to go to a certain place such as a mosque or anywhere else. Compare this with the ridiculous procedures of baptism which the Christians do when they want to admit someone to the Church. Then there is the fact that the Christians venerate the cross on which Jesus was tortured and crucified in great pain – as they claim. They take it as a sacred object of blessing and healing, instead of scorning it and hating it as a symbol of oppression and the worst possible way for the son of God to die!

Do you not see that the Muslims are closer than others to the truth, because they believe in all the Prophets and Messengers, respecting them all and recognizing that all of them taught the truth of Divine Unity (Tawheed) and that each of them was appointed by Allaah and sent to his people with laws that were appropriate to the time and place? When the fair-minded Christian sees the followers of Islam believing in Musa (Moses), ‘Eesaa (Jesus), and Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and in the original Torah and Gospel, as well as the Qur’aan, and sees his own people denying the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and rejecting the Qur’aan, wouldn’t his open-mindedness make him think that the Muslims are most likely to be right?

You say that the Messiah said, “No one comes to the Father except through me”. We need, first of all, to be sure that these words can truly be attributed to Jesus. Secondly, this is clearly not true. How then could mankind have known God at the times of Nooh (Noah), Hood, Saalih, Yoonus (Jonah), Shu’ayb (Jethro), Ibraaheem (Abraham), Musa (Moses) and other Prophets? If you were to say that during the time of Jesus (upon whom be peace) and up to the time of the Final Prophet, Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) the Children of Israel had no other way to know the religion of Allaah except through the way of Jesus, this would be correct.

Finally, you quote the Messiah as saying, “I and the Father are one”. This is clearly not correct. If we examine the matter objectively, without letting our own desires get in the way, it becomes clear that the conjunction “and” in the phrase “I and the Father” implies that two separate entities are involved. “I” is one entity, and “the Father” is another. If you say, “So-and-so and I”, it is obvious to any rational person that they are two separate people. The equation 1+1+1=1 makes no sense to any rational person, whether he is a mathematician or not.

Finally, I advise you (and I do not think that you will reject this advice) to think deeply about what you have read, putting aside your background, any pre-conceived ideas, your own desires and feelings of attachment to your religion or culture, and to seek guidance sincerely from Allaah. Allaah Most Generous and will never let any of His servants down. Allaah is the One Who guides to the Straight Path, and He is Sufficient for us and is the best disposer of affairs..

__________________

 

[sirajstc]

Myths and Misconception about Islam

 

[sirajstc]

ISLAM IGNORES HUMAN RIGHTS ????

by brother Mabsoot​

The misconception does not follow from the reasons given, and the reasons ignore a great deal of information.


Islam is a complete way of life. Given this, it is not surprising that the Creator is concerned with the method which we choose to govern ourselves. The preeminent rule which the Islamic state must observe is stated in the Qur'an (translation follows):

[4:59] O you who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if you do believe in Allah and the Last Day; That is best, and most suitable for final determination.
From this verse, it is clear that the state's obligation of obedience to the Creator is as important as the obedience of the individual. Hence, the Islamic State must derive its law from the Qur'an and Sunnah. This principle excludes certain choices from the Islamic state's options for political and economic systems, such as a pure democracy, unrestricted capitalism, communism, socialism, etc. For example, a pure democracy places the people above the Qur'an and Sunnah, and this is disobedience to the Creator. However, the best alternative to a pure democracy is a democracy that implements and enforces the Shari'ah (Islamic Law).
The Creator also states in the Qur'an (translated):

[42:36-38] So whatever thing you are given, that is only a provision of this world's life, and what is with Allah is better and more lasting for those who believe and rely on their Lord, and those who shun the great sins and indecencies, and whenever they are angry they forgive, and those who respond to their Lord and keep up prayer, and their rule is to take counsel among themselves, and who spend out of what We have given them.
Allah orders us in this verse to conduct our matters by taking counsel among ourselves, or by consulting each other. This is the methodology of the Islamic state, to consult one another, but to always keep the Qur'an and Sunnah paramount. Any law which contradicts the Qur'an or Sunnah is unlawful. This broad principle of consultation is certainly wide enough to encompass a form of government where all are heard - in fact, encouraged to be heard. The early Islamic states were of this form. The petty governments of many `Muslim countries' today do not apply this principle and in fact commit many crimes against the people.
As for slavery, Islam is unique among the `religions' in its close attention to the peaceful removal of this practice. Before the advent of Islam, slavery was widespread all over the world. The Messenger of Islam taught us that freeing slaves was a great deed in the sight of Allah. From the Sunnah, specifically in the study of the Sunnah called Sahih Bukhari, we find:

[3:46:693] Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Whoever frees a Muslim slave, Allah will save all the parts of his body from the (Hell) Fire as he has freed the body-parts of the slave." Said bin Marjana said that he narrated that Hadith to `Ali bin Al-Husain and he freed his slave for whom `Abdullah bin Ja'far had offered him ten thousand Dirhams or one-thousand Dinars.
Also from the Sunnah, specifically in the study of the Sunnah called Maliks Muwatta, we find:
[38:9:15] Narrated Aisha Ummul Mu'minin: The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was asked what was the most excellent kind of slave to free. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, answered, "The most expensive and the most valuable to his master."
The Creator has also made it easy for slaves to gain their freedom. From the Sunnah, specifically in the study of the Sunnah called Sahih Bukhari, we find:

[3:46:704] Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Whoever frees his portion of a common slave should free the slave completely by paying the rest of his price from his money if he has enough money; otherwise the price of the slave is to be estimated and the slave is to be helped to work without hardship till he pays the rest of his price."
The condition of slavery is very different in Islam than the harsh conditions imposed by non-Muslims or disobedient Muslims. From the Sunnah, specifically in the study of the Sunnah called Sunan Abu Dawud we find:

[41:4957] Narrated AbuHurayrah: The Prophet (saw) said: None of you must say: "My slave" (abdi) and "My slave-woman" (amati), and a slave must not say: "My lord" (rabbi or rabbati). The master (of a slave) should say: "My young man" (fataya) and "My young woman" (fatati), and a slave should say "My master" (sayyidi) and "My mistress" (sayyidati), for you are all (Allah's) slave and the Lord is Allah, Most High.
Also from the Sunnah, specifically in the study of the Sunnah called Sahih Bukhari, we find:

[3:46:721] Narrated Al-Ma'rur bin Suwaid: I saw Abu Dhar Al-Ghifari wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a cloak. We asked him about that (i.e. how both were wearing similar cloaks). He replied, "Once I abused a man and he complained of me to the Prophet. The Prophet asked me, `Did you abuse him by slighting his mother?' He added, `Your slaves are your brethren upon whom Allah has given you authority. So, if one has one's brethren under one's control, one should feed them with the like of what one eats and clothe them with the like of what one wears. You should not overburden them with what they cannot bear, and if you do so, help them (in their hard job)."
As a result of the teachings of Islam, slavery was almost completely eradicated from many areas of the Muslim world, peacefully and without bloodshed.

 

[sirajstc]

ALLAH MOON GOD ???

this is very common Question asked by non muslims these days .


Quran proves - "Allah" is NOT a 'moon god':

"And from among His Signs are the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. Do not bow down
(prostrate) to the sun nor to the moon, but only bow down (prostrate) to "Allah" Who created
them, if you (really) worship Him." [Quran 41:37]

for more details
http://www.godallah.com/moon_god.php

adding to the post above(Allah is a moon??)

"They ask you about the new moons. Say: These are signs to mark fixed periods of time for mankind and for the pilgrimage." [Holy Quran 2:189]

therefore ; the moon was created BY Allah, conclusion, Allah created moon and sun....etc, SO WE WORSHIP ALAH,the one and only,NO MOONS INVOLVED
---------------

----------------

 

[sirajstc]

Surah Al-Ikhlas and its Great Message


The Quran without a doubt is a beautiful book, full of wisdom and great meanings. Surah Al-Ikhlas is no exception to this rule.



Surah Al-Ikhlas is the 112th Surah in the Quran, and without a doubt is one of the most powerful Surah's in the Quran, the Surah completely gets rid of any shirk that people are committing, and moves God away from the paganistic ideas and doctrines that they have ascribed unto him. The Surah deals essentially and exclusively with Tauhid. Tauhid is:



confirming the Oneness of Allah. It is the basis of Islam. (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/referenc...rm.TAUHID.html)



What does it mean to bear witness to Tawheed?


Question:
What does it mean to bear witness that there is no god except Allaah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah?

Answer:
What it means to bear witness that there is no god except Allaah is to deny that anyone other than Allaah has the right to be worshipped, and to affirm that this is the right of Allaah alone, with no partner or associate. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

"That is because Allaah He is the Truth (the only True God of all that exists, Who has no partners or rivals with Him), and what they (the polytheists) invoke besides Him, it is Baatil (falsehood). And verily, Allaah He is the Most High, the Most Great"[al-Hajj 22:62]

So the words laa ilaaha (there is no god) deny all things that are worshipped instead of Allaah, and the words illa Allaah (except Allaah) affirm that all kinds of worship are for Allaah alone. So what they mean is that there is none that is rightfully worshipped except Allaah.

Just as Allaah has no partner in His dominion, so too He has no partner in His worship.

What it means to bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah is tobelieve firmly, from the depths of one's heart, and express it on one's lips, that Muhammad is His slave and His Messenger to all of creation, mankind and the jinn alike. That means believing what he has told us about events in the past, what he has told us about things that are yet to come, what he has permitted of halaal things, what he has forbidden of haraam things; and it means obeying and following what he has commanded, and giving up and avoiding what he has forbidden, following his laws, adhering to his Sunnah in secret and in the open, accepting and submitting to his judgements, and knowing that obedience to him is obedience to Allaah, and disobedience to him is disobedience to Allaah, because he is the one who conveyed the Message from Allaah, and Allaah did not cause him to die until He had perfected the religion, and he conveyed it clearly. May Allaah reward him on behalf of us with the best reward that was ever given to any Prophet on behalf of his people and any Messenger on behalf of his nation.

A person can only enter Islam by uttering this twin testimony of faith; its two parts are intertwined and cannot be separated. For the conditions of testifying that there is no god but Allaah are the same as the conditions of testifying that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah. These, along with the evidence for them, are mentioned in questions no. 9014 and 12295.

And Allaah knows best.

Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid (http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=21738&ln=eng)




Let us now show the verses of this great Surah and it's great message that it sends:
112.001
YUSUFALI: Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;

This verse here gets rid of any polytheistic beliefs, such as ascribing partners to God, or saying that he is 3, or 4, or a hundred. The verse is making it clear that Allah is one, and has no partners.

By saying this, it also affirms the point that all things in the universe are controlled by God, and God alone, he has all the power, and everything you see around you is done by his will alone. It essentially shows that all the power in the universe exclusively belongs to God and no one else, unlike what several pagans believe and have believed.


The Surah continues:



112.002
YUSUFALI: Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;


The verse affirms that Allah is eternal, meaning he does not die, nor is he brought into this life through birth. It gets rid of all polytheistic and pagan beliefs which claimed that God is a man, or that God died and was given birth to etc etc. The Surah continues to make this point very clear:

112.003
YUSUFALI: He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;



The verse makes it explicitly clear that God does not beget any children, therefore having no sons or daughters. This is also a clear refutation to many pagan beliefs that were floating around before and during that time, that God had children including sons and daughters etc etc. The verse also then makes it clear that God himself is not begotten, affirming that he eternal, he always is, and does not come into being through sexual intercourse. Beautiful verses indeed. The Surah finally ends by saying:


112.004
YUSUFALI: And there is none like unto Him.


The verse is showing us that God is above all, that he is unlike any of us, he does not eat, nor does he sleep, nor does he get married like we all do. Therefore God is making it clear to all those who have made false doctrines against him that he is far above to what they ascribe him to.


In fact if one notices, the verses all compliment each other and are following a specific order with each verse making a point for the previous. Verse 2 tells us that Allah is eternal, meaning he always is, the next verse explains further telling us he is not given birth to, hence continuing the meaning of the previous verse, that he is eternal and always is. Verse 3 goes on to tell us that Allah has no kids either, and then it explains further to us in the next verse by telling us that God is unlike anyone, and nothing can be compared to him. Hence he does not have kids, and if people do not understand this, then it makes it clear that he is unlike anyone and is far above what our human minds can comprehend and make up in his name. So as you can see each verse compliments the next.


Here is what tafsir Ibn Kathir wrote:

The Reason for the Revelation of this Surah and its Virtues

Imam Ahmad recorded from Ubayy bin Ka`b that the idolators said to the Prophet , "O Muhammad! Tell us the lineage of your Lord.'' So Allah revealed

[Þõáú åõæó Çááøóåõ ÃóÍóÏñ - Çááøóåõ ÇáÕøóãóÏõ - áóãú íóáöÏú æóáóãú íõæáóÏú - æóáóãú íóßõäú áøóåõ ßõÝõæÇð ÃóÍóÏñ ]

(Say: "He is Allah, One. Allah He begets not, nor was He begotten. And there is non comparable to Him.'')



Hadith on its Virtues

Al-Bukhari reported from `Amrah bint `Abdur-Rahman, who used to stay in the apartment of `A'ishah, the wife of the Prophet , that `A'ishah said, "The Prophet sent a man as the commander of a war expedition and he used to lead his companions in prayer with recitation (of the Qur'an). And he would complete his recitation with the recitation of `Say: He is Allah, One.' So when they returned they mentioned that to the Prophet and he said,

«Óóáõæåõ áöÃóíøö ÔóíúÁò íóÕúäóÚõ Ðóáößó¿»

(Ask him why does he do that.) So they asked him and he said, `Because it is the description of Ar-Rahman and I love to recite it. So the Prophet said,

«ÃóÎúÈöÑõæåõ Ãóäøó Çááåó ÊóÚóÇáóì íõÍöÈøõå»

(Inform him that Allah the Most High loves him.)'' This is how Al-Bukhari recorded this Hadith in his Book of Tawhid. Muslim and An-Nasa'i also recorded it. In his Book of Salah, Al-Bukhari recorded that Anas said, "A man from the Ansar used to lead the people in prayer in the Masjid of Quba'. Whenever he began a Surah in the recitation of the prayer that he was leading them, he would start by reciting `Say: He is Allah, One' until he completed the entire Surah. Then he would recite another Surah along with it (after it). And used to do this in every Rak`ah. So his companions spoke to him about this saying; `Verily, you begin the prayer with this Surah. Then you think that it is not sufficient for you unless you recite another Surah as well. So you should either recite it or leave it and recite another Surah instead.' The man replied, `I will not leave it off. If you want me to continue leading you (in prayer), I will do this; and if you all do not like it, I will leave you (i.e., I will stop leading you).' They used to consider him to be of the best of them to lead them in prayer and they did not want anyone else to lead them other than him. So, when the Prophet came they informed him of this information and he said,

«íóÇ ÝõáóÇäõ¡ ãóÇ íóãúäóÚõßó Ãóäú ÊóÝúÚóáó ãóÇ íóÃúãõÑõßó Èöåö ÃóÕúÍóÇÈõßó¡ æóãóÇ Íóãóáóßó Úóáóì áõÒõæã åóÐöåö ÇáÓøõæÑóÉö Ýöí ßõáøö ÑóßúÚóÉò¿»

(O so-and-so! What prevents you from doing what your companions are commanding you to do, and what makes you adhere to the recitation of this Surah in every Rak`ah) The man said, `Verily, I love it.' The Prophet replied,

«ÍõÈøõßó ÅöíøóÇåóÇ ÃóÏúÎóáóßó ÇáúÌóäøóÉ»

(Your love of it will cause you to enter Paradise.) This was recorded by Al-Bukhari, with a disconnected chain, but in a manner indicating his approval.



As We said this is a very powerful and beautiful Surah:



A Hadith that mentions this Surah is equivalent to a Third of the Qur'an

Al-Bukhari recorded from Abu Sa`id that a man heard another man reciting

[Þõáú åõæó Çááøóåõ ÃóÍóÏñ ]

(Say: "He is Allah, One.'') and he was repeating over and over. So when morning came, the man went to the Prophet and mentioned that to him, and it was as though he was belittling it. The Prophet said,

«æóÇáøóÐöí äóÝúÓöí ÈöíóÏöåö ÅöäøóåóÇ áóÊóÚúÏöáõ ËõáõËó ÇáúÞõÑúÂä»

(By He in Whose Hand is my soul, verily it is equivalent to a third of the Qur'an.) Abu Dawud and An-Nasa'i also recorded it. Another Hadith Al-Bukhari recorded from Abu Sa`id, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Messenger of Allah said to his Companions,

«ÃóíóÚúÌöÒõ ÃóÍóÏõßõãú Ãóäú íóÞúÑóÃó ËõáõËó ÇáúÞõÑúÂäö Ýöí áóíúáóÉò¿»

(Is one of you not able to recite a third of the Qur'an in a single night) This was something that was difficult for them and they said, "Which of us is able to do that, O Messenger of Allah'' So he replied,

«Çááåõ ÇáúæóÇÍöÏõ ÇáÕøóãóÏõ ËõáõËõ ÇáúÞõÑúÂä»

("Allah is the One, As-Samad'' is a third of the Qur'an.) Al-Bukhari was alone in recording this Hadith.


In conclusion I say that this verse crushes every form of polytheism, and crushes every pagan lie invented against God. Indeed this Surah is so great it crushed centuries of lies with a simple 4 verses, this very fact alone shows the greatness of God, that in 4 short verses, he sends out a very strong and beautiful message that crushes every form of lie that is ascribed to him by polytheists. That just makes me say ?God is great' ?Allahu Akbar'.
And Allah Knows Best!

 

[sirajstc]

Muslims don't Worship a Moon God


Refuting the Moon God allegation
​

One of the most common argument thrown against Muslims is that us Muslims worship a moon God! Indeed this claim is very strange since there is not a single Islamic source that says that we Muslims should worship the moon, nor is there a single Islamic source that says that our God is a moon God. Not only that, there is not a single source that shows any Muslims including the first Muslims in Mecca who used to worship the moon.



So just with that information we have there we can simply lay this argument to bed, because the burden of proof is not on the Muslims to prove that our God is not a moon God, rather the burden of proof is on those who claim that our God is a moon God. The person who is making the claim must at least bring a shred of evidence from Islamic sources (Quran, Hadiths, Tafisr etc) that the God of Islam is a moon God. So far what we have is an argument from silence, which is made up of simple assumptions and personal assertions not backed up by any evidence.



Now even though the burden of proof is not on me to prove that the God of Islam is NOT a moon God I shall still go ahead and do it. It is rather very easy to prove that Allah is not a moon God, and we don't have to go into fancy work and books to try and prove this like some others have done, at the end of the day we have the very best book there is which is the Noble Quran, so we should simply what it tells us regarding the matter and conclude from there.



Basically all I have to show from the Quran is a direct command from the Quran that tells us to NOT worship the moon, if I can produce this verse then the argument is closed and finished. It does not make much sense that we Muslims worship a moon God when our God in the Quran tells us to not worship the moon now does it? Off course not.



Here is the direct command of the Noble Quran that we Muslims should not worship the moon:



041.037
YUSUFALI: Among His Signs are the Night and the Day, and the Sun and the Moon. Do not prostrate to the sun and the moon, but prostrate to Allah, Who created them, if it is Him ye wish to serve.


So the verse is very explicit that we Muslims should not worship the moon nor the sun, and that the moon is a creation of Allah. This verse completely crushes the lie that we Muslims worship a moon God, I mean does it make sense that we Muslims worship a moon God when we have such a verse? Off course not!



Let us read Ibn Kathir's tafsir of this verse:



Here Allah reminds His Creation of His power, and that He is the One Who has no equal, and He is Able to do all things. Allah's saying;



(And from among His signs are the night and the day, and the sun and the moon.) means, He created the night with its darkness and the day with its light, and they alternate without ceasing. And He created the sun with its shining light, and the moon with its reflected light. and He allotted their stages and gave them separate orbits in the heavens, so that by the variations in their movements man may know the stages of night and day, of weeks, months and years, and time periods related to people's rights, acts of worship and various transactions. Moreover, because the sun and moon are the most beautiful of the heavenly bodies that can be seen in both the upper and lower realms, Allah points out that they are created entities which are in a state of enthrallment to Him, subject to His dominion and control. So He says:



(Do not prostrate yourselves to the sun nor to the moon, but prostrate yourselves to Allah Who created them, if you (really) worship Him.) meaning, `do not associate anything in worship with Him, for your worship of Him will be of no benefit to you if you worship others alongside Him, because He does not forgive the association of others in worship with Him.' He says:


(But if they are too proud, ) i.e., to worship Him Alone, and they insist on associating others with Him,


So it crystal clear that the moon is a creation of Allah and that it should NOT be worshipped.



Here are some other verses which make it very clear that Muslims do not worship a moon God:



007.054
YUSUFALI: Your Guardian-Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days, and is firmly established on the throne (of authority): He draweth the night as a veil o'er the day, each seeking the other in rapid succession: He created the sun, the moon, and the stars, (all) governed by laws under His command. Is it not His to create and to govern? Blessed be Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds!



Notice the moon is CREATED entity.



013.002
YUSUFALI: Allah is He Who raised the heavens without any pillars that ye can see; is firmly established on the throne (of authority); He has subjected the sun and the moon (to his Law)! Each one runs (its course) for a term appointed. He doth regulate all affairs, explaining the signs in detail, that ye may believe with certainty in the meeting with your Lord.



The moon is under the control and command of Allah, obviously the moon is not a god.



021.033
YUSUFALI: It is He Who created the Night and the Day, and the sun and the moon: all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its rounded course.



Once again we see that the moon is a CREATED entity, created by the all powerful God.



So it is crystal clear that the Quran forbids the worship of the moon, and that the Quran shows us that the moon is a created entity under the command of God.



Since we have established enough proof from the Quran that Muslims don't worship the moon, let us now turn our attention to the hadiths and see what they say regarding this matter:



Volume 4, Book 54, Number 425:



Narrated 'Aisha:

On the day of a solar eclipse, Allah's Apostle stood up (to offer the eclipse prayer). He recited Takbir, recited a long recitation (of Holy Verses), bowed a long bowing, and then he raised h is head saying. "Allah hears him who sends his praises to Him." Then he stayed standing, recited a long recitation again, but shorter than the former, bowed a long bowing, but shorter than the first, performed a long prostration and then performed the second Rak'a in the same way as he had done the first. By the time he had finished his prayer with Taslim, the solar eclipse had been over. Then he addressed the people referring to the solar and lunar eclipses saying, "These are two signs amongst the Signs of Allah, and they do not eclipse because of anyone's death or life. So, if you see them, hasten for the Prayer."



Volume 4, Book 54, Number 426:



Narrated Abu Mas'ud:

The Prophet

said, "the sun and the moon do not eclipse because of the death or life of someone, but they are two signs amongst the Signs of Allah. So, if you see them, offer the Prayer (of eclipse)."



Notice how the sun and the moon are both refered to as signs from God, obviously had the moon been worshiped as THE God it wouldn't have been called a sign of God but rather God himself. In Islam when the phrase a sign of God is mentioned this means a miracle or an event that happens by God to show you that he exists, in this case it is the occurrence of the eclipse which involves both the sun and the moon, because one has to wonder how can such events occur without a divine being who controls both the sun and the moon causing the moon to eclipse the sun during the day, this cannot be a mere coincidental event happening in the universe on its own.



So with all this information we have we can have no other conclusion than the fact that the moon was not worshipped by Muslims, the Muslims did not believe the moon was God, and the Quran does not tell us to worship the moon either. Any person who claims that we Muslims worship the moon after knowing these facts will simply be a liar.



And Allah Knows Best and Indeed Allah is not a moon but rather he is the One who created the moon!


(another stupid misconcetion, cleared out of the way )

ALhamdulelah, we thank Allah for his mercy over us

and helping us win over all these stupid crazy people..

 

[sirajstc]

taken from; http://www.welcome-back.org/question/20041211.shtml


Why did God not make one language and send one book for all humanity?
By Sayyid Abul A’la Mawdudi Trans. by Mushfiqur Rahman

Question. A Sikh friend of mine was given some literature to read. While reading those, he raised this objection: "You say that Allah speaks to the Prophets and through these special people he sent a universal way of life for all mankind. Question is, why such an important way of life is prescribed in this one particular language [Arabic], which is used only in one particular geographic location? Why could not that Almighty Allah create one universal language for all of mankind so that all people could benefit from that it equally? Arabic Qur’an is certainly beneficial for the Arabs only."

Answer. Had your Sikh friend who raised this objection pushed his imagination a bit further, he could have also asked: "Why did God not send a copy of the Qur’an directly to every human being? Since He is the Almighty, He could have done this too!"

These people actually do not try to understand one basic point, and that is: for guiding the humanity, Allah (swt) does not adopt a method that would require an alteration in the natural workings and systems of the universe. The variety of languages, and due to that the emergence of various small and large ethnic groups – all this is but a natural phenomenon which came into existence by the will of Allah (swt). And in this are lot of benefits and goodness that Allah (swt) would not want to destroy. Yes, He is the Almighty, but He is also the Wise. In His universe, things are running under a perfect set of laws and principles. Due to these principles, variance between languages, cultures, and traditions emerges. Even if Allah (swt) had created some sperate type of language, that still could not have been the mother tongue of all nationalities, nor could the literature in that language affect and influence the minds of all people on earth. They would not have appreciated the beauty of that language [like one appreciates his mother tongue]. If Allah (swt) – by some supernatural way – eliminated all the mother tongues of all people and then imposed, supernaturally, one language on the entire humanity, then that is a different matter. However, since one action of Allah (swt) does not come to nullify another action of His, He has sent guidance to the humanity while sustaining the natural systems and frameworks of all languages.

Arabic Qur’an can only be beneficial for the Arabs – this allegation could have been true had Allah (swt) only sent a piece of book [from heaven]. But the reality is that Allah (swt) sent the book together with a guide. That guide first addressed a particular nation in whose language the book came. Then, according to the prescriptions laid in the book, he educated them, purified them, gave them practical training, and completely reshaped their lives in a full social revolution. Then he charged them with this responsibility that they, on his behalf, would transmit this guidance to other nations, educate them, purify them, train them, and reshape their lives the same way as he had done to them. Thus, once one nation adopts this ideal, it would bear the responsibility of taking it to other nations. This was the natural way for universalizing that teaching and guidance. Every great movement of the world that wanted to universalize it’s teaching had adopted this same method, be that a movement to establish God’s way or any other type of movement.

If one accepts the argument that a book is only beneficial for the particular nation in whose language it is written, then one will have to consider the history of all the sciences of the world as wrong. All the books of the world will need to divided and segregated according to language. All the benefits of translations and various mediums of international mass communications will have to be denied. Yet, it is through these mediums that the messages of great world movements and the words of great leaders are reaching the far corners of the earth. Then what crime did the book of Muhammad (s) commit that it has to be considered confined only for the Arabs just because it is in Arabic?

If one is still not assured after this and he thinks that Allah (swt) should have done things as he thought He should have, then he has the right to remain firm in his opinion. But the question is, if, by putting up such questions as hindrance, one does not benefit from a book or a message, then whose loss is it? This is not the policy of the truth seekers. They search for the ray of light everywhere and from all sources. If one closes his mind with one objection or another against every book or teaching, then he will not be able to make even a single step on the life’s simple and straight path.

(Sayyid Abul A’la Mawdudi, Rasael wa Masael. Originally published in Tarjumanul Qur’an, July-October, 1944.)

very good question

^^ ehh?