It is Never OK to Hit a Woman

what about the ``pervaizi``? dont they reject hadiths altogether?

Re: # 313

I think it would have been more honest of you to say that ``I accept only those ahadith to be true, which are promoted as such by the Quadiani religious establishment ....because (type in any reason)``.

I wouldn`t mind if you write in the reason bracket that becuaes ``Quadiani religious establishment verified those hadith to be consistent with Qura`n and reject those which are found to be inconsistent in their opinion.``

I want to keep such a qualifying statement for the records.

Hasan (#310),

Important clarification: Ahmadis reject only those ahadith that violate teachings of Quran or whose authenticity cannot be validated.

Verifiable ahadith that are consistent with teachings of Islam are considered an important part of Islam by me, as well as Ahmadi-Muslims altogether.

+++

You are right in that this debate has turned into an Ahmadi/anti-Ahmadi issue. This should not have been the case at all. Since Urstruly has failed to validate questionable elements of his Islam, he has tried to shift focus of this debate (#312 further supports this contention ...)

Re: # 310

Since Quadianis are Muslim pretenders, just saying that you are not Quadiani is not enough. You know what you have to do.

Urstruly (#305, 309),

You are distorting truth and telling lies.

- I have not changed my stance, but maintained the same position all along.

- I have rejected ahadith that negate teachings of Quran. I rejected your interpretation of “talking ants”. This is not the same as rejecting Quran … but only your interpretation that I find inconsistent and senseless.

For me Quran is the word of Allah Almighty which I hold in utmost respect and regard. This should have been clear to you by now.

- I have not cursed Islam, but only exposed the views of your ullema. And difference between the two is huge. Since I consider myself a Muslim ... mocking Islam or other religions is wrong in my view.

There are good reasons why I criticize your ullema. They preach senseless violence in the name of Islam. Furthermore, when you fail to substantiate your beliefs on any issue, you refer to scholarship of ullema … claiming that the ullema cannot be wrong.

I highlighted several beliefs of your ullema and “recorded ahadith” (posts #112, #307). Your silence on these issues is revealing.

Furthermore, your rants against Ahmadi-Muslims are based upon blatant lies and distortion of truth, and are designed to divert attention from the issue at hand.

To sum things up ...

You are trying to diffuse the issue of how corrupt your ullema and their views have become. Their views are squarely negated by Quran and you are unable to argue otherwise. And hence your tirade against Ahmadi-Muslims ...

Urstruly,
first i would like to correct you. You said ``....Message of Peace of our Master (pbuh)``.
Your master is only Allah. Not huzoor (PBUH) who was a messenger of your Master. Secondly since when did this debate became one of Qadianis and non-Qadianis. I am a non Qadiani and still dont beieve in Hadith because I think the words of human beings can be changed. I do believe also that yes all Mullahs are corrupt and they have done nothing but destroy this religion. I understand where you are going with the Qadiani topic but do you really think that it is only Qadianis who think that all Ahadiths are falsely attributed to Muhammad (PBUH). Also why do you think that not believing in hadith is the same as not loving your prophet. I dont believe in hadth but still love my prophet (although calling anybody other than Allah a master might be construed as shirk).

Re: # 306

It still does not explain the behavior of the rest of the Quadianis on this thread. It only explains why you changed your stance.


As far as types of ahadith is concerned, I have noticed that, most of the ahadith that Quadiani reject to be true are those that establish some principle of jurisprudence or law. As a matter of fact Quadianis reject all such ahadith to be false, even if they are verbatim from the verses of Qura`n and they have no qualms about it. (For, example, when I quoted the verse of Ant and Solomon, you even tried to say that Qura`n was erroneous. But that was a digression).

I think all the pieces of puzzle have started falling in place. It all happened when British occupied Hindustan. At that time British found two challenges that they had to deal with to ensure their long term survival, These challenges were:

1. Muslims had an un-questionable love for Holy Prophet (pbuh)

2. Muslims followed Sharia law as established in post Akbar years by Mujadis Alif Thani and finally revived and modernized by the Ijtehad of Aurangzeb Alamgir in Fatawa-e-Alamgiri- (may God bless their soul).

Lets discuss these challenges one by one:

Challenge # 1: How to take away love of Holy Prophet (pbuh) from the hearts of minds of Muslims;

When evangelical Christian missionaries came to Hindustan they found the local population to be quite superstitious and that believing in miracles etc. As a matter of fact the Hindu mythology is just full of supernormal and stories of other world. They portrayed Jesus (pbuh) as the god who died for humanity, who walked on water; who could raise the dead, cure lepors,. but the Hindu population did not find the message of Christianity very appealing, since their own mythology is way more colorful than this. Then they tried this approach with Muslims whose Prophet (pbuh) is attributed with ``miracles`` that could be counted on the digits of one hand and Muslims preachers throughout the history of Islam had never felt a need to present his miracles as a proof of his greatness since the message alone is so powerful that it does not need miracles. As a matter of fact the message itself is the miracle. And as far as the miracles of Jesus (pbuh) are concenred Muslims already believe in them. After getting disappointed on both fronts they started using the tactics which have become a standard practice around the globe i.e. if you can`t discredit Islam, then insult it. The missionaries started inviting Muslim Scholars for public debate on religion. But instead of debating scholarly issues those missionaries used those occassions to poke fun on Islam and Prophet (pbuh); all in front of booing hindu crowds. Since these debates used to occur in schoolyrads; Muslims refused to send their kids to those schools. (which resulted on the whole sir syed thing)

Mirza Sahib, in those days was a young Muslim scholar who used to debate with those missionaries; but later something turned his head and he became the loyal British subject. After declaring his prophethood he spent rest of his life discrediting Muslim dogma and its tennents. In order to do that his main course of action had been to divert Muslims from Holy Prophet (pbuh) and towards him, which he called a mission. This was a war for him, and he did everything fair or unfair to lead his war. So his tradition continues through his disciples who mindlessly try to discredit every tennet, every hadith, and even Qura`n if they have to to divert Muslims from the established path.

Challenge#2:

Islamic law and jurisprudence is probably the longest surviving law in the history of mankind, which has been in practice for 1500 centuries around the globe. If Saudi Arabia and Iran are the examples then this law is being practiced even today. In order to complete the Muslim subjugation British had to abolish this law; because any law which is based on the values and tradition of the land itself is the most potent symbol of the soverienity of the nation. Take away the law of a nation and you ahve made a whole nation lost its way. British had to work on two fronts. They could impose the British Common Law by the force of the gun but they couldn`t get the law out of the heart and minds of the Muslims. For that they retained the services of people like Mirza who attacked the very basis of law that is Qura`n and Hadith in order to discredit it. It is true that our ancestors were bound by the shackles and chains of slavery but in their heart they had Ishq-e-Rasool. That is the reason in 1937, Quaid-e-Azam successfully, got the subcontinent`s first mini-Shariat bill (after the collapse of Moghals) when he pursuaded British to re-enact the long abolished Muslim Inheritence Law.

During my discourse with several Quadianis I have quoted several ahadith that elaborate on the principle of an Islamic law, as a litmus test, and every time Quadiani mindlessly started screaming that ``ALL AHADITH`` are false, and it is somehow Mullah conspiracy, just as on this board,.

One reason for such mindless tirade comes to mind that in return for their services, Quadianis can get a visa for Britian, Canada, and several other European countries so easily. One can understand the financial reasons for this but again human beings have responsibility towards themselves too. Right?

Abu_safwaan (#297):

If a person criticizes the Prophet (pbuh) based upon recorded history and ahadith, it is fair to respond on basis of history and ahadith. No issue here.

However, a Muslim should not overrule teachings of Quran on basis of recorded ahadith. That’s the point I have made all along.

Furthermore, in Quran Allah Almighty vows to protect Quran. No such promise is made regarding ahadith. This further suggests that a Muslim should follow Quran and not “recorded ahadith” in case the two differ.

Urstruly (#293, 305),

Here`s some more along the lines of what I have maintained. Once again I am raising issues of apostasy, blasphemy, and adultery. Based upon “recorded ahadith”, your ullema insist on killing the perpetrator in each case.

On the other hand, here is how Quran commands believers to deal with these issues:

+++

Apostasy

Forgiven through repentance: 3:86-91
Harmless to faith 3:144, 5:54
Punishment for apostasy from Allah alone 2:217, 3:87-89, 4:137, 16:106

Blasphemy

4:140 Believers commanded to sever ties with blasphemers
6:68 Believers commanded to turn away from those who blaspheme
13:43 Prophet (pbuh) commanded to refer matter to Allah if someone calls him a liar

Adultery

24:2 Punishment of 100 lashes for perpetrator
4:25 Half of full punishment for slave women (half of 100 lashes is 50 lashes, but half of “death” is not possible.)

+++

Note the difference between what Allah Almighty commands us in Quran … and what your ullema tell us to do instead. It is a day-and-night difference.

Urstruly (#293):

My view all along has been that some recorded ahadith are fabricated since they violate the teachings of Quran.

I have further explained that if a hadith is consistent with teachings of Islam and can be verified for accuracy, it becomes a source of guidance for me. Ahadith that don’t fit these criteria remain dubious in my view, and I`d rather follow Quran instead.

This is a straight-forward view. I am not sure what is so difficult for you to understand.

+++

To support my view, I referred you to recorded ahadith which claim that the Prophet (pbuh) multiplied food and water. He made trees cry. Water flowed from his fingers. Earth would expel corpse of his enemy by continuously spitting it out. He flew from Mecca to Jerusalem, and back, during night … and even bodily ascended to heavens. His companions were guided by magical lamps during night … etc. There`s lots more, but I`ll pause here for now.

You have stayed away from dealing with the issue here. Your rants against Ahmadis and Mirza Sahib are incorrect, irrelevent, and attempts to divert attention.

Re: # 294 Philosopher

I have no idea, how did Quadianis came about the idea of masih ma`ood without any hadith. Please enlighten me.

One thing that really bothers me is that until I posted the web address of main Quadiani website carrying hundereds of ahadith, every Quadiani on this board was so vehemently and vociferously denying the voracity of all ahadith. I found this attitude mind boggling. That is the reason I wrote my last post addressed to sattar and asked him to explain this anamololy. I said there could be three reasons (i) that these Quadianis are being dishonest but they do not know it (ii) they are being dishonest and they know it (iii) it is just a plain and simple game of cloak & dagger i.e. cheat and misguide your enemy, because this is something that has to be done.

But now that sattar has written his last post a more reasonable explanation could be that Quadianis beleive only those ahadith to be true that are sanctioned by the Quadiani religious establishment. Claiming that ``oh we only believe only those ahadith to be true that are consistent with Qura`n`` seems to be just pussyfooting around the issue; because the first criteria that early hadith collectors used was that a hadith should be consistent with Qura`n no matter how authentic source or chain of narrations it might have come from.

It has been almost seven years now that I have been debating Quadiani vs Muslim issues with Sattar and he has posed literally 10s of ahadith to me claiming that those were contrdictory to Qura`n. Our debate usually ends up with him cursing Islam, our belief system, our religious scholras (who according to him are all thugs and charlatans), and Caliphs (who were just opportunists and power hungary monsters); every time I show him with proof how a hadith is consisten with Qura`n. I have real problem accepting this nonsense that Islam has been nothing but a cesspoool of corruption, malice, and dishonesty until Mirza Quadiani 1300 years later, figured out the correct Arabic diction and reformed the religion. Pahleez.

It is not that our debates have been totally useless, but at one particular debate I became aware of a certain dimension of human psychy, which betrayed all my previously held notions in this regard. We have been debating for days that Mirza Sahib has called his opponents as ``Kanjriun ke bachchay`` (children of prostitute). He vociferoulsy debated with me for days that the Arabic word ``Baghiyya`` that Mirza sahib used to describe his opponents as such meant ``poor women`` and not ``prostitutes`` or `women with dubious character``. I posted links to several English-Arabic on line dictionbaries and showed him that the word ``Baghiyya`` only means ``Prostitutes, Trollops, and women of dubious character`` but he would not accept. But the defining moment came when I actually posted a photocopy of the page from Mirza Sahib`s book Roohani KhazaiN on this website to show how Mirza Sahib himself had translated the word ``Baghiyya`` in urdu and it was nothing but what I had been saying all along i.e. Prostitutes. As usual Sattar`s discourse ended in a tirade against Muslim Ullema aka Mullahs. I fail to see how it was Mullah`s fault for Mirza Sahibs poor choice of words for his opponents?? But one thing was made clear to me that day that True Guidance is only from Allah. Unless He wills it no amount of evidence, logic, or truth can bring a person to the righteous path. That is the reason we see that early prophets who performed mind boggling miracles, like those of Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them both) only made their people try to kill them. Human being is a starnge universe.

What really worries me is the fact that anti-Mullah brouhahah and tirade has become standard Quadini mode of discourse and this has robbed them of sincerety, honesty, and integrity- The three attrubutes that define a human being. ``All ahadith are wrong``, all ``Mullahs are corrupt``, all ``Muslims have been following a false religion for past 1500 years`` - what is the meaning of this tantrum? And thank God to YouTube and other online video sources it has become abundently clear that Quadianis get their que from their top religious establishment. We don`t need a Mullah to tell us that anymore - we can see that with our own eyes.

Frankly, personally, I don`t give a shit what a Quadiani or anyone says about our religion. It doesn`t need protectors or apologists, or pecahers.

Fanoos ban kar jis ki hifazat hawa kare
woh shamma kia bujhay gi jissay roshan khuda kare

In this day and age when Muslims have neither political power, nor military power, no scientific edge, no financial edge, they are being slaughtered everywhere, they are being hounded everywhere; they are being tortured everywhere; their religion is being targetted and scrutinized everywhere - Muslims have become lazy, stagnant, corrupt and complacent and yet we see that Islam has become the fastest spreading religion in the world. I wouldn`t have believed any of this had I seen with my own eyes, 2-3 human beings reverting back to the religion of nature every week - and 2/3rd of all converts are white females who are embracing the Message of Peace of our Master (pbuh) despite all the propaganda how this religion oppresses women.

As I said, personally, I have nothing against Quadianis or any other religion. As a Muslim it is forbidden for us to question other peopel`s belief system lest put one down. However, what we are urged to do is to convey the message to the best of our abilities and face the difficulties. Our Prophet (pbuh) stood fast in front of adversity and wished his enemies well even when he was stonned, he was bleeding and crying in pain. We are his disciples. If someone asks us a question we have to answer his question.

To Zeena and hamidm,
you guys have probably seen me shouting against politicians, for Musharaff etc on other posts and probably disagree with me on a lot of things, but on this issue, both of you have my full support. By giving example or reasons of Muhammad`s (PBUH) life and marriags I was in no way saying that it is OK to have multiple marriages. Our lives are not comparable to Huzoor`s life and I truly believe that the law of multiple marriages should be stopped. No one understands the law and only use it for their own gains.
And Zeena even though I have shaved my head (on my own choice - ok maybe because my wife thought I looked cute) I am still not fat or old enough to be called a sahib :).

Re: # 302zeemax wrote;
[Then the next question arises, as to whether there can be an eventuality in which a wife becomes an `enemy combatant`?]

yap.if she has an extramerital affair with a major across the border.

if such a situation ever arises ,give her a good strong ``daraba``[sexual intercourse] as the writer translated the word from the Quran which has been translated as ``strike her`` so far.

so dont punish her if she becomes your enemy or have an extramerital affair across the line of the control, exchange ``daraba`` with her.

regards

#301 by philosopher

So I guess in some cases it is OK to hit a woman if she`s an `enemy combatant`! For instance I would love to beat up Lyndie England real good.

Then the next question arises, as to whether there can be an eventuality in which a wife becomes an `enemy combatant`?

#300 by abu_safwaan

Of-course :-)

Re: # 299 zeemax
According to a study women have hidden desire of being spanked,so its useless to show

your hatred and anger to enemy this way.enemies would love that and perhaps have an

orgasm too.the only thing men can get is erection.

By the way when i say ``YOU`` i am refering to HATERS not you Zee Bhai.