A Journey Through Our Conscience

Honestly, good job on the article.....

Thankyou everybody for all your comments !!!
I really appreciate all the discussion and the quest behind writing this article was to understand and get input from all you chowkies as to what needs to be done to make Pakistan a society where women are treated justly under the law.
How to stop the abuse abd raise awareness as to the rights of our women.

sincerely,
sajal javid

teshah,

that`s why i don`t have high hopes to communicate with ntsyed. the only way things will proceed is that ntsyed with his world views will eventually die and hopefull his next generation will manage to cut down on fanaticism and the after 4-5 generations, under the modren facilities of communication and education, the world will become more coherant in it`s views. but that doesn`t concern me because i would be dead by then and i don`t believe in reincarnation, not because i preclude the possibility of it`s happenning but because even if it occurs and the soul doesn`t remember anything about it`s past, what is the point then?

so, let`s keep discussing to keep ourselves busy and entertained. ;-)

teshah#283:

Guilty as charged: Muddat hui hai yaar ko mehmaan kiye huai!

I was an infrequent visitor to chowk for some time as I was very busy with a project which is now coming to an end. I will be more regular now unless another project falls into my lap without looking for it.

You were write about Manu Smriti. It is the name of a book attibuted by Manu. It lays down some very regressive caste-based laws for the Hindus. Fortunately, the Hindu Code Bill, one of the genuine reforms undertaken by Nehru is now the new ``Manu Smriti`` for the Hindus.

Regarding the question, it seems that not only you, but no one else seems to know the answers. In any case, I am reposting those questions in case someone missed them in my last post:

Does anyone know what are the hadood laws when a non-muslim woman complains of rape/zabar/zina against a muslim man?
Is it a crime for a muslim to have a non-consensual sex with a non-muslim woman? If so, whose witness is admissible?
What is the punishment if the crime is proved?
What happens in the opposite case, namely, if it is a muslim woman and a non-muslim man?

nt:

don`t give credit to your flawed lagics. the best you do is usually articulate your non-sense in never ending stories. i do not feel like debating the stuff with you because you are not leaving us with a practical common frame of reference to communicate. you are diving deeper and deeper into absurdity and i dont see any hope in penetrating these many layers.

Re: # 292

mj:

don`t give credit to your flawed lagics.

I never do... Allah provides us the ability to understand the rationale, of which logic is a subset. ALLAH O AKBER!

It seems flawed to you because you refuse to face the truth.

you are diving deeper and deeper into absurdity and i dont see any hope in penetrating these many layers.

Gold is rarely found on the surface. One has to dig deeper and deeper to get to it. The gold nuggets that one digs out with his/her hard labour is pure and worths more than the one he/she buys/sells in market.

the best you do is usually articulate your non-sense in never ending stories. i do not feel like debating the stuff with you because you are not leaving us with a practical common frame of reference to communicate.

As a man keen on literature, it should not be difficult for you to discern the moral of the story, as all these point to the Only Frame of Reference - Allah and our needs and benefits of obedience to Him.

Submission and obedience to Allah is the only practical common frame of reference and solution available to mankind today... as it was in the 7th century, and will be till the end of time. It`s baseless and unthoughtful rejection neither has benefitted anyone, nor it will.

I know you and some others will contend that the ground realities are much different from the 7th century Arabia. One only needs to study the pre-Islamic history of not just Arabia, but the entire world, and he/she will the stark similarities in the two eras - then and now.

Secondly, as the Creator, He is more aware of the ground realities of yesterday, today, and tomorrow than collectively all human beings could be. Therefore, the Quran was the only solution then, it is today, and it will remain so tomorrow. One just needs to study it with honesty towards himself/herself.

Example:
You can buy a computer and based on your understanding you start using it without consulting the accompanying operator`s manual and user guide. The Quick Guide, pop up messages and instructions and errors will only take you so far, and if you notice they refer you to the user guide and/or consult the experts.

You`ll experience its optimum performance if you study and follow the instructions and advices in the enclosed booklets. You`ll obtain even more output if you consult the manufacturer and other experts of the system. Therefore, the level of your benefits increases corresponding to the effort you put into learning the system, instead of living off of pop-up windows.

Similarly, what a mullah and I say are just pop up windows, asking you to refer to the instructions manual and user guide: the Quran and the authentic Ahadith of the Prophet (pbuh).

Food for thought:
Look at the word ALLAH - His actual Name as He prefers

First of all, I`m sure you can see that there are only three letters used in this phrase: A, H, and L. Similarly, in arabic there are only three letters that form this phrase: Alif, Laam, and small Ha.

If you think about it, these are the only and same three letters in their respective languages that form the most powerful political statement in the world: La-ilaha illallah

How is it the most powerful statement? Because my dear brother, by submitting one`s self to Allah with this statement one experiences absolute freedom. With just this small sentence he rejects being subjugated by any mortal being or society and everything else in this universe. The fear of poverty, persecution, and even death vanishes from one`s heart if and when one submits to Allah (as his Creator and True Lord) with utter humbleness and sincerity. The heart and mind are then filled with love, respect, and fear of Allah only.

Secondly, I don`t know too many languages, but I`m sure that to say the word Allah and the statement La-ilaha-illallah in any language will produce the same result as in Arabic and English - just three letters that represent these basic sounds of speech.

I have yet to see any human being form a statement, let alone as powerful as this one, in this fashion. Only Allah can do it. ALLAH O AKBER!

This food for thought gives us only 1st of the countless reasons to believe in Allah as our Creator and our Ultimate Benefactor.

Then, if one believes in Allah and submits to Him, he/she realizes the benefits of following the His Instructions Manual - The Noble Quran.

Then in the Quran, Allah instructs the users (His believers) to follow the Prophet - Allah`s peace and blessings be upon him - becuase he (pbuh) was the ultimate embodiment of Quran. He showed us how to follow the Quran as a human being for maximum benefit, therefore we must seek out his (pbuh) ahadith to learn from him.

Now you have the System: Islam
The best Instruction Manual for it: the Noble Quran
And the best expert of this system: authentic ahadith of the Prophet - peace and blessings be upon him.

All you need to do is to put in the required effort to understand it and reap the most benefits out of it. Otherwise, you`ll continue to misunderstand the system and endlessly keep investing in new ones, when there is none like it.

The rest is up to you, and between you and your Creator.

M`as-salaam!

Re: # 294

ntsyed
``Then in the Quran, Allah instructs the users (His believers) to follow the Prophet - Allah`s peace and blessings be upon him - becuase he (pbuh) was the ultimate embodiment of Quran. He showed us how to follow the Quran as a human being for maximum benefit, therefore we must seek out his (pbuh) ahadith to learn from him.

Now you have the System: Islam
The best Instruction Manual for it: the Noble Quran
And the best expert of this system: authentic ahadith of the Prophet - peace and blessings be upon him.``

My question: Do you think the Hadees I quoted in my post at 202 is an authentic one? If so what lesson does it convey? Mind, it is from Sunnan Abudawud which is included in the Suha-sittah, the six compilations of Ahadees considered authentic by the Sunnies and is the main basis perhaps of the Law of Blasphemy in Pakistan. Perhaps you may claim to be a Shia and reject all these Ahadees as unauthentic. But then some Shias express doubt even about the authenticity of the Quran.

For your convenience I repeat the said Hadees hereunder:

``Sunnan Abudaud

Book 38, Number 4348:
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:
A blind man had a slave-mother(a sex-slave who bears one`s children out of wed-lock) who used to abuse the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and disparage him (Why she did so it does not tell). He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master(mind, not a husband); she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.``

What lesson one can draw from this Hadees, particularly, about the status of the woman in Islam, if at all, a female `sex-slave` is considered to be a `woman`?

292 malikjahanzeb

How can one think of a `practical common frame of reference` in the face of the cults based on blasphemy lynching? But nevertheless it is indeed life and death question for the humanity to find one if it has to exist in the global village as the world has come to be with the weapons of mass massacre.

Re: # 295

teshah,

The hadith you`ve quoted may or may not be authentic. Simply saying it is narrated by xyz and compiled in abc`s work does not guarantee authenticity. One has to see the complete chain of narrators, examine their credetials, etc to determine a hadith authentic or weak. Furthermore, some pertinent information seems to be missing from the text you`ve typed; e.g. the identities of the blind man and the woman; when did this incident take place; who else among the notable companions of the Prophet (pbuh) were present, and so forth.

This particular hadith you`ve quoted has been quoted by the anti-Muslim camp for the obvious reasons. If I remember correctly, last time it was quoted to me by an Ahmedi, who whimsically accepts, quotes, and rejects the Prophet (pbuh) and his ahadith to suit/justify his claims. As I told him, I cannot verify the authenticity of the hadith without proper references, thus cannot make a comment on it until I do.

As for my orientation - I am only a Muslim, Alhumdolillah, just like my Prophet (pbuh) was. He was neither a sunni nor a shia, and he (pbuh) has strictly forbidden us from creating divisions amongst ourselves. Therefore, I`m neither a sunni nor shia nor any other kind... just a plain and simple Muslim I am, who obeys the Quran and Prophet (pbuh) to the best of my abilities.

To me all women are respectable regardless of their respect for themselves and others. Allah and Prophet (pbuh) tell me not to look at na-mehram women; not to have unnecessary contact with them; treat all of them gently and respectfully regardless of their age, status, religion, etc... and that`s what I do to the best of my ability and beg Allah to help me do better.

You will find the correct information in places they are contained, not in places where they`re not. Honesty is not only the best policy, it`s the foremost virtue. Without honesty, one never finds the will to seek the correct information, nor does he find it, and nor will he be able to act on it. I hope you can see where the stress is in the preceding statements.

Otherwise, please find someone else to exploit his/her words in your efforts to smear Islam.

While you`re at it, think of how much difference there is between blasphemy vis a vis sedition and treason against a non-Islamic state; and how are the convicted dealt with. I`m sure, at your age, you`ll be able to see the parallels.

You seem way past the age of reformation, particularly an externally induced one. But, if you seek Allah with honesty, then may Allah find you soon.

mj,

Your simple refusal to study the history will not change it. Many have come and gone in the last 1400 years, with the hope that the views held by people like me ``will eventually die and hopefull his next generation will manage to cut down on fanaticism and the after 4-5 generations, under the modren facilities of communication and education, the world will become more coherant in it`s views.`` A similar view is summed up with sex and violence in Holly, Bolly, Lolly and other woody movies, most of which are false fantasies in a world of fantasies. Why don`t you busy yourself with figuring out how many 4-5 generations it must have been in the last 1400 years to make you particular fantasy (as highlighted above) come true. lol

On the other hand, during the same period as above, in spite of incessant overt and covert efforts to distort, suppress and/or eliminate it, Islam continues to thrive more than ever. The wise amongst the anti-Muslim crossed the chasm and became most sincere servants of Allah. The rest have fizzled away in the dust of history. Case in point: the subsequent powerful generations of Ganges Khan served Islam more than their grand and great grandfather had destroyed it.

The simple explanation for such a phenomenon is that True Islam is the only natural way to live. Fighting the nature has only yielded more and bigger problems (in every sense of the word) for the mankind; as you can see for yourself in the current environment. So, learning to live according to the One Who Created this nature is the only logical solution to all the problems. Just ponder the questions I put forth in #291, and you will see what I mean.

By now you`ve firmly established the fact that you`ve never seriously studied Quran or ahadith to continue your fantasy that can vanish any given second. All that hot-air about ``I`ve chewed it, digested it, blah blah blah`` was just that - hot air.

The reality, that you seem to deliberately miss by a mile or more, is that everytime you reject, distort, and defame Islam, more and more people are born into and embracing Islam... ALLAH O AKBER

By the way teshah, the above response to mj also applies to you :-)~~

Ciao

Re: # 297

ntsyed

``This particular hadith you`ve quoted has been quoted by the anti-Muslim camp for the obvious reasons. If I remember correctly, last time it was quoted to me by an Ahmedi, who whimsically accepts, quotes, and rejects the Prophet (pbuh) and his ahadith to suit/justify his claims. As I told him, I cannot verify the authenticity of the hadith without proper references, thus cannot make a comment on it until I do.``


Thank you dear ntsyed (`antisyed`,isn`t it?) for your interaction? I never imagined you to be so simple as to doubt the authenticity of Sunnan Abudawud and try to check up its veracity after a lapse of over 1000 years. For your information I had come across the said Hadees in the Urdu monthly `Aldahwah`of Lashkare Tayyabah. I was also surprised to read it as it seemed itself to be blasphemic as it appeared to negate the very concept of the Prophet as `Rehmatulaalimin`. Nay, in fact it negated blatantly all the human values avowed by Islam. What surprised me was the fact that the extremists invoked it for justifying the lynching of the people by accusing them of blasphemy. And you say this Hadees is quoted by anti-muslim camp for obvious reasons! For your information all `Illamdeeni` cult is obviously based on this Hadees. Sorry, my breakfast is getting cold. So, more later on.

Malikjahanzeb

Excuse me, dear, I don`t agree with your opinion about ntsyed. As appears from his ineraction discussed above he seems to be a simple muslim who has lot to learn about Islam.

Re: # 298

Dear Mr. teshah,

First of all, please accept my humble apologies for any disrespect I may have demonstrated in the previous response to you. I just looked at your profile, and being the younger in every sense of the word, I feel I owe you an apology.

You have correctly assessed my being a simple Muslim who has a lot to learn about Islam. If scholars like Bukhari and others of his stature - who devoted their entire lives to Islam, claimed they still had a lot to learn, even ``simple Muslim`` seems to be an overstatement in my case.

(`antisyed`,isn`t it?): Depends on who/what you`re referring to as syed ;-)~~

Being a learned man I hope you will oblige me with correction on my following few simple concepts.

I never imagined you to be so simple as to doubt the authenticity of Sunnan Abudawud and try to check up its veracity after a lapse of over 1000 years.

It is my belief that there is no such thing as blind faith in Islam, albeit a large number of contemporary Muslims believe so. As you`ve pointed out, various groups distort ahadith and even Quranic verses to lead uneducated and simple Muslims astray. Therefore, I always try to check the references before believing anything.

Following is my understanding of ahadith:
My information is that Abu Daud ranks fourth amongs the suha-sittah after Bukhari, Muslim, and Tirmidhi. He`s followed by Ibn Maja, and I can`t remember the sixth name. The significance of the ranking is to distinguish who amongst them has compiled most number of authentic ahadith. By that measure, Bukhari contains some dha`eef ahadith; Muslim has a slightly greater number of dha`eef ahadith, and so on.

Therefore, amongst the top four reporters, Abu Daud has most number of dha`eef ahadith.

Now, to distinguish a mustanad (authentic) hadith from others, I look at all the people who narrated a particular hadith until it reached one of the suha-sittah reporters. Their (narrators`) credibility, lineage and other factors are considered to determine the authenticity, because there are some israeli ahadith as well. As is apparent, the latter are narrated by Jews. Some of them are from the Old Testament and confirm various verses and ahadith of our Prophet (pbuh). Others of this group are either grossly distorted from the Old Testament and/or Quran and ahadith of our Prophet (pbuh) for the obvious purpose.

Therefore, veracity of a hadith must be checked if there seems to be controversy, contradiction, or anything of that sort, and doesn`t (at least seem to) conform to the Shar`ia. Then it is incumbent upon the literate to convey the truth to an illiterate like me. Otherwise, cults evolve and cause problems for everyone.

What little bit I have been able to discover about the hadith in question, it appears you`ve read and quoted a distorted version of a Sahih (authentic) hadith, as did the Ahmedi fellow.

The woman was not the blind man`s slave - she was his wife. (first twist ;-)~~)

Secondly, as you`ve mentioned yourself, he forbade and rebuked her repeatedly before resorting to the extreme measure out of frustration and overwhelming anger. Perhaps you can or cannot imagine the amount of love some of his (pbuh) followers have for him. Following is an apt example.

If you read about the Battle of Badr, Abu Jahal was brought down by two young boys, and later beheaded by an adult companion (ra). Historians claim that the boys were not even tall enough to hang their swords in their waistbands without dragging them (swords) on the ground. The only reason they were in the battlefield was to kill Abu Jahal because he used to slander the Prophet (pbuh). Now imagine Abu Jahal who was big burly and a fierce fighter, and imagine the love for the Prophet (pbuh) and courage of the two young boys, probably in their early teens if not younger. One of the boys was attacked by Abu Jahal`s son who severed one arm of the boy from shoulder. The arm was hanging only by skin, which became an obstacle for the boy. The boy pressed the hand of the cut and loosely hanging arm under his feet and yanked his arm away, and continued fighting until he was martyred. On the contrary, we witness the chicken modern soldiers of BS freedom crying and scared shi*tless, which they use to justify killing innocent civilians - men, women, and children. Later they end up in asylums or homeless or psychotics wreaking havoc on their populations.

Anyway, Context of the hadith in question: Blasphemy (second twist ;-)~~)
Blasphemy is also sedition, except that it is of the highest magnitude, i.e. against Allah. It is a direct and wanton attack on the very foundation of our faith.

For one thing, it provokes deep rooted emotions of the believers and drives them towards anger and violence, and all hell breaks loose. Naturally, when the foundation is attacked, the response called-for could not be mild.

Seconldy, if a blaphemer is not stopped he/she threatens the younger and future generations in terms of faith, understanding of Islam, and obedience to Allah. Ostensibly this is the case with a lot of people on this very portal. They greedily accept all that Allah gives them, then turn around and question His Existence and Mercy, then again they turn around and expect Mercy from Him.

Digression: the nation of `aad was destroyed for the very reason - they would ask Allah to forgive their previous sins and infractions but then turn around and mock Him again. Until, there came a point that Allah wiped them off. We as Muslims are lucky that our Prophet (pbuh) invoked Allah not to destroy us for similar behaviour. Otherwise, it`s certainly overdue for us.

Back to the topic...
Since Allah has appointed all His messengers Himself and guarantees their infallibility in all His scriptures He sent through them to the mankind, therefore, slandering the Prophets (pbut) - not just Mohammad (pbuh) - is also considered blasphemy against Allah.

Regardless of one`s gender, social status, etc. sedition and treason are to be punished severely, as the whole idea behind it is to disrupt the peace in a community and the concept of punishment is to maintain peace through law & order. Hence, blasphemy being sedition against the Highest Authority, must be dealt with accordingly to maintain law & order in the community.

However, the penalty is to be waived if the accused erred unintentionally out of ignorance and he/she repents and promises not to repeat the offense.

The current condition:
Ever since the world has stopped punishing the three major sins when they threaten the foundation and fabric of the society, for which Allah the Exalted Himself orders the rulers to impose death penatly - i.e. Shirk/disbelief/blasphemy, adultery, and murder, the entire humanity has spun out of control into lawlessness.

Cases in point:
It is legally permissible for the ignorants to blaspheme and ridicule the believers and their obedience to Allah, whereas believers - who have nothing to do with politics, war, terrorism - are horded in droves into jails, tortured beyond recognition and killed throughout the world. Believers are even forbidden to retort when ridiculed and persecuted. Justice, eh!

In predominently Muslim communities, Polygamy is becoming more and more taboo (mainly due to the weaknesses of the men involved), and in non-Muslim countries it is a crime. Meanwhile, prostitution and general fornication, which more than often result in abortion, infanticide, STDs, dysfunctional and broken families to name a few, have been legalised.

Murders and massacres are justified as wars for ``freedom``, while the freedom fighters - regardless of their religion and/or nationality - are deemed terrorists and even their families are tortured and killed with impunity. Hardened killers walk out free on technicality, while the victims are rendered statistics and `collateral damage`. On the other hand, killing the aggressors - be it at a national level or personal - is severely punished in various inhumane forms.

The current rule of thumb is ``might is right``. Every one does whatever he/she likes, chaos and anarchy has engulfed the whole world and only Shaitaan and disbelievers benefit from the prevailing volatile conditions. And if that`s the way we want it, then we cannot stop anyone from exerting his/her might. Certainly we cannot complain when Allah exerts His Might through His believers, as He retains most Rights to this earth than anyone and everyone inhabiting it.

As for our dear Prophet (pbuh) as `Rehmatulaalimin`, let there be no doube that second only to Allah, he (pbuh) is the Rehmatulaalimin as Allah has claimed in the Quran as well. Otherwise, he (pbuh) would not have granted general amnesty upon conquering Makkah. There were many other tribes and communities before and after that grand event that he (pbuh) pardoned and set free for the sake of Allah. Even the person who had martyred the Prophet (pbuh)`s dear uncle Hamza (ra) was spared when he embaraced Islam. It was his mercy and kindness that he (pbuh) never killed a hypocrite/apostate/disbeliever, even though Allah had made him (pbuh) well aware of those hyprocrites. The only times they were killed were when they had become a threat to the community.

As an expample, I`m sure you must have come across the exceptions on the conquest of Makkah. There were few (I don`t remember the exact number) major kuffar who had caused tremendous mischief in the past and were not going to change their ways in the future either. Hence, by Allah`s command, our Prophet (pbuh) ordered those few kuffars to be put to the sword and so they were.

The important thing to remember here is that whenever Allah raised a prophet from a community, the Prophets (pbut) only did what Allah told them to do. Not even a single letter any of them said that did not come to them from Allah. That`s why Allah stresses in the Quran and all the previous books to follow the Prophets (pbut) if one wishes to obey Allah, and disobedience of the Prophets (pbuh) is disobedience of Allah. Instead, for our contemporary conveniences we believe and obey Allah selectively, which negates the very definition of belief and faith in Him.

Now some, due to their ignorance and reluctance to seek the truth, twist the aforementioned facts as contraditions between Quran and Sunnah. Then so be it. One cannot be educated until he/she wishes for it. These people look for `one-line` solutions/answers, and mostly their first intent is to find words they can twist to maintain their ignorant complacency and material conveniences.

With a degree in political science, I`m sure you`ll agree that there is a reason to have a govt. Similarly, there are reasons for the govt to implement laws. Just the fact that the govt. of Pakistan (any govt for that matter) fails to implement fair hudood and all other laws and regulations to maintain peace and encourage properity at the behest of other countries, one does not automatically obtain the right to slander the Prophet (pbuh), Quran, and Allah. The ones who claim this right should be ready for the push back they receive. By virtue of their infringement, they forfiet the right to demand a certain level/kind of response.

If one wishes to live in a global village, then each and every one has to respect the others` views beliefs and so forth, MUSLIMS CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO BE THE ONLY ONES TO ABIDE BY THIS PRINCIPLE. If people who wish to live in the 70th century humor and/or blast the foundations of my belief and wish to live in the 7th century Arabia, then they should not complain about the manner I respond to their disrespect. The moment one disrespects the other, he/she loses the right to be respected, until and unless the agressor apologizes. I`m sure with your education and experience you have discerned who has started what, and what he/she deserves in return. To put it simply, it`s a two way street.

I hope your dinner is still warm.

M`as-salaam

Re: # 299:

``Murders and massacres are justified as wars for ``freedom``, while the freedom fighters - regardless of their religion and/or nationality - are deemed terrorists and even their families are tortured and killed with impunity. Hardened killers walk out free on technicality, while the victims are rendered statistics and `collateral damage`. On the other hand, killing the aggressors - be it at a national level or personal - is severely punished in various inhumane forms.

The current rule of thumb is ``might is right``. Every one does whatever he/she likes, chaos and anarchy has engulfed the whole world and only Shaitaan and disbelievers benefit from the prevailing volatile conditions. And if that`s the way we want it, then we cannot stop anyone from exerting his/her might. Certainly we cannot complain when Allah exerts His Might through His believers , as He retains most Rights to this earth than anyone and everyone inhabiting it.

--

Interesting.. don`t know if you live in North America.. If so, would be eager to know if FBI had a talk with u already..

nt, beleive me man you are sick. and your sickness has much to do with the inability to see it......

Urstruly,

I truly thank you for your support wrt the ``lecture`` and the subsequent posts. In addition to mine, your support has alleviated other`s confusion(s) as well. ;-)~~

M`as-salaam

MJ,

Here`s the explanation you`re looking for (Sattar is mostly correct on the subject, except that he does not remember the names, numbers, etc)

Tribe: Banu Quraiza
Religion: Judaism
Location: Madinah
Leader: Ka’ab ibn Asad
Fighting Strenght: 1000 men
Treaties:
1. Muslims, led by Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him)
2. Tribe of Aus, led by Sa’d ibn Mu’az (ra)

The battle of Ahzab or Confederates, who tried to surround and annihilate the Muslim community in Madinah is full of underhand intrigues (collusion, machinations, plotting, maneuverings, scheming) on the part of such diverse enemies as the Pagan Quraish, the Jews (Banu Nadhir) who had been already expelled from Madinah for their treachery, the Gatafan tribe of Bedouin Arabs from the interiors (the desert Arabs of Central Arabia), and the Jewish tribe of ”Banu Quraiza” in Madinah. This was the unholy Confederacy against Islam. But though they caused a great deal of anxiety and suffering to the beleaguered Muslims, Islam came triumphantly out of the trial and got more firmly established than ever.

The Quraish in Makkah had tried all sorts of persecution, boycott, insult, and bodily injuries to the Muslims, leading to their partial hijrat to Abyssinia and their Hijrat as a body to Madinah. The armed conflict between them and the Muslims took place at Badr in Ramadhan A.H. 2, when the Quraish were signally defeated. Next year (Shauwal A.H. 3) they came to take revenge on Madinah. The battle was fought at Uhud, and though the Muslims suffered severely, Madinah was saved and the Makkans had to return to Makkah with their object frustrated. After their successive defeats at Badr and then at Uhud, they began to make a network of intrigues and alliances, and besieged Madinah with a force of 10 – 12 thousand men in Shauwal and Zul-qa’da A.H. 5. This is the siege of the Confederates referred to in 33: 9-27, which lasted over two weeks; some accounts give 27 days. The entire Muslim population, including women, children, and elderly, was considerably less than the Confederate army (Coalition of the Willing, wouldn`t you say?). The battle caused much suffering for the Muslims, from hunger, cold, and unceasing shower of arrows, and constant general or concentrated assaults. But it ended in the discomfiture of the Confederates, and established Islam firmer than ever. It was a well-organized and formidable attack, but the Muslims had made preparations to meet it. One of the preparations, which took the enemy by surprise, was the Trench (Khandaq) dug round Madinah with advice and the supervision of Salman Farasi (ra) and by the Prophet (pbuh)’s order. The siege and battle are therefore known as the Battle of the Trench or the Battle of the Confederates.

After an investment of two to four weeks, during which the enemies were disheartened by their ill success, there was piercing blast of the cold east wind. It was severe winter, and February can be a very cold month in Madinah, which is about 3,000 ft. above the sea-level. The enemy’s tents were torn up, their fires were extinguished, the sand and rain beat in their faces, and they were terrified by the portents against them. They had already well nigh fallen out amongst themselves, and beating a hasty retreat, they melted away. The Madinah fighting strength was no more than 3,000, and the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza who were in their midst was a source of weakness as they were treacherously intriguing with the enemy. And further were the Hypocrites. But there were hidden forces that helped the Muslims. Besides the forces of nature there were angels, though invisible to them, who assisted the Muslims.

The onrush of the enemy was really tremendous. The Trench round the Madinah was between the defenders and the huge attacking force, which had some high ground behind them, which is in reference to “above you” in 33:10: when any of them came through the valley or over the Trench, they seemed to come from “below” as referred to in the same verse. The showers of arrows and stones on both sides must also have seemed to come from the air.

All the fighting men of Madinah had come out of the City and camped in the open space between the City and the Trench that had been dug all around. The disaffected Hypocrites sowed defeatist rumors and pretended to withdraw (today SOME of them are referred to as “moderates”) for the defense of their homes, though their homes were not exposed, and were fully covered by the vigilant defensive force inside the Trench.

Apparently, after the battle of Uhud, certain men who had then shown cowardice were forgiven on undertaking that they would behave better next time. A solemn promise made to the Messenger of Allah is a promise to Allah, and it cannot be broken with impunity.

In times of danger, they would look to the holy Prophet (pbuh) for protection, and keep themselves snugly from the fight. When the danger is past, they will come and brag and wrangle and show their covetousness or greed for gain (made or booty won) though they gave of themselves but sparingly. Considering his “overwhelming” knowledge of not just Quran but the entire Islam, Mirza Quadyani may be a direct descendant of these people. Does anyone know where exactly they’ve built their 5-star paradise in Pakistan?

The Jews of Banu Quraiza were counted the citizens of Madinah and were bound by solemn engagements (treaty) to help in the defense of the City. But on the occasion of the Confederate siege by the Quraish and their allies (Coalition of the Willing) they connived with the enemies and treacherously aided them.

Banu Quraiza’s leader was Ka’ab ibn Asad, who himself had made the pact of alliance with the Prophet (pbuh) on behalf of the entire Banu Quraiza to fight along side Muslims in the event of an attack. During the battle he was approached by the leader of Banu Nadhir (the Jewish tribe from outside Madinah), Huyy ibn Akhtab, to assist the Confederates from within Madinah. After receiving a promise from Huyy ibn Akhtab that in the event of Quraish’s retreat he would enter the Banu Quraiza castles to face the same fate as them, Ka’ab ibn Asad obliged and breached the treaty with the Prophet (pbuh) and the Muslims started assisting the enemies outside; even though he admitted that he had not seen anything except honesty, fidelity, trustworthiness in Mohammad (pbuh).

Simultaneously, they prepared/waited to attack the Muslims from within, as well as dispatched help outside to the Confederates. At one point Muslims intercepted 20 of their camels (KBR supplies convoy?) taking help outside the City to the Confederates.

Their first target was the Far’a castle which belonged to Hassan ibn Thabit (ra) and contained Muslim women and children when the City was attacked. Among the women were Prophet (pbuh)’s aunt, Safiyya bint Abdal Mutallib (ra). She noticed a Banu Quraiza Jew circling the castle in an attempt to breach it for the rest of the 1000 or so Banu Quraiza fighters. Alone she went out; picked up a stick and beat him to death with it. When his treacherous tribesmen heard about his death, they thought contrary to their initial assumptions there were Muslim fighters inside the castle to defend it. Consequently, being the typical cowards they were, they did not dare to attack the castle and turned their entire attention to attack (the Muslim Mujahids in the Trench) from the inside.

Immediately after the siege was raised and the Confederates had fled in hot haste, the Prophet (pbuh) turned his attention to these treacherous “friends” who had betrayed his City in the hour of danger.

Banu Quraiza was filled with terror and dismay when Madinah was free from the Quraish danger. They shut themselves up in their castles about three or four miles to the east (or north east) of Madinah, and sustained a siege of 25 days, after which they surrendered, stipulating that they would abide by the decision of their fate at the hands of Sa’d ibn Mu’az (ra) – chief of Aus tribe – with which they had been in alliance.

Sa’d (ra) applied to them the Jewish Law of the Old Testament, not as strictly as the case warranted. In Deuteronomy 20:10-18, the treatment of a city “which is very far off from the Jewish land” is prescribed to be comparatively more lenient than the treatment of a city “of those people, which the Lord thy God does give thee for an inheritance,” i.e. which is near enough to corrupt the religion of the Jewish people. The punishment for these is total annihilation: “thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth” (Dueteronomy 20:16). According to the Jewish standard, the Banu Quraiza deserved total extermination – of men, women, and children. They were in territory of Madinah itself, and further they had broken their engagement (treaty) and helped the enemy.

Sa’d (ra) adjudged them the milder treatment of the “far-off” cities which is thus described in the Jewish Law: “Thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword; but the women and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself, and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the Lord thy God hath given thee (Deuteronomy 20:13-14). The men of Banu Quraiza – who some say numbered around 1000 – were slain; the women were sold as captives of war and their lands and properties were divided among the Muhajirs.

Thus, the punishment was NOT meted out by the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), as your Zionist masters allege. They were punished by the leader of the Aus tribe (with which they had an alliance), Sa’d ibn Mu’az (ra) whom the Banu Quraiza Jews had asked for. Furthermore, they were punished according to their own Law of the Old Testament; and a lenient one at that, though by the same Law they deserved complete annihilation.

Go figure, eh?

Now you’ll have to find some special muck which doesn’t make a U-turn to hit you in the face. Atheism is OUT, dude...you`ll get kicked around from all sides, even Ahmedis....ha ha ha ha.

drlokraj, masanamuthu, malikjahanzeb, and rsridhar,

It couldn`t get any funnier than this... :-)~ I`m beginning to amaze myself at predicting the ``moderate Muslims`` and non-Muslim mindset. All praises be to Allah.

ALLAH O AKBER

I could start another thread of explaining to you the geo political situation beyond the headlines for your untrained minds, but then, they may not be able to handle the stress.

So just read my post again to see WHEN and UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES such actions were taken; also whether the behaviors of USA and Coalition of Willing has any similarity or not.

It`ll be good for your intellectual growth, if you`re able to figure it out. Otherwise, happy spinning!

Sridhar...
feel free to lash out against our Prophet (peace be upon him) if you wish; it will neither tarnish/diminish his name; nor the message he conveyed to the entire mankind; nor his followers who love him more than themselves and their families.

The Jews have been saying nastier things about Maraym (may Allah be pleased with her) and her son Jesus (peace be upon him) since the last two millenniums, as well as slandering our Prophet (peace be upon him) for the last 1400 years. But what do you know Joe... Christianity has the highest number of followers and it is soon to be surpassed by Islam in terms of following. Meanwhile, look up one of the current dire dilemmas the Jews have on their hands - their male population is rapidly diminishing and female population is growing out of proportions. I wonder why that may be...

Just as the two aforementioned Prophets (peace be upon them) used to forgive their critics, I will forgive you too, for annihilating an innocent ignorant is against the spirit of True Islam.

Also, feel free to puke all over your keyboard...the puke is yours and the keyboard is yours, so have a ball and knock yourself out.

However, here`s a food for thought for you: if the Muslim conquerors of India had converted the non-Muslim indigenous and exterminated the ones who did not convert, do you think there would be any Hindus and other religions left after centuries unchallenged rule of Muslims there?

Study the history and think with your mind, not your emotions that get riled up with the headlines.

Re: # 286

``I could start another thread of explaining to you the geo political situation beyond the headlines for your untrained minds, but then, they may not be able to handle the stress.

So just read my post again to see WHEN and UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES such actions were taken; also whether the behaviors of USA and Coalition of Willing has any similarity or not...``

---

Yeah right..

Don`t you think the same ``WHEN and WHAT circumstances`` apply to Bush as well..*after Sept 11, it is no longer possible to ignore Muslims as just a set of regressives who want to take the world back to the 7`th century..``

Looks like we need to get trained by you to understand your logic.. I don`t want to end up in Guantanamo bay though.. thanks but No thanks..

---

Regarding this article, I emphathise with the author and understand the suffering of women. As you can see from the direction of the discussion, there seems to be a quite a number of people who believe in the correctness of a 7`th century document and its universality. If you read Quran you`l find where all this treatment of women is coming from.. Unfortunately I think there is little hope in fighting for respect or equal rights in a society that is formed on the basis of a dogmatic religion entrenched in regressive beliefs..

Just to end on a positive note, you can try to invoke religion to get some rights, like having a women`s jamaat to decide on women`s issues etc.. rape cases need to be handled by a sharia court with women judges etc.. fight for equal rights in mosques or form a separate mosque etc

Re: # 289 & 290

I think for now Yale & Harvard would suffice you to learn the basics of logic and its relationship with rationale. Noam Chomsky there will be wonderful resource for you to begin with. Perhaps, then you`ll be ready to understand what this whole thing is really about.

``Don`t you think the same ``WHEN and WHAT circumstances`` apply to Bush as well..

NO!

I think you need to take some time off chowk and read the various international reports to understand what exactly is going on... too much CNN, BBC, and Fox are not good for anyone`s intellect.

*after Sept 11, it is no longer possible to ignore Muslims as just a set of regressives who want to take the world back to the 7`th century..

It is not about Muslims trying to take the whole world back to 7th century. How many Muslims do you think are in South America? How about China...do you think N. Korea has a sizable Muslim population?

It is the US led Coalition of Willing who are taking the world in that direction...even farther back to 7th century BC. Afghanistan, Iraq, and Palestinian camps are just a few clear proofs of that. But the truth seldom jumps out from the headlines; one has to dig deeper to get to it.

Do you think the growing global economic gap between the rich and poor is being widened by the Muslims? Do some studying to see who`s driving this train backwards.

Why do you think that after thousands of arrests, torture, killings by the US and the rest of the Coalition of the Willing there has not been ``1`` single SOLID ``conviction`` on terrorism?

Why do you think after 5 years of Bush reign, Palestinian issue remains where it was when he stole the White House? Sure it must be the Palestinians... `cause Bush, Sharon and AIPAC, AEI, The Hudson Institute, etc are mere lambs and doves of peace and prosperity for all.

Why do you think Iraq continues to burn 2 years after the mighty Coalition forces removed the terrible dictator? Do you think they really don`t have the means to crush the rebellion?

With their control over Afghanistan, do you think they`re really that weak to stop the poppy cultivation and most horrible law & order situation? What`s seems to be the problem when the Taliban have been chased off and they recently had successful elections?

Why do you think not one Hindu fanatic has been charged in the Gujrat riots yet? Even when official Indian reports have declared that Muslims did not instigate it. Which century do you think those Hindus were from...500 BC, or the stone age to have cut out the unborn babies from their alive mother`s wombs just to see what would happen to their tiny heads on their tiny bodies if a boulder was dropped on them? Do you think it would take the Indian govt. that long to find the culprits and mete out justice, when they allegedly have a formidable force to swallow Pakistan effortlessly and then take on the Chinese?

But hey, the`re the largest democracy of the World, majority of whose population is being pushed into destitution, drugs, thuggery, prostitution, etc etc etc. It has come to the point that one of the elightened Indians here claims that ``Prostitutes are most liberal women`` `cause they have the guts to work alone at night. The dim wit doesn`t realize that muder and robbery are even more gutsy acts, which would then make the hardened criminals more and more liberal as their rapsheets gets longer. And it is so refreshing to see that NONE of the liberal women came forward to correct him. Nor did any of the Righteous Liberal Men had anything to say about it. It must be the new trend. WOW!

I don`t know about you or the aforementioned groups, but I`ll be bluntly honest with you that I cannot allow women of my household to reach this new summit of Liberalism.

You need to read the Quran on your own, instead of reading verses here & there and believing what the disoriented ``moderate`` Muslims here have to say in order to modernize Islam, beofre you form an opinion about it. As Pink Floyd said, these people are comfortably numb in their western cocoons. Little do they (or even the non-Muslim mouth pieces of the Corporate Crooks and King makers of G8) know that even if they reddened their hands with Muslims blood to appease the Coalition of the Willing, the latter will slaughter them before they have a bout of conscienceness. It was recently demonstrated in Bosnia, Kosovo, Gujrat, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

But one cannot expect the Headline Generation juveniles to put in that effort.

MJ,
nt, beleive me man you are sick. and your sickness has much to do with the inability to see it......

That`s it? Is that the best you could come up with? LOL

You turned out to be hot air after all. afsos sud afsos....sighhhhhhhhhhh

The straitjacketed inside an asylum always consider the ones outside as mentally sick

since you`re into poetry, I`m sure you could explain this following one to me;

badal ker bhase phir atay hain her zamanay mein;
agarchey peere hai adam, jawan hain laat o manat;
wo aik sajda jisay to gira(n) samajhta hai;
hazar sajdon se deta hai aadmi ko nijaat.

Beware though; do come up for air when its depth begins to drown you :-)~~

Ciao

but sattar, they were all liars.......

MJ,

But first, here’s more on Banu Quraiza issue … that was raised earlier. I have read and understood the following …

Muslims had entered treaties with different communities in Medina, agreeing to defend each other if attacked. During the Battle of Ditches, the Meccan army laid a siege to Medina. Muslims dug ditches to prevent the enemy from charging in. Forests, mountains, and settlements etc. prevented attacks from the (3?) remaining sides. Meccans then conspired with Banu Quraiza. The plan was that the Meccan army will attack from the front, and Banu Quraiza will launch a simultaneous attack on Muslims from behind.

Muslims found out about this plan, posted army to prevent being attacked from behind, and repelled frontal Meccan attacks. The plan failed. Eventually the Meccans got tired, packed their bags, and left. It was now time to deal with Banu Quraiza for their betrayal.

And this is where history becomes somewhat contentious …

Leaders of Banu Quraiza did not want Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to be the judge over this issue. They did not trust him and did not think he’d be fair to them. Instead they chose one of the senior Jewish leaders to be the judge (name?). Muslims led by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) agreed to this choice. The judge strictly followed Torah on the matter, and the verdict was that of death, as specified by Torah.

Much uncertainty surrounds the number of Jews hence executed. Some accounts indicate that all adult men of Banu Quraiza (totaling 800?) were executed. This very well may not have been the case. It is hard to imagine all adult male population directly involved in this attack. Furthermore, since people were following orders, it is not fair to blame all men who participated. My understanding is that mainly the ring leaders of Banu Quraiza were executed for this conspiracy … which probably totaled 20 - 40 or so men … which ain’t bad at all.

Furthermore, I think remaining population of Banu Quraiza was given a choice … if they wanted to stay or leave. They chose to leave … and were allowed to go. It is quite possible that some were taken as slaves for additional compensation as decided on the matter.

Some fair-minded historians think Banu Quraiza leaders erred by rejecting Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as the judge. Noting the general amnesty granted at the fall of Mecca, some historians are of the opinion that if given a chance, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) may have been lenient on this matter.

+++++++++

As for kick a$$ stuff on Mirza Sahib or anyone else for that matter … I am not your man. I think they were all good men … Moses, Buddha, Muhammad, Krishna, Jesus, Mirza … and all. They taught good lessons, made personal sacrifices … and did what they could to alleviate human suffering. May they all rest in peace … may we too find peace on earth … and may my options recover a bit more over the next fiscal year … amen, amen, and amen.

... and that’s too many posts for one day ... have a good weekend mate …

hamidm,

I hear you chief … I am just busting some mullah chops here. They come in all flavors … some are wide-eyed jihadis … others try to rationalize their holier-than-thou hang ups. They’re all f#$%ing hypocrites.

Keenness to preach Quran seems to be their common trait. Maybe there’s something hideous about the book itself … or at least those sermonizing others on it. Or maybe the ummah is missing out on benefits of having an occasional drink to loosen up. In any case, no amount of taqwaa is worth the an@l sense of self-righteousness that often accompanies it.

+++++++++

ntsyed (#272), here`s one more for blessed friday …

``More power to the ones (whoever they may be) believing #202.``

Your cousin Urstruly believes in #202. No kidding … just ask him. And when you do, also ask about #259. You`ll be shocked ... and will probably shave off your beard.

Re: # 281 sattar,

you are doing a great service to prophet hamidm by busting mullah chops and pointing out the funny side of quran and it`s author.

but to let you enter the heretic club, you will have to pass thru the litmus test.

now that you have cut the base on which you were standing, why not move on the next logical step? in short, we need to hear some kick a$$ stuff about mirza sahib of qadiyan.

come on man, you can do it........

Again, ntsyed is just a name. Other than that, everything is the same as it always was.

Dullabhati,

My comment was in response to Urstruly’s assertion. He had suggested that those who reject prophethood of Mirza Sahib are considered non-Muslims by Ahmadis. This is incorrect. According to Ahmadi views, rejecting Mirza Sahib (or other prophets that may follow) does not make one non-Muslim.

Yes, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the highest deity in Islam. Quran calls him the most exalted prophet (Seal of Prophets), the “best example”, “mercy for all worlds”, and asks believers to obey him.

Your point has some validity in that arguably one must accept prophethood of Muhammad (pbuh) in order to be a “Muslim” … since the term Muslim comes from Quran, which also attests to prophethood of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). However, owing to mullahs selectively ignoring Quran, all bets are off. No kidding. There are all sorts of theories floating around among ullema ... about which verse of Quran or recorded hadith abrogates which verse of Quran. It gets very complicated ... just ask Naqshbandi ... who pointed me to a few sources ... before discovering the truth about me. Like Urstruly, he too no longer talks to me. I guess I must have upset him ... or something. Oops!

Now why do some mullah get very defensive about prophet Muhammad (pbuh), but not so much about Allah … is a bit of a mystery … which I too have noticed at times.


ntsyed,

I have asked Urstuly … may be you can help … with the question I raised in #259. I think the fire is under his tail, as well as yours. Crack, crack, boom.

Water? Or chusni?

Aah the Jews!
They voted with their feet. If there was ever such an injustice they would not have flocked to the muslim-ruled lands.

Spain, Morroco,Aljaazair, Egypt, Iraq, Iran--keep counting there are hundreds of names.

Oh yeh they did go to ``christain`` and ``pagan`` lands but only during the last century.

Their most glorious rennaisance was under the muslim lands; of course as dhimmis. Every Jewish writer attests to that.

The jews of Calcutta , who have now more or less dwindled to a few now,, speak eloquently and fondly of their muslim friends, servants and mullahs [ as recently reported in the Toronto Star]. So much so that even during Taliban days they refused to migrate[no it was not the money]. Jews in Pakistan held important goverment positions & prospering--it is only recently that they emigrated from other lands to Israel & the west--India, Russia included.

David, the well-known Indian actor personally told me about the treatment he received at the hands of fellow racist (europen Jews) who refused to accept him because of his Anwar Sadat looks. He insisted that Moses and Jesus really looked like him ( Haa Haa). They refused him burial in their cemetry. It was the muslims who buried him. Even in Israel all jews who are de-jewed by their Levis ( Brahmins) are buried in muslim cemetries. Even in Toronto two years ago there was a huge procession and police was called in when a `jew` was not allowed in a Jewish cemetry.

So let the descendants of Bani-Quraiza figure such intra Islamic-Jewish affairs. Their is no need for the Hanumaans for this monkey-chatter & jumping from tree to tree. The true subject to discuss is Ghori & Ghazni--and I admit that there is a lot of catching upto do there.

re: # 273-276

We get too caught up with names, ntsyed is bad or such is good. These are just names, individuals. In the march of time, individuals come and go.

The religious belief system then is exactly the same as it is now. Merely the outer layering and labelling gets changed in a tactical response to time and place.

As always I have directly put this question:

Irrespective of where it went and what outer form it took, has Islam changed in any fundamental sense since the day Ijtehad began?

---

If people still continue to get confused with names, labels, and outer forms, then truly, we may have nothing really worth preserving of our own.

re: some A-hole`s comment
``After winning the war, if the prisoners accepted Islam, they would be set free. Otherwise, they would be beheaded. Why? In the Quran, Allah tells the Prophet (pbuh) to tell the non-believers (when the latter was confronted with same question as yours today) that yes, killing is abhorrible, but their mischief (fitna) is even worse. Meaning, if the non-Muslims did not desist from threatening the Muslim communities - militarily or otherwise - they are begging to be killed. In other words, snakes never befriend anything except their kind, thus should be killed before they turn into serial killers.``
I am not active in this thread (thank God for that). This seems to be an islamic thread and i can see why it stinks.
Some of u guys seem to be in a time-warp, still living in bedouin Arab land, forgetting that the world has moved on.
It also shows why Islamic countries are so regressive.
The above sentence that some A-hole quoted seem to justify killing of non-muslims.
Muslim invaders came to India, conquered, raped and killed. They did not give the population any choice to live in peace with them without having to renounce their religion. The choice was: convert or perish.
So, if your prophet said that this was O.K, tell u what, i have just lost respect for him. In my many years on Chowk, one thing i never did was to lash out against your prophet but i think it is time now to do so.
You guys are just pathetic. You still hang on to some goddamn outdated book written in a language most of u do not understand. I just feel like puking all over the keyboard.
Sridhar

Re: # 275

``Muslim invaders came to India, conquered, raped and killed. They did not give the population any choice to live in peace with them without having to renounce their religion. The choice was: convert or perish.``

This is not quite true. After conditions stabilized, Hindus were able to, and did, live according to their religious beliefs. The only condition was to accept a subservient status, which they did. Some Muslim rulers are said to have gone even farther and respected some Hindu sensitivities, such as wrt killing of cows.

Re: # 249

MJ, I do not argue if my information is incomplete. You`re fooling yourself to believe that I`m shying away. I don`t believe in shooting from the hip in these matters. As I said, Insha Allah, I`ll look up your allegation and give you a solid answer simply to perpetuate your nightmare :-)~

I looked up Dr. Lactantius` paper. Let me just put it this way: I can dissect his each and every argument for you, but then you may lack the attention span for it. I`m glad you don`t claim yourself to be a Muslim if you fall for people who constantly trip over their own tongues. Read the article carefully and you`ll see it for yourself.

As for the banu quraiza... I dread to ask you of its source lest it be a devious yahudi like danial pipes.

Generally speaking though, as the Muslims were establishing their sovereignty, the practice was to invite every non-Muslim individual and communities to Islam; particularly the ones in proximity. If the invitation was rejected, then treaties were offered to respect each other`s territories and trade cravans passing through. If the non-Muslims rejected/breached the treaties but their mischief was did not pose an imminent threat to Muslims, they would be given certain amount of time to rethink their options. Otherwise, if the Muslim community was imminently threatened, the enemy would be called to war. After winning the war, if the prisoners accepted Islam, they would be set free. Otherwise, they would be beheaded. Why? In the Quran, Allah tells the Prophet (pbuh) to tell the non-believers (when the latter was confronted with same question as yours today) that yes, killing is abhorrible, but their mischief (fitna) is even worse. Meaning, if the non-Muslims did not desist from threatening the Muslim communities - militarily or otherwise - they are begging to be killed. In other words, snakes never befriend anything except their kind, thus should be killed before they turn into serial killers.

If the women of the vanquished accepted Islam, they were set free and allowed to marry the Muslims. Same with children. Otherwise, keeping them as slaves was more feasible than leaving them on their own for survival, which often forced women into prostitution. Most of the prostitues today are also forced to dehumanize themselves out of economic deaperation, regardless of how much some idiot claims that prostitutes are most liberal women. I know, you`d like the latter option, but not only it strikes at the heart of moral fabric of the societies, it spreads diseases which directly threaten the societie`s well being in more ways than one.

Now read carefully again before you compulsively hammer your response on the keyboard.

Frankly, you continue to disappoint me more and more by believing anything and everything without its context. It seems that even Canada has failed to instill objectivity in your thought processes, but you expect others to be objective.

Afsos sud afsos...

Re: # 267

``In the Quran, Allah tells the Prophet (pbuh) to tell the non-believers (when the latter was confronted with same question as yours today) that yes, killing is abhorrible, but their mischief (fitna) is even worse. Meaning, if the non-Muslims did not desist from threatening the Muslim communities - militarily or otherwise - they are begging to be killed. In other words, snakes never befriend anything except their kind, thus should be killed before they turn into serial killers.

If the women of the vanquished accepted Islam, they were set free and allowed to marry the Muslims. Same with children. Otherwise, keeping them as slaves was more feasible than leaving them on their own for survival, which often forced women into prostitution. Most of the prostitues today are also forced to dehumanize themselves out of economic deaperation, regardless of how much some idiot claims that prostitutes are most liberal women..``

---

WOW, what a defence for prophet and his army`s (s)exploits.. ?. I`m replacing a few words from your sentences..

``In 2003, God tells George Bush (pbuh) to tell the Muslims (when the latter was confronted with same question as yours today) that yes, killing is abhorrible, but their mischief (fitna) is even worse. Meaning, if the Muslims did not desist from threatening the non-Muslim communities - militarily or otherwise - they are begging to be killed. In other words, snakes never befriend anything except their kind, thus should be killed before they turn into serial killers.

If the women of the vanquished accepted American democracy, they were set free and allowed to marry the Christian soldiers. Same with children. Otherwise, keeping them as slaves was more feasible than leaving them on their own for survival, which often forced women into prostitution. Most of the prostitues today are also forced to dehumanize themselves out of economic deaperation, regardless of how much some idiot claims that prostitutes are most liberal women..``

---

Don`t know why you guys are making a big hue and cry for ``Abu-ghraib`` or ``Guantanamo``. The American soliers were just following the Quran and the prophet. You should be proud..

:-))

Re: # 273 masanamuthu,

ha ha ha ha

jawab nahin yaar....

Re: # 267

``Meaning, if the non-Muslims did not desist from threatening the Muslim communities - militarily or otherwise - they are begging to be killed. In other words, snakes never befriend anything except their kind, thus should be killed before they turn into serial killers.``

Going by that logic,what Bush and his allies are doing to muslims after 9/11 is correct.Where will this lead to ?

>>>No has been able to prove him otherwise, because no one can, and no one will be able to achieve that fantasy

thanks for admitting a fantacy, a fantacy.

>>>No has been able to prove him otherwise, because no one can, and no one will be able to achieve that fantasy

this is what the sane call `height of stubbornness`. yani ke, ``haan, nahin, magar aesa nahin hay kiyoo ke aesa ho hi nahin sakta``.

>>>No has been able to prove him otherwise, because no one can, and no one will be able to achieve that fantasy

no one has ever proved that a crow is black. because it is all about the definition of what is black.

baray bhai,

i agree with you that mo was flawless. but my perspective is very peculiar when i say that.

Re: # 266

``thanks for admitting a fantacy, a fantacy.``

I thank your inability to read and the ability to twist words out of context, otherwise I wouldn`t have had this opportunity to clarify.

Fantasy in this regard is the futile desire of discrediting the Prophet Mohammad, Allah`s peace and blessings be upon him. Considering your short attention span, I think you wouldn`t want me to define rest of the words in the sentence following Fantasy :-)~

``this is what the sane call `height of stubbornness`. yani ke, `haan, nahin, magar aesa nahin hay kiyoo ke aesa ho hi nahin sakta```.

By the same definition, you`re also stubborn to believe that Allah, Quran, and Prophet Mohammad, Allah`s peace and blessings be upon him, is flawed becuase you refuse to look at the context to maintain your ``enlightened`` complacency. Whereas, I hope my previous response made it clear to you that I look up the matter before offering a response. I may still come up with a wrong answer, but before you and ilk deem it wrong, look up the matter thoroughly and substantiate your claims. Otherwise, more of you will become freaked out spinning Sattars who follow their tails thinking it`s the enemy following them :-)~

``no one has ever proved that a crow is black. because it is all about the definition of what is black.``

Colors - in terms of pigments: All humans determined it a long time ago that even if equal amounts of primary colors pigments - i.e., red, blue, and green - are mixed, the product color would be unrepresentative of any of the colors therein. Thus, just like the dark night when not much can be seen, this product was determined BLACK, KALA, ASWAD, etc.

In terms of light, the mixture of same colors produces White. I hope you can figure out the rest.

I have a pretty good guess as to where you`re going to go from here - i.e. your next spin... but I`d rather wait for it to see how predictable you and your ilk are.

the age of prophets. when will it come?

guys when will we learn from the history?

when i look at people like mo and hazrat mirza ghulam ahmed of qadiyaan and shree guru nanak of nankaana sahib, i see great people. these are the people above all of us. they are a lesson for us. these are the folks who have not bowed to anything but have made others bow to themselves. the techniques they used is another matter. you gotta have some means.

these are the people who are the reason why we are circucised. they are the reason why we celibrate eid. they are the reason of becomming of pakistan and india and saudi arabia. these are the people who have pushed the practical and thoeratical limits of the human race to where we find us today. they injected a great mass of energy in rather numb people to do something, to find out what lies ahead. these people might be tyrants and frauds for the contemporary, but for us they are a blessing. they are the very people because of whome we are in a position to denounce them. they bear a profound lesson and that lesson is, how to become prophets. how to witness the triumph of will. how to reach the next big thing.... how to become supermen.

so folks, good luck with being prophets. hamidm uncle is already there. i am on my way. others are awaited.

hamidm: Why, O holy one with his own masjid, is it so important to be a muslim? What is wrong with DullaBhatti (for example) who is not a muslim?? He seems like a fine fellow to me, at least as good a man it appears as any muslim poster on chowk, and surely Allah would not have a problem with him choosing his own faith (or lack thereof) as long as he does not go around doing or condoning evil deeds (like blowing up shia mosques for example)(in which case calling oneself a muslim wouldnt help anyway).

#260
Unless you meant ``.....rejecting of prophet of Allah as last prophet.....``

#255

Sattar: You said ``Firstly, rejecting a prophet of Allah does not make one a non-Muslim.``

Is there any aspect of Islam whose source (hadith) or ``medium`` (book) is not Prophet Mohammad? If you are going to reject the prophet, how are you going to believe what he said? if you are not going to believe what he said or did what is your definition of Islam left? on ther other hand If you are believing in him how can you reject him? My understanding so for is that Mohammad is the highest deity in Islam and without his credibility, and hence credibility of his words, there is not much of Islam left. That is the reason I have seen time and again people get away with badmouthing Allah but a word against the Prophet and all hell breaks loose.
please clear this point.

Urstruly,

I think ntsyed is now more curious about the Prophet (pbuh) brutally violating Quran and being reminded by others of his conduct (from what I recall you telling me ... he tried to starve Meccans into subjugation ... causing extreme hardship for even the elderly, women, infants, pregnant mothers, kids ... everyone ... ).

No wonder Jerry Falwell is still upset ...

Faruk: and one more thing - dont dare say anything against my Hazrat Maulana Hamidm. He is hafiz-e-Quran (not just from beginning to end but can also recite it backwards from the end to the beginning), and a haji (every year). If you dare write against him, I shall tell him to say a special ``badduaa`` to you. Also, he will no doubt run for elections and become the next prime minister - and then with what face (kis mooN say) will you go and ask for a sugar license or cement license?? Think about these things before saying anything negative about my Maulana Hamidm!!

Faruk #253 You seem like a wise man. I will switch my pir from Hamidm to you. ;-)

Urstruly (#241),

I am honored that you’ve asked me. I hope we can stay on talking terms this time.

”Muslim” issue

Firstly, rejecting a prophet of Allah does not make one a non-Muslim. This issue rests between Allah and each individual. Earlier you made up stuff against Ahmadis … only to discover that your web-mullahs misguided you. I hope you’ve learnt your lesson by now.

More on Ahmadi-Muslims

Quran explains why Ahmadi-Muslims are considered kaffirs by others. Each time a prophet of Allah appears, corrupt elements of society gather to oppose him. Quite often the charge is led by corrupt clergy. Example of Jesus Christ comes to mind in this context. He came to guide people back to Mosaic Law and was betrayed by the clergy.

Islam, like any other religion, has suffered at the hands of its followers. Emphasis on peace, dignity, and compassion is replaced with corrupt political ideologies, oppression, and ill-conceived calls for jihad. Islamic laws on blasphemy, apostasy, and adultery underscore this issue. Stories about prophets raising the dead, flying above clouds to meet with god further underscore this issue. Quran suggests that Allah will raise prophets to revive teachings of Islam as people go astray.

On the same issue, dear Prophet (pbuh) foretold that Allah will raise Issa-ibne-Marriam in latter days of Islam. This metaphor emphasizes parallels between Jesus Christ, raised earlier, and the prophet who will appear later among the Muslims. In this context he also prophesied that people of Issa-ibne-Marriam will be singled out by all 72 sects of corrupt ummah. He said …

“ …my people will be divided into 73 sections, all of them will be in the fire except one.`` The companions asked, `Who are they O Messenger of Allah,` Holy Prophet (pbuh) said, ``They are those who will be like me and my companions.``

In an unwitting fulfillment of this prophecy, ullema from all 72 sects declared Ahmadis non-Muslims. This declaration seems to attest to truthfulness of Islam, the dear Prophet (pbuh), and views of Ahmadi-Muslims. Furthermore, Ahmadis are not allowed to declare their faith in kalima, to pray openly, or to perform hajj. These are some more parallels between Muslims then, and Muslims now.

I hope this suffices. On the same note, tell us more, as you claimed, about the dear Prophet (pbuh) brutally violating Quran, of which he was reminded by others. Surely we all can learn from you.

Re: # 255

........... i am a muslim ........

........... and if i am a muslim, then you, my friend sattar, are also a muslim if you want to be one ........ as long as you are circumcised, believe in a super-being named al-lah, celebrate eid and shab-i-barat, and every now and then bow towards mecca, you are a muslim regardless of what urstruly or others have to say ........ as muslims we have every right to criticize our prophet and it is our prerogative to disagree with some of the things that he did or said ....... it is that simple ! ........... now, personally i have some major issues with the character of muhammad, but that is no reason to dump him - after all there were other prophets who were way out of line and yet their followers are more than happy to give them the benefit of doubt ............ no?

......... i am seriously thinking of forming my own masjid ......... send money ......

Re: # 255

See there was no need to get into tizzy over a simple question. I hope this answers ntsyed`s querry.

dost-mittar

``The problem arises when people claim that the message is as valid today as it was then.``

Precisely. People who understand what you are saying don`t bother defending the indefensible. Intellectually, morally, and psychologically they have moved on. Others haven`t. That`s the problem.

It`s the whole concept of religion as clear and unerring guide to action in general, not just Islam. Would you think that villagers who regularly beat up their women would not find justification and vindication in such verses? Of course, they did.

Intellectuals may rationalize them all they want, but here lie THE real roots of our today`s evils.

(just a thought: as if Hitler`s murders of Jews had nothing to do with the Bible and with Chrisitanity! LOL...but let`s not go there, since we are rightly focused on Hindus and Muslims)

re : tahmed 32 #251
“I think that summarizes it. (havent read the article or the discussion, but i have blind faith in hamidm).”

Your statement caught my eye…..

it’s very close to the sate of Muslims in the world today.


Most have not read the book or understood anything in it, but they have blind faith in some guy who has strung a beard between his ears……


Regards,

Faruk

ntsyed,

I think I know which verses you keep referring to … but wanted to see if you have the integrity to come forward. Apparently you don’t.

Killing people for worshipping their gods is absurd … and is negated by common sense as well as Quran. Executing ``infidels and hypocrites`` for anti-state terrorist activities applies to everyone ... regardless of who they worship.

BTW, you cousin Urstruly, when cornered, once admitted that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) blatantly and brutally violated Quran … and was reminded of this by others. The Prophet (pbuh) apparently realized his mistake, and made appropriate changes in his conduct. I kid you not ... all this is coming from Urstruly!!! Now, it’s a travesty for a Muslim to hold such beliefs … isn’t it? (Urs, correct me if I am wrong … won’t you?).

You cousins also hold mutually contradictory views on ahadith. You acknowledged that they contain errors, Urstruly does not think so. So maybe the two of you should sort out your Islam first. And feel free to ask echo for advice … apparently he knows how to copy-and-paste.

Lastly, MJ asked you a simple question about Banu Quraiza … and you’re rambling once again. What`s up with that?

Re: # 252

Sattar,

Just as your dyslexia is incurable, which forces you to omit/add/delete letters/words from/to your opponent`s comments, your chasing your own tail is approaching advanced stages.

Now that you seem to be bored of the flies, let me help you tie a pack of fire crackers at the end of your tail.

Oh, i see... Urstruly already did that...thank Urstruly!

Happy spinning and freaking out Sattar!

250: I think that summarizes it. (havent read the article or the discussion, but i have blind faith in hamidm).

nt:

so this time its you who is shying away from the arguments. come on man, you could have done a better job than making your man stand in line with tyrants, dictators and killers. i completely missed any argument if you had any.

tell me, if such massacres are a routine in this not-so-rosy world, why do we need a religion for the first place, if it doesn`t intend to improve the situation?

is god sitting in front of the tv, eating pop-corn while he enjoys the show? or is he like you and me, who desparately wants the situation to improve but is too egoistic to talk to me directly?

Oh another Head of State, who is also a Pope err ..Poopy? The other `great` ones are the Jerry-Springer family of England. There also a Poopy (female pope) holds the Orb in one hand and the Mace in the other.

L`aanUt lUkhh L`aanUt on such lowclass among humanity. Are they not aware that muslims are there for a purpose? Does she not know the number of Danes who are abandoning
her royal deviousness for Islam.

No it is the western thuGGs who are in muslim lands who should leave; but they are there like vultures, hyenas, and crows--nobody has changed their muslim lifestyle or Islamic laws. Let Karzais, Musharrafs, Mubaraks et al remain confined within their Palaces & the Western thuGGs in their bases. May Allah increase their security so much that they know not the difference between a prison and a palace.

No muslim has ever been conquered!...unless of course when he sells himself and tries to become ``moderate``, ``enlightened``..in short westoxicated.

---

Danish queen warns against rise of Islam
Queen Margrethe II says in her new book people must on occasion show their opposition to Islam.

COPENHAGEN - Denmark`s Queen Margrethe II warned against the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Denmark and the world in a new book out on Thursday, saying people must on occasion ``show their opposition to Islam``.

``It is a challenge we have to take seriously. We have let this issue float about for too long because we are tolerant and very lazy,`` she said in the authorized biography ``Margrethe`` written by journalist Annelise Bistrup.

While she did not specifically refer to fundamentalism, she spoke of ``these people for whom religion is their entire lives``.

``We have to show our opposition to Islam and we have to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on us because there are some things for which we should display no tolerance,`` she said.

``And when we are tolerant, we must know whether it is because of convenience or conviction,`` added the queen, who has reigned since 1972 and celebrates her 65th birthday on Saturday.

Denmark has in recent years been accused of fuelling xenophobic tendencies after implementing a slew of measures aimed at curbing immigration. The government has argued that it wants to focus efforts on improving the assimilation into Danish society of immigrants already in the country.

Queen Margrethe, who professes a knowledge of Islam due to her interest in archaeology, said it was ``natural that young Muslims would be attracted`` to the faith`s absolute values and seek refuge in religion ``as they are cut off from our community because of their lack of (Danish) language skills.``

``It`s not just a matter of speaking and understanding`` Danish, she said, but also ``understanding the language`s codes, and we have to help them.``

The queen, who is hugely popular among Danes, is the head of the Lutheran-Evangelical Church, of which 85 percent of Denmark`s 5.4 million inhabitants are members. Muslims make up about three percent of the population.

kaalchakra#245:
``(2) asked that we be aware of the historical time, arguing that the verse was true THEN but now NOW``

In my opinion, this can be a valid argument, not just for Ramayan, but also for Mahabharat, Quran, Bible or any other scripture. The problem arises when people claim that the message is as valid today as it was then.

As an aside, that particular verse, as far as I know, is not in the original Valmiki Ramayan but only in the Tulsidas version, which is probably more reflective of the time when he wrote it, namely during the 16th century Avadh.

re: dost-mittar # 231, teshah

Shahji had the reference wrong, but his argument is right. Islam was not the first religion to openly institute broad discriminations against women. Being a latecomer it merely got rid of a few inequities prevalent in the-then Arabic society, retained other social inequities, and created many brand new ones.

---

Still, `pashu dhol...`` reference is very apt. During the days of my childhood, spent living in an Indian village, I heard almost every defensive method that is even today standard fare for all Koranists worldwide. In random order, here are the top 15 avoidance strategies used by people -


They

1) looked for `compensating` verses from other parts of Ramcharit Manans,

(2) asked that we be aware of the historical time, arguing that the verse was true THEN but now NOW

(3) asked that we consider the place, arguing that the verse was revealed in a particular SITUATION and since we don`t face that situation now, no harm is done.

(4) reinterpreted the words, suggesting those words meant very different from what any lay person would obviously take them to mean.

(5) brazenly blamed the reader - the confusion, it was argued, arose because the reader did not `read intelligently, `with an open mind,` or was too closed in his/her heart, or was too ignorant, or not read well enough in commentaries on the book. If the reader thought harder, was more open to receiving God`s word, or educated himself by reading up on commentaries, etc. (s)he would get what God meant.

(6) adopted a ``So-what? Naturalist Imperative - nature discriminates - argument.

(7) adopted a ``So-what? Divine Imperative - these are God`s words - argument, implying you and I could not outguess or judge God.

(8) highlighted the miracle of the book - how could one book be full of such wisdom, beauty and have caught the imagination of so many people?

(9) highlighted the miracle of the ``author`` - how could an ordinary person write such a miraculous book? / or its variant, who were we to assume we know better than Goswami ji?``

(10) highlighted the force and sufficiency of tradition - how could an ordinary person question the wisdom of validated by people over centuries?

(11) advanced the ``cardboard religion`` argument - if