Ibn Warraq Rebuttal Blog

The Quran: A Divine Book Rebuttal to Ibn Warraq's 2002 book What the Koran Really says

2007-03-20T17:38:00.000-07:00

The Quran: A Divine Book

By Ehteshaam Gulam

Rebuttals to Ibn Warraq’s 2002 book, What the Koran really Says.

******* INTRODUCTION *********

After reading Warraq’s foolish 1995 book, Why I am Not a Muslim, I can positively say that Ibn Warraq is no scholar. As a matter of fact, I can say that most of his material is so bad, I can refute it easily. And that’s what I am going to do with his 2002 book, what the Koran really says.

First off, the book is NOT a Quran where Warraq has his own commentary. The book rather is a collection of essays and works by others of the Quran.

The book mainly deals with such stuff as the sources of the Quran, Allegations that the Quran copied off the so-called Dead Sea Scrolls, Coptic sources of the Quran (again, the same allegation of the Quran copying off the Bible), Alleged manuscript problems of the Quran, Who was Dhul-Quruin, etc. It doesn’t deal with alleged contradictions, etc of the Quran rather it deals with the sources, the compliation, and the written text of the Quran.

The Book is about 782 pages long, but don’t be fooled, the material can again be easily refuted. Its just the same stuff over and over written by different bums rather than Ibn Warraq.

For the Quran to copy off the Qumran or Dead Sea Scrolls, lets take a look at this allegation and see just how silly and dumb it really is.

For more info of the Quram and Dead Sea Scrolls please visit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls

First off the Qumran is located in Israel NOT in Arabia. It’s foolish that Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) traveled all the way to Israel to write a Holy Book. Moreover not every book from the Bible was found there, the following books were found in the Qumran cave:

Psalms, Deuteroomy, 1 Enoch, Genesis, Isaiah, Jubliess, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Minor Prophets, Daniel, Jermiah, Ezekiel, Job, 1 and 2 Samuel.

Moreover the Quran is very different from the Bible, remember the Bible contains detailed lists of events and such. The Quran however only tells a little of the story and not so much about the details. For example, stories about Jesus are found in the Gospels, however the stories in the Quran about Jesus differ greatly. The Quran tells a story of Moses and Al- Khidir in chaptet 18, the cave while nowhere in the Bible does this story exist. Moreover these scrolls were discovered sometime in 1947 NOT sometime in the 6th century the time the Quran was revealed to Prophet Mohammed.

Remember that Pre-Islamic Arabia had no Books whatsoever as this hadith states:

Bukhari Volume 3, Book 31, Number 137:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
The Prophet said, "We are an illiterate nation; we neither write, nor know accounts. The month is like this and this, i.e. sometimes of 29 days and sometimes of thirty days."
And we have several examples of Pre-Islamic poetry:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Polemics/poetry.html
http://www.georgetown.edu/departments/arabic/bonnah.htm

Moreover the Quram cave contained a Hebrew version of the Bible. Nobody in Prophet Mohammed’s inner circle knew Hewbrew that well as this hadith demonstrates:

Book 017, Number 4211:
Abdullah b. 'Umar reported that a Jew and a Jewess were brought to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) who had committed adultery. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to the Jews and said: What do you find in Torah for one who commits adultery? They said: We darken their faces and make them ride on the donkey with their faces turned to the opposite direction (and their backs touching each other), and then they are taken round (the city). He said: Bring Torah if you are truthful. They brought it and recited it until when they came to the verse pertaining to stoning, the person who was reading placed his hand on the verse pertaining to stoning, and read (only that which was) between his hands and what was subsequent to that. Abdullah b. Salim who was at that time with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Command him (the reciter) to lift his hand. He lifted it and there was, underneath that, the verse pertaining to stoning. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) pronounced judgment about both of them and they were stoned. Abdullah b. 'Umar said: I was one of those who stoned them, and I saw him (the Jew) protecting her (the Jewess) with his body.
Notice how the person had to read the Torah, and not Prophet Mohammed or Abdullah b. Salim. Moreover this was in a Jews possession and not so Prophet Mohammed’s possession. The Torah was in Hebrew and not in Arabic, thus making it impossible for Prophet Mohammed to copy off of.

Moreover here are the datings of an Arabic Bible:

The earliest Arabic version of the Old Testament is that of R. Saadias Gaon of 900 C.E.

The oldest Arabic version of the New Testament was published by Erpenius in 1616 C.E.

Remember the Bukhari Hadith I stated above. To see the science of the Hadith, read my Book Why I am a Muslim: Sliencing the false propaganda of Ibn Warraq in the Feburary section. How can the Quran copy off the Bible when the Bible didn’t even exist at the Prophet’s time? There are no sources of the Quran.

The Quranic stories differ from the ones found in the Bible. For evidence read and compare the following:

The story of Adam: Quran 2:30-29 ; 7:19-24 ; 15:28-29 ; 32:7-9 vs. Genesis 2:4-3:24

Cain and Abel: Quran 5:27-31 vs. Genesis 4:1-16

Prophet Noah: Quran 11:25-34; 36-48; 23:23-30; 26:105-122 vs. Genesis 6:9-9:29

Prophet Abraham’s sacrifice: Quran 37:99-112 vs. Genesis 22:1-19

Prophet Lot and the Destruction of Sodom: Quran 7:80-84; 11:77-83; 15:57-77; 21:74-75; 26:160-175 vs. Genesis 19:4-28

Prophet Joseph: Quran 12: 4-101 vs. Genesis 37:3-37:36; 39:1-47:12

Prophets Moses and Aaron: Quran 2:51-61; 7:104-156 ; 10:75-92 ; 11:96-97 ; etc. vs. Deuteronomy 9:8-29

Prophet Samuel and King Saul: Quran 2:246-250 vs. 1 Samuel 8:4-10:8; 17:1-11

Prophet David Quran 2:251 vs. 1 Samuel 17:1-54

Prophet Jonah: Quran 37:123-132 vs. Jonah 1:1-4:6

A prophet analysis of the above verses will make it clear that both the Quran and the Bible are different from one another in many aspects.

Another Essay I found Online proves the preservation of the Quran here:

Proof of The Preservation of the Quran
By Sabeel Ahmed

There are hundreds of religions flourishing around the world: Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Bahaism, Babism, Zoroastrianism, Mormonism, Jehovas Witnesses, Jainism, Confucianism etc. And each of these religions claim that their scripture is preserved from the day it was revealed (written) until our time. A religious belief is as authentic as the authenticity of the scripture it follows. And for any scripture to be labeled as authentically preserved it should follow some concrete and rational criteria.
Imagine this scenario:
A professor gives a three hour lecture to his students. Imagine still that none of the students memorized this speech of the professor or wrote it down. Now forty years after that speech, if these same students decided to replicate professor's complete speech word for word, would they be able to do it? Obviously not. Because the only two modes of preservation historically is through writing and memory.
Therefore, for any claimants to proclaim that their scripture is preserved in purity, they have to provide concrete evidence that the Scripture was written in its entirety AND memorized in its entirety from the time it was revealed to our time, in a continuous and unbroken chain. If the memorization part doesn't exist parallel to the written part to act as a check and balance for it, then there is a genuine possibility that the written scripture may loose its purity through unintentional and intentional interpolations due to scribal errors, corruption by the enemies, pages getting decomposed etc, and these errors would be concurrently incorporated into subsequent texts, ultimately loosing its purity through ages.
Now, of all the religions mentioned above, does any one of them possess their scriptures in its entirety BOTH in writing AND in memory from the day of its revelation until our time.
None of them fit this required criteria, except one: This unique scripture is the Qur'an - revelation bestowed to Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) 1,418 years ago, as a guidance for all of humankind.

Lets analyze the claim of the preservation of the Quran...
Memorization
'In the ancient times, when writing was scarcely used, memory and oral transmission was exercised and strengthened to a degree now almost unknown' relates Michael Zwettler.(1)
Prophet Muhammad (S): The First Memorizer
It was in this 'oral' society that Prophet Muhammad (S) was born in Mecca in the year 570 C.E. At the age of 40, he started receiving divine Revelations from the One God, Allah, through Archangel Gabriel. This process of divine revelations continued for about 22.5 years just before he passed away.
Prophet Muhammad (S) miraculously memorized each revelation and used to proclaim it to his Companions. Angel Gabriel used to refresh the Quranic memory of the Prophet each year.
'The Prophet (S) was the most generous person, and he used to become more so (generous) particularly in the month of Ramadan because Gabriel used to meet him every night of the month of Ramadan till it elapsed. Allah's Messenger (S) use to recite the Qur'an for him. When Gabriel met him, he use to become more generous than the fast wind in doing good'. (2)
'Gabriel used to repeat the recitation of the Qur'an with the Prophet (S) once a year, but he repeated it twice with him in the year he (Prophet) died'. (3)
The Prophet himself use to stay up a greater part of the night in prayers and use to recite Quran from memory.
Prophet's Companions: The First Generation Memorizers
Prophet Muhammad (S) encouraged his companions to learn and teach the Quran:
'The most superior among you (Muslims) are those who learn the Qur'an and teach it'. (4)
'Some of the companions who memorized the Quran were: 'Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Ibn Masud, Abu Huraira, Abdullah bin Abbas, Abdullah bin Amr bin al-As, Aisha, Hafsa, and Umm Salama'. (5)
'Abu Bakr, the first male Muslim to convert to Islam used to recite the Quran publicly in front of his house in Makka'. (6)
The Prophet also listened to the recitation of the Qur'an by the Companions: 'Allah Apostle said to me (Abdullah bin Mas'ud): "Recite (of the Quran) to me". I said: "Shall I recite it to you although it had been revealed to you?!" He Said: "I like to hear (the Quran) from others". So I recited Sura-an-Nisa' till I reached: "How (will it be) then when We bring from each nation a witness and We bring you (O Muhammad) as a witness against these people?"' (4:41) 'Then he said: "Stop!" Behold, his eyes were shedding tears then'. (7)
Many Quranic memorizers (Qurra) were present during the lifetime of the Prophet and afterwards through out the then Muslim world.
'At the battle of Yamama, many memorizers of the Quran were martyred. 'Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al Ansari, who was one of those who use to write the Divine Revelations: Abu Bakr sent me after the (heavy) casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle of) Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra (those who memorized the entire Quran) at other place..."' (8)
'Over the centuries of the Islamic Era, there have arisen throughout the various regions of the Islamic world literally thousands of schools devoted specially to the teaching of the Quran to children for the purpose of memorization. These are called, in Arabic, katatib (singular: Kuttab). It is said that the Caliph 'Umar (634-44) first ordered the construction of these schools in the age of the great expansion'. (9)
Second Generation Memorizers:
"...Quranic schools were set up everywhere. As an example to illustrate this I may refer to a great Muslim scholar, of the second Muslim generation, Ibn 'Amir, who was the judge of Damascus under the Caliph Umar Ibn 'Abd Al-Aziz. It is reported that in his school for teaching the Quran there were 400 disciples to teach in his absence". (10)
Memorizers in Subsequent Generations:
The Number of Katatib and similar schools in Cairo (Egypt) alone at one time exceeded two thousand. (11)
Currently both in the Muslim and non-Muslim countries thousands of schools with each instructing tens of hundreds of students the art of memorizing the entire Quran. In the city of Chicago itself, there are close to 40+ Mosques, with many of them holding class for children instructing them the art of Quranic memorization.
Further Points of Consideration:
* Muslims recite Quran from their memory in all of their five daily prayers. * Once a year, during the month of Fasting (Ramadan), Muslims listen to the complete recitation of the Quran by a Hafiz (memorizer of the entire Quran) * It's a tradition among Muslims that before any speech or presentation, marriages, sermons, Quran is recited.
Conclusion:
Quran is the only book, religious or secular, on the face of this planet that has been completely memorized by millions. These memorizers range from ages 6 and up, both Arabic and non-Arabic speakers, blacks, whites, Orientals, poor and wealthy.
Thus the process of memorization was continuous , from Prophet
Muhammad's (S) time to ours with an unbroken chain.
"The method of transmitting the Quran from one generation to the next by having he young memorize the oral recitation of their elders had mitigated somewhat from the beginning the worst perils of relying solely on written records..." relates John Burton (12)
"This phenomenon of Quranic recital means that the text has traversed the centuries in an unbroken living sequence of devotion. It cannot, therefore, be handled as an antiquarian thing, nor as a historical document out of a distant past. The fact of hifz (Quranic Memorization) has made the Qur'an a present possession through all the lapse of Muslim time and given it a human currency in every generation never allowing its relegation to a bare authority for reference alone" reflects Kenneth Cragg (13)

Written Text of the Quran
Prophet's Time:
Prophet Muhammad (S) was very vigilant in preserving the Quran in the written form from the very beginning up until the last revelation. The Prophet himself was unlettered, did not knew how to read and write, therefore he called upon his numerous scribes to write the revelation for him. Complete Quran thus existed in written form in the lifetime of the Prophet.
Whenever a new revelation use to come to him, the Prophet would immediately call one of his scribes to write it down.
'Some people visited Zaid Ibn Thabit (one of the scribes of the Prophet) and asked him to tell them some stories about Allah's Messenger. He replied: "I was his (Prophet's) neighbor, and when the inspiration descended on him he sent for me and I went to him and wrote it down for him..." (14)
Narrated by al-Bara': There was revealed 'Not equal are those believers who sit (home) and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah' (4:95). The Prophet said: 'Call Zaid for me and let him bring the board, the ink pot and scapula bone.' Then he (Prophet) said: 'Write: Not equal are those believers...' (15)
Zaid is reported to have said: 'We use to compile the Qur'an from small scraps in the presence of the Apostle'. (16)
'The Prophet, while in Madinah, had about 48 scribes who use to write for him'. (17)
Abdullah Ibn 'Umar relates:... 'The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "Do not take the Qur'an on a journey with you, for I am afraid lest it should fall into the hands of the enemy"' (18)
During the Prophet's last pilgrimage, he gave a sermon in which he said: 'I have left with you something which if you will hold fast t it you will never fall into error - a plain indication, the Book of God (Quran) and the practice of his Prophet...' (19)
'Besides the official manuscripts of the Quran kept with the Prophet, many of his companions use to possess their own written copies of the revelation'. (20)
'A list of Companions of whom it is related that they had their own written collections included the following: Ibn Mas'ud, Ubay bin Ka'b, Ali, Ibn Abbas, Abu Musa, Hafsa, Anas bin Malik, Umar, Zaid bin Thabit, Ibn Al-Zubair, Abdullah ibn Amr, Aisha, Salim, Umm Salama, Ubaid bin Umar'. (21)
'The best known among these (Prophet's Scribes) are: Ibn Masud, Ubay bin Kab and Zaid bin Thabit'. (22)
'Aisha and Hafsa, the wives of the Prophet had their own scripts written after the Prophet had died'. (23)
Conclusion:
The complete Quran was written down in front of the Prophet by several of his scribes and the companions possess their own copies of the Quran in the Prophet's lifetime. However the written material of the Quran in the Prophet's possession were not bounded between the two covers in the form of a book, because the period of revelation of the Qur'an continued up until just a few days before the Prophet's death. The task of collecting the Qur'an as a book was therefore undertaken by Abu Bakr, the first successor to the Prophet.
Written Quran in First Generation:
At the battle of Yamama (633 CE), six months after the death of the Prophet, a number of Muslims, who had memorized the Quran were killed. Hence it was feared that unless a written official copy of the Quran were prepared, a large part of revelation might be lost.
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al-Ansari, one of the scribes of the Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra (memorizers of the Quran, were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle) of Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra at other places, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost, unless you collect it (in one manuscript, or book)...so Abu Bakr said to me (Zaid bin Thabit): You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness) and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript)'...So I started locating the Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who know it by heart)..." (24)
Now, a committee was formed to under take the task of collecting the written Quranic material in the form of a book. The committee was headed by Zaid bin Thabit, the original scribe of the Prophet, who was also a memorizer of the complete Quran.
'...Zaid bin Thabit had committed the entire Quran to memory...' (25)
The compilers in this committee, in examining written material submitted to them, insisted on very stringent criteria as a safeguard against any errors.
1. The material must have been originally written down in the presence of the Prophet; nothing written down later on the basis of memory alone was to be accepted. (26) 2. The material must be confirmed by two witnesses, that is to say, by two trustworthy persons testifying that they themselves had heard the Prophet recite the passage in question. (27)
'The manuscript on which the Qur'an was collected, remained with Abu Bakr till Allah took him unto Him, and then with Umar (the second successor), till Allah took him unto Him, and finally it remained with Hafsa, 'Umar's daughter (and wife of the Prophet)'. (28)
This copy of the Quran, prepared by the committee of competent companions of the Prophet (which included Memorizers of the Quran) was unanimous approved by the whole Muslim world. If they committee would have made a error even of a single alphabet in transcribing the Quran, the Qurra (memorizers of the Quran) which totaled in the tens of hundreds would have caught it right away and correct it. This is exactly where the neat check and balance system of preservation of the Quran comes into play, but which is lacking for any other scripture besides the Quran.
Official written copy by Uthman
The Quran was originally revealed in Quraishi dialect of Arabic. But to facilitate the people who speak other dialects, in their understanding and comprehension, Allah revealed the Quran finally in seven dialects of Arabic. During the period of Caliph Uthman (second successor to the Prophet) differences in reading the Quran among the various tribes became obvious, due to the various dialectical recitations. Dispute was arising, with each tribe calling its recitation as the correct one. This alarmed Uthman, who made a official copy in the Quraishi dialect, the dialect in which the Quran was revealed to the Prophet and was memorized by his companions. Thus this compilation by Uthman's Committee is not a different version of the Quran (like the Biblical versions) but the same original revelation given to the Prophet by One God, Allah.
Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham (Syria) and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Armenia and Azherbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their differences in the recitation of the Quran, so he said to Uthman, 'O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and Christians did before'. So Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, 'Send us the manuscripts of the Quran so that we may compile the Quranic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you'. Hafsa sent it to Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Said bin Al-As and Abdur Rahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, 'In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Quran, then write it in their (Quraishi) tongue'. They did so, and when they had written many copies, Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied and ordered that all the other Quranic materials whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt..." (29)

Again a very stringent criteria was set up by this Committee to prevent any alteration of the Revelation.
1. The earlier recension (Original copy prepared by Abu Bakr) was to serve as the principal basis of the new one. (30) 2. Any doubt that might be raised as to the phrasing of a particular passage in the written text was to be dispelled by summoning persons known to have learned the passage in question from the Prophet. (31) 3. Uthman himself was to supervise the work of the Council. (32)
When the final recension was completed, Uthman sent a copy of it to each of the major cities of Makka, Damascus, Kufa, Basra and Madina.
The action of Uthman to burn the other copies besides the final recension, though obviously drastic, was for the betterment and harmony of the whole community and was unanimously approved by the Companions of the Prophet.
Zaid ibn Thabit is reported to have said: "I saw the Companions of Muhammad (going about) saying, 'By God, Uthman has done well! By God, Uthman has done well!" (33)
Another esteemed Companion Musab ibn Sad ibn Abi Waqqas said: "I saw the people assemble in large number at Uthman's burning of the prescribed copies (of the Quran), and they were all pleased with his action; not a one spoke out against him". (34)
Ali ibn Abu Talib, the cousin of the Prophet and the fourth successor to the Prophet commented: "If I were in command in place of Uthman, I would have done the same". (35)
Of the copies made by Uthman, two still exist to our day. One is in the city of Tashkent, (Uzbekistan) and the second one is in Istanbul (Turkey). Below is a brief account of both these copies:
1. The copy which Uthman sent to Madina was reportedly removed by the Turkish authorities to Istanbul, from where it came to Berlin during World War I. The Treaty of Versailles, which concluded World War I, contains the following clause:
'Article 246: Within six months from the coming into force of the present Treaty, Germany will restore to His Majesty, King of Hedjaz, the original Koran of Caliph Othman, which was removed from Madina by the Turkish authorities and is stated to have been presented to the ex-Emperor William II". (36)
'This manuscript then reached Istanbul, but not Madina (Where it now resides)'. (37)
2. The second copy in existence is kept in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. 'It may be the Imam (master) manuscript or one of the other copies made at the time of Uthman'. (38)
It Came to Samarkand in 890 Hijra (1485) and remained there till 1868. Then it was taken to St.Petersburg by the Russians in 1869. It remained there till 1917. A Russian orientalist gave a detailed description of it, saying that many pages were damaged and some were missing. A facsimile, some 50 copies, of this mushaf (copy) was produced by S.Pisareff in 1905. A copy was sent to the Ottoman Sultan 'Abdul Hamid, to the Shah of Iran, to the Amir of Bukhara, to Afghanistan, to Fas and some important Muslim personalities. One copy is now in the Columbia University Library (U.S.A.). (39)
'The Manuscript was afterwards returned to its former place and reached Tashkent in 1924, where it has remained since'. (40)
Conclusion:
'Two of the copies of the Qur'an which were originally prepared in the time of Caliph Uthman, are still available to us today and their text and arrangement can be compared, by anyone who cares to do, with any other copy of the Quran, be it in print or handwritten, from any place or period of time. They will be found identical'. (41)
It can now be proclaimed, through the evidences provided above, with full conviction and certainty that the Prophet memorized the entire Quran, had it written down in front of him through his scribes, many of his companions memorized the entire revelation and in turn possess their own private copies for recitation and contemplation. This process of dual preservation of the Quran in written and in the memory was carried in each subsequent generation till our time, without any deletion, interpolation or corruption of this Divine Book.
Sir Williams Muir states, " There is otherwise every security, internal and external, that we possess the text which Muhammad himself gave forth and used". (42)
Sir William Muir continues, "There is probably no other book in the world which has remained twelve centuries (now fourteen) with so pure a text". (43)
This divine protection provided to the Quran, the Last Reveled Guide to Humanity, is proclaimed by One God in the Quran:
We* (Allah) have, without doubt, send down the Message; and We will assuredly Guard it (from corruption)' (Quran - Chapter 15, Verse 9). *('We' is the plural of Majesty, and not the Christian plural of trinity)
Compare this divine and historical preservation of the Quran with any literature, be it religious or secular and it becomes evident that none possess similar miraculous protection. And as states earlier, a belief is as authentic as the authenticity of its scripture. And if any scripture is not preserved, how can we be certain that the belief arising out of this scripture is divine or man made, and if we are not sure about the belief itself, then our salvation in the hereafter would be jeopardized. Thus this above evidence for the protection of the Quran from any corruption is a strong hint about its divine origin. We request all open hearted persons to read, understand and live the Quran, the 'Manual for Mankind'. _____________________________________________________________________________________
by Sabeel Ahmed
ChooseIslam@yahoo.com
References:
1. (1) (Michael Zwettler, The Oral Tradition of Classical Arabic Poetry, p.14. Ohio State Press: 1978
2. (Transmitted by Ibn Abbas, collected in Sahih Al-Bukhari, 6.519, translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan)
3. (Transmitted by Abu Hurayrah, collected in Sahih Al-Bukhari, 6.520, translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan)
4. (Transmitted by Uthman bin Affan, collected in Sahih Bukhari, 6.546, translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan).
5. (Jalal al-Din Suyuti, 'Al-Itqan fi-ulum al-Quran, Vol. I p.124)
6. (Ibn Hisham: Sira al-nabi, Cairo, n.d., Vol.I, p.206).
7. (Bukhari, 6.106)
8. (Al-Bukhari, 6.201)
9. ( Labib as-Said, the Recited Koran, Translated by Bernard Weiss, M.A.Rauf, and Morroe Berger, The Darwon Press, Princton, New Jersey, 1975, pg.58).
10. ((Ibn al Jazari, Kitab al-Nash fi al-Qir'at al-Ashr, (Cairo al-Halabi, n.d._ vol. 2, p. 254, also Ahmad Makki al-Ansari, al-Difa' An al-Qur'an. (Cairo, Dar al-Ma'arif, 1973 C.E.), part I, p.120)
11. (Labib as-Said, the Recited Koran, Translated by Bernard Weiss, M.A.Rauf, and Morroe Berger, The Darwon Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1975, pg.59)
12. (John Burton, An Introduction to the Hadith, p.27. Edinburgh University Press: 1994)
13. (Kenneth Cragg, The Mind of the Qur'an, p.26. George Allah & Unwin: 1973)
14. (Tirmidhi, Mishkat al-Masabih, No. 5823)
15. (Bukhari, 6.512)
16. (Suyuti, Itqan, I, p.99)
17. (M.M.Azami, Kuttab al-Nabi,Beirut, 1974)
18. (Muslim, III, NO. 4606, also 4607, 4608; Bukhari, 4.233)
19. (Ibn Hisham, Sira al-nabi, p.651).
20. (Suyuti, Itqan, I, p.62).
21. (Ibn Abi Dawud: Masahif, p.14)
22. (Bayard Dodge: The fihrist of al-Nadim: A Tenth Century Survey of Muslim Culture, New York, 1970, pp.53-63)
23. (Muwatta Imam Malik, Lahore, 1980, no.307, 308, translation by M. Rahimuddin).
24. ((Bukhari 6.201)
25. (Labib as-Said, The Recited Koran, translated by Bernard Weiss, et al. 1975, p.21.
26. (Ibn Hajar, Fath, Vol. IX, p.10)
27. (ibid., p.11)
28. (Bukhari, 6.201)
29. (Bukhari, 6.510)
30. (Ibn Hajar, Bath, IX, p. 15)
31. (Suyuti, Itqan, Vol.I, p.59)
32. ((ibid., p.59).
33. (Naysaburi, al-,Nizam al-Din al-Hasan ibn Muhammad, Ghara'ib al-Quran wa-ragha'ib al-furqan. 4 vols. To date. Cairo, 1962).
34. ((Ibn Abi Dawud, p.12)
35. Zarkashi, al-, Badr al-Din, Al-Burhan fi-ulum al-Quran, Cairo, 1957, Vol. I, p. 240.
36. (Fred L. Israel, Major Peace Treaties of Modern History, New York, Chelsea House Pub., Vol. II, p. 1418 )
37. (Makhdum, op.cit., 1938, p.19).
38. (Ahmad Von Denffer, Ulum Al-Qur'an, Islamic Foundation, revised ed., 1994, p.63)
39. (The Muslim World, Vol.30(1940), pp. 357-8.)
40. (Ahmad von Denffer, Ulum Al-Quran, Islamic Foundation, revised Ed., 1994, p.63).
41. (ibid., p,64)
42. (Sir Williams Muir, Life of Mohamet, Vol.I. Introduction)
43. (ibid.)

Alleged Grammatical Errors of the Quran are addressed here:

http://www.understanding-islam.com/related/text.asp?type=article&aid=18

Alleged Manuscript problems with the Quran are addressed here:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Mss/

(The site also has pictures of the preservation of the Quran and early Quranic manuscripts)

Response to Dave The Web Master of ex-christians.net

2007-03-08T19:02:00.000-08:00

I am famous! I was doing a search on my name out of boredom (my college class was cancelled) and came across an article written about me by Dave the Web master of
ex-christians.net.

First off if Dave is reading this, then I would like to thank him. Making fun of Christianity is one thing I enjoy doing in my spare time. Dave's site caters to that crowd.

Second my response to him. Dave wrote:

I think Islam is every bit as ridiculous as Christianity. But, if I were still a Christian, I might have to pause and think after reading statements like this defending Islam. Would I just chock it up to Satan counterfeiting good Christian apologetics so as to cause confusion? When I was still a Protestant Christian, and I heard Catholics defending their latest apparition of Mary, I'd think they were either lying, or if they really had visions, the visions were just a Satanic counterfeit. Occasionally, however, when logic would prevail, Catholic stories of silly apparitions and idiotic miracles would make me stop and questions whether I wasn't just fooling myself too.

So, here's a question: Why would an Islamic adopt the apologetic rhetoric of fundamentalist Christianity? Is it Satanic counterfeiting? Is it because these "reasons to believe" are so persuasive? Or is it something else?

What do you think?

You can read his article at

http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2007/03/what-exactly-does-atheism-prove.html

To answer him, no Islam wouldn't resort to that. Christianity has NO evidence for itself. Therefore it has to lie about himself. And those Catholic visions of Mary are no truer than the tooth fairy. So Dave, yeah, I agree with you Christianity is ridiculous. However Islam has a whole lot of evidence for itself. Dave, if your reading this why not go to the following sites:

http://wwww.examinethetruth.com
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com

and see the evidence for yourself.

As for the statement of Satanic involvement here is a rebuttal of that by Dr. Zakir Naik top Islamic scholar of our times:

Question

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

Answer

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

Surah Waqiah, chapter 56 verses 77-80

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

In a Book well-guarded,

Which none shall touch
But those who are clean:

A Revelation from the Lord
Of the Worlds."

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1.

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

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

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

2.

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

In Surah Al Aaraf chapter 7 verse 200

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

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

3.

In Surah Baqarah, chapter 2 verse 168

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

4.

In Surah Yasin, chapter 36 verse 60

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

for that he was to you an enemy avowed?"

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

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

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

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

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

So Dave after looking at all the evidence for Islam, come talk to me. And keep up the good work in making a joke out of Christianity, I love your site.

-Ehteshaam

Oh BTW I still dont believe a majority of your so-called testimonies to be from ex-Christians.

What does Atheism Prove?

2007-03-03T21:13:00.000-08:00

What does Atheism Prove?

Ibn Warraq and his followers are mainly atheist, agonistics. Secularist, etc. But I have to ask, what exactly does atheism prove? Absolutely nothing. I’ll explain.

An atheist has to purpose, no salvation, no afterlife… its like this world is it and that’s all we have. But because of this, that means that the atheists can drink, smoke, do drugs, rape, murder, etc. After all they only have one life to live… so why not live it to its fullest? So a world without God is a world worse than a world with God… there’s nobody holding us back from doing evil… Imagine a world where no law or order exist…. That would be an atheist world. Atheism is the belief that no God exist… and its atheism that actually hurts people rather than helps them. When somebody becomes an atheist, that means they are free to do whatever they want. Eventually they destroy themselves… using drugs, sex outside marriage, lying, cheating, stealing…. All these are fair game to an atheist. After all whos stopping them from doing these things? Atheism destroys the soul… it gives it no meaning, no purpose.

But if there’s more to this life? And that’s where Islam comes in.

Islam is the only religion on the face of this earth that actually has evidence for it. And it makes sense. There are no Chosen people, crucified saviors, idol worship, blind dogma…. It’s a religion that is beautiful, complex and makes sense if you think about it.

So I ask the reader…. Would you rather follow nothing or something? Would you follow something that is blind such as Atheism or Christianity or Islam, the only religion that has evidence for itself? The choice is yours.

Rebuttals to Atheism:

http://www.harunyahya.com/c_refutation_atheism.php

Miracles of the Quran:
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com
http://www.examinethetruth.com

For Rebuttals for Christianity Please read

The Cross and the Crescent By Jerald F. Dirks
Lost Christianities By Bart Erhman
Misquoting Jesus by Bart Erhman

Prophet Mohammed's various marriages explained

2007-03-03T20:40:00.000-08:00

Prophet Mohammed (P) Various Marriages Explained.

Scholar Reza Aslan in his Book No God But God (2005) explains Prophet Mohammed(pbuh)'s various marriages.

Out of boredom on Friday I went to Borders, and as usual I was looking through the religious books. I found a very intersting book called No God but God by Religious scholar Reza Aslan. I had my notebook handy with me so I started copying down info off his book (I Didnt want to pay 14.95 plus tax for it....so I am cheap, sue me...) so here is it is, Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him)'s various marriages explained.

The following info was taken from the book No God but God: The Origins, Evolution and Future of Islam by scholar Reza Aslan. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in Religion from Santa Clara University, a Master of Theological Studies from Harvard University, a Master of Fine Arts in Fiction from the University of Iowa, and is currently a Doctoral Candidate in Sociology of Religions at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

The City of the Prophet Page 63:

The community that Mohammed was trying to build in Yathrib would be doomed without polygyny.

The City of the Prophet page 64:

Muhammad’s unions with Aisha and Hafsa linked him to the two most important and influencial leaders of the early Muslim community- to Abu Bakr and Umar respectively. His marriage to Umm Salamah a year later forged an important relationship with one of Mecca’s most powerful clans, the Makhzum. His union with Sawdah- by all accounts an unattractive widow long past the age of marriage-served as an example to the Ummah to marry those women in need of financial support. His marriage to Rayhana, a Jew, linked him with the Banu Qurayza, while his marriage to Mariyah, a Christian and a Copt, created a significant political alliance with the Ruler of Egypt.

The City of the Prophet page 65:

Like the great Jewish patriarchs Abraham and Jacob, like the prophets Moses and Hosea, like the Isrealite Kings Saul, David and Solomon and like nearly all of the Christian/Byzantine & Zoroastrian/Sasanian monarchs, all shakhs in Arabia-Mohammed included had either multiple wives, multiple concubines, or both. In seventh century Arabia, a Shaykh’s power and authority was in large part determined by the size of his harem. And while Mohammed’s union with a nine-year-old-girl may be shocking to our modern sensibilities, his betrothal to Aisha was just that: a betrothal. Aisha did not consummate her marriage to Muhammad until after reaching puberty, which is when every girl in Arabia without exception become eligible for marriage.

In an interview Reza Aslan had this to say about Prophet Mohammed (p)’s treatment of women:

Two, he also went through great strides to give women the opportunity to maintain some semblance of equality within the community. Certainly he didn't say women are equal to men in society. After all, we are talking about 7th century Arabia. But he did give them the right to divorce their husbands, the right to inherit, the right to maintain their own businesses and their own property, the right to keep their dowry as their own private property throughout their marriage. These were, again, revolutionary ideas in a society in which women were by and large considered property. Like cattle.

From The Agonist: Exclusive Interview with Author Reza Aslan, Sean-Paul Kelley | San Antonio | April 29, http://agonist.org/

2007-03-03T20:38:00.000-08:00

Rebuttals to Ibn Warraq’s 2003 book Leaving Islam

Before you read this I want you to visit the following site: http://exchristian.net/testimonies/.

There you will see people who allegedly leave Christianity and write about it. There’s only one problem. Its hard to believe that those testimonies are real.

The problem is that anyone can log on to the ex Christian site and make up some bogus “leaving” my religion testimony. And well its hard to believe it because there’s no evidence that its real. For all we know it could be atheists, jews or even Muslims who make this stuff up.

Same thing with these bogus testimonies of “leaving Islam”. They really don’t prove anything. I’ll explain.

*How do we know that Ibn Warraq didn’t make these testonomies up? After all he is trying to sell books…

• There are all sorts of stupid idiots with unnessary venom and hate for Islam…. For all we know these people could log on to the filthy site faithfreedom.org or secularism.org and make up some bull. Wouldn’t it be cool to see your “testimony” on Ali Sina or Ibn Warraq’s site? Plus these people who write these testonmies are so ignorant of what Islam teaches…its not even funny.
• There is no proof that people get brainwashed by Ibn Warraq and then leave Islam…
• Anyone can claim that they are influencing people by simply making up stories and emails.
• The people who did write for Ibn Warraq’s leaving Islam book seem to be completely one sided about Islam… rather than looking at it from both viewpoints.

So with this in mind, how could anyone believe this bogus stuff? For all we know non-muslims and Ali Sina and his master Ibn Warraq could’ve made all this up…. Remember Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina don’t have any evidence against Islam.. all their polemic can be refuted very easily.. now they want peoples attention and money… and they want Muslims to “leave” Islam in order for them to prove a point. Well to be honest nobody with intelligence would “leave” Islam. I have a very hard time believing that Ali Sina or Ibn Warraq or apostates. They don’t know a lot about Islam, especially Ali Sina. Both of them could be white dudes throwing mud on a religion claiming to be something they never were. Some people will do anything for a buck and popularity. And that’s exactly what Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina are doing… making up lies against Islam for just that.

In conclusion if you were to read Ibn Warraq’s book Leaving Islam, remember that Warraq could’ve made all those up or someone with hate and venom for Islam could’ve made up a testimony. Who is Ibn Warraq and those who write testinomys of leaving Islam? Nobody knows. What do they want? Your money and attention.

Islam is the only religion in the world that actually has evidence for itself. And since nobody is able to prove Islam wrong… they start making up lies about it… and not only that but claim Muslims listen to them and leave Islam because of it.

If I said that I went camping and saw big foot, and wrote about it on a blog, many people wont believe me… but a few will. Same thing with Sina and Warraq. They make up crap about Islam and a majority of people don’t believe it but a few do. Sorry Ibn Warraq. I don’t believe your book Leaving Islam. And neither should you.

Refuting Ali Sina and his site:

http://www.answering-christianity.com
http://www.examinethetruth.com
http://www.faithfreedom.com

How to use this Book

2007-02-26T19:47:00.000-08:00

Sallams (Peace be upon you)

As of Today, 2-26-2007 I have finished writing my rebuttal book to Ibn Warraq's 1995 book Why I am Not a Muslim. Mainly this book deals with the following issues

What does the Quran has to say about the Bible

Women in Islam

Jihad/terrorism in Islam

The Evolution deciect

Rebuttals to other Ibn Warraq books

Alleged scientific errors

The Perfect perservation of the Quran and the Hadith

Islam and human rights

Dogs in Islam

Evidence for Islam

How the Bible got corrupted

Did Jesus exist

Islams views on homosexuality, pigs and alcholol

All these topics were major themes in Ibn Warraq's book. So this book refutes all these claims. Now, these are only the major themes in Warraq's book. There are other topics in his book, but these topics seemed the most important, so this is why I decided to refute them.

All sources are incidated in the Bibliography section and spread the word....Warraq's book has finally been refuted! Praise be to God!

Thanks,
Ehteshaam Gulam

Warraq’s Women Writing Rebuttal

2007-02-26T19:44:00.000-08:00

On page 297 of his book, Warraq goes further into women. He claims that certain verses in the Quran are “migonistic”. He quotes the following Quranic verses to prove his point:

O ye who believe! the law of equality is prescribed to you in cases of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the woman for the woman. But if any
remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude, this is a concession and a Mercy from your Lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in grave penalty. (Quran 2:178)

Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise. (Quran 2:228)

O ye who believe! When ye deal with each other, in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing Let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let not the scribe refuse to write: as Allah Has taught him, so let him write. Let him who incurs the liability dictate, but let him fear His Lord Allah, and not diminish aught of what he owes. If they party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable Himself to dictate, Let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her. The witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (For evidence). Disdain not to reduce to writing (your contract) for a future period, whether it be small or big: it is juster in the sight of Allah, More suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves but if it be a transaction which ye carry out on the spot among yourselves, there is no blame on you if ye reduce it not to writing. But take witness whenever ye make a commercial contract; and let neither scribe nor witness suffer harm. If ye do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So fear Allah; For it is Good that teaches you. And Allah is well acquainted with all things. If ye are on a journey, and cannot find a scribe, a pledge with possession (may serve the purpose). And if one of you deposits a thing on trust with another, let the trustee (faithfully) discharge his trust, and let him Fear his Lord conceal not evidence; for whoever conceals it, - his heart is tainted with sin. And Allah knoweth all that ye do. (Quran 2:282)

If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (Quran 4:3)

Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise. (Quran 4:11)

Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great. (Quran 4:34)

With regards to the first verse, the verse is indicating a strict law of justice, equality, and a strong recommendation of mercy and forgivness. Islam states that if you must take a life for a life, there should be equality in it. The reason why a woman is mentioned separately is because her position as a mother or an economic worker is different. She does not form a third class, but a division in the other two classes.

With regards to the second verse, it is speaking about waiting for the divorced period. Islam tries to maintain the married state as far as possible, especially where children are concerned. Further this verses states that men and women will have similar rights against one another. Another point is that the difference in economic positions makes mens rights greater than the womens.

With regard to the next verse, I think Dr.Zakir Naik explains it best:

It is not true that two female witnesses are always considered as equal to only one male witness. It is true only in certain cases. There are about five verses in the Qur’an that mention witnesses, without specifying male or female. There is only one verse in the Qur’an, that says two female witnesses are equal to one male witness. This verse is Surah Baqarah, chapter 2 verse 282. This is the longest verse in the Qur’an and deals with financial transactions. It says:
"Oh! ye who believe!
When ye deal with each other,
in transactions involving future obligation
in a fixed period of time
reduce them to writing and get two witnesses
out of your own men and if there are not two men,
then a man and two women, such as ye choose,
for witnesses so that if one of them errs
the other can remind her."
[Al-Qur’an 2:282]
This verse of the Qur’an deals only with financial transactions. In such cases, it is advised to make an agreement in writing between the parties and take two witnesses, preferably both of which should be men only. In case you cannot find two men, then one man and two women would suffice.
For instance, suppose a person wants to undergo an operation for a particular ailment. To confirm the treatment, he would prefer taking references from two qualified surgeons. In case he is unable to find two surgeons, his second option would be one surgeon and two general practitioners who are plain MBBS doctors.
Similarly in financial transactions, two men are preferred. Islam expects men to be the breadwinners of their families. Since financial responsibility is shouldered by men, they are expected to be well versed in financial transactions as compared to women. As a second option, the witness can be one man and two women, so that if one of the women errs the other can remind her. The Arabic word used in the Qur’an is ‘Tazil’ which means ‘confused’ or ‘to err’. Many have wrongly translated this word as ‘to forget’. Thus financial transactions constitute the only case in which two female witnesses are equal to one male witness.
However, some scholars are of the opinion that the feminine attitude can also have an effect on the witness in a murder case. In such circumstances a woman is more terrified as compared to a man. Due to her emotional condition she can get confused. Therefore, according to some jurists, even in cases of murder, two female witnesses are equivalent to one male witness. In all other cases, one female witness is equivalent to one male witness. There are about five verses in the Qur’an which speak about witnesses without specifying man or woman.
While making a will of inheritance, two just persons are required as witnesses. In Surah Maidah chapter 5 verse 106, the Glorious Qur’an says:
"Oh you who believe!
When death approaches any of you,
(take) witnesses among yourself when making bequests."
[Al-Qur’an 5:106]
two just persons of your own (brotherhood)
or other from outside if you are journeying
through the earth and the chance of death befalls you."
[Al-Qur’an 65:2]
Two persons endued with justice in case of talaq.

"Four witnesses are required
in case of charge against chaste women,
[Al-Qur’an 24:4]
There are some scholars who are of the opinion that the rule of two female witnesses equal to one male witness should be applied to all the cases. This cannot be agreed upon because one particular verse of the Qur’an from Surah Noor chapter 24, verse 6 clearly equates one female witness and one male witness:
"And those who launch a charge
against their spouses, and have (in support)
no evidence but their own -
their solitary evidence can be received."
[Al-Qur’an 24:6]
Hazrat Ayesha (RA) hadith narrated of one witness
Many jurists agree that even one witness of a woman is sufficient for the sighting of the crescent of the moon. Imagine one woman witness is sufficient for one of the pillars of Islam, i.e. fasting and the whole Muslim community of men and women agree and accept her witness! Some jurists say that one witness is required at the beginning of Ramadaan and two witnesses at the end of Ramadaan. It makes no difference whether the witnesses are men or women.
Some incidents require only female witness and that of a male cannot be accepted. For instance, in dealing with the problems of women, while giving the burial bath i.e. ‘ghusl’ to a woman, the witness has to be a woman.
The seeming inequality of male and female witnesses in financial transactions is not due to any inequality of the sexes in Islam. It is only due to the different natures and roles of men and women in society as envisaged by Islam.
(info acquired at Dr. Zakir Naik’s website http://www.irf.net )

The next verse, Warraq states is Quran 4:3 which says that men are allowed to marry up to four women. However a closer reading of the verse states that if one cannot do justice with these four then marry only one or one your right hand possess, or female captives from war. The Quran is the only book which says one, no where in the Old Testament or the New Testament is there a limit of wives one can have.

Further Dr. Zakir Naik explains this best:

In the USA, women outnumber men by 7.8 million. New York alone has one million more females as compared to the number of males, and of the male population of New York one-third are gays i.e sodomites. The U.S.A as a whole has more than twenty-five million gays. This means that these people do not wish to marry women. Great Britain has four million more females as compared to males. Germany has five million more females as compared to males. Russia has nine million more females than males. God alone knows how many million more females there are in the whole world as compared to males.
Even if every man got married to one woman, there would still be more than thirty million females in U.S.A who would not be able to get husbands (considering that America has twenty five million gays). There would be more than four million females in Great Britain, 5 million females in Germany and nine million females in Russia alone who would not be able to find a husband.
Suppose my sister happens to be one of the unmarried women living in USA, or suppose your sister happens to be one of the unmarried women in USA. The only two options remaining for her are that she either marries a man who already has a wife or becomes public property. There is no other option. All those who are modest will opt for the first.
In Western society, it is common for a man to have mistresses and/or multiple extra-marital affairs, in which case, the woman leads a disgraceful, unprotected life. The same society, however, cannot accept a man having more than one wife, in which women retain their honourable, dignified position in society and lead a protected life.
Thus the only two options before a woman who cannot find a husband is to marry a married man or to become public property. Islam prefers giving women the honourable position by permitting the first option and disallowing the second.
There are several other reasons, why Islam has permitted limited polygyny, but it is mainly to protect the modesty of women.
(Ibid)
The fifth verse Warraq quotes is speaking about inheritance. Again I leave it up to Dr. Zakir Naik to explain this (he’s a really good thinker/explainer):
The Glorious Qur’an contains specific and detailed guidance regarding the division of the inherited wealth, among the rightful beneficiaries.
The Qur’anic verses that contain guidance regarding inheritance are:
* Surah Baqarah, chapter 2 verse 180
* Surah Baqarah, chapter 2 verse 240
* Surah Nisa, chapter 4 verse 7-9
* Surah Nisa, chapter 4 verse 19
* Surah Nisa, chapter 4 verse 33 and
* Surah Maidah, chapter 5 verse 106-108
There are three verses in the Qur’an that broadly describe the share of close relatives i.e. Surah Nisah chapter 4 verses 11, 12 and 176. The translation of these verses are as follows:
"Allah (swt) (thus) directs you as regards your children’s (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females, if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; If only one, her share is a half.
For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; If no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases is) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
In what your wives leave, your share is half. If they leave no child; but if they leave a child, ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts. In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eight; after payment of legacies and debts. If the man or woman whose inheritance is in question, has left neither ascendants nor descendants, but has left a brother or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth; but if more than two, they share in a third; after payment of legacies and debts; so that no loss is caused (to anyone). Thus it is ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-Knowing Most Forbearing"
[Al-Qur’an 4:11-12]
"They ask thee for a legal decision. Say: Allah directs (them) about those who leave no descendants or ascendants as heirs. If it is a man that dies, leaving a sister but no child, she shall have half the inheritance. If (such a deceased was) a woman who left no child, Her brother takes her inheritance. If there are two sisters, they shall have two thirds of the inheritance (between them). If there are brothers and sisters, (they share), the male having twice the share of the female. Thus doth Allah (swt) makes clear to you (His knowledge of all things).
[Al-Qur’an 4:176]
In most of the cases, a woman inherits half of what her male counterpart inherits. However, this is not always the case. In case the deceased has left no ascendant or descendent but has left the uterine brother and sister, each of the two inherit one sixth. If the deceased has left children, both the parents that is mother and father get an equal share and inherit one sixth each. In certain cases, a woman can also inherit a share that is double that of the male. If the deceased is a woman who has left no children, brothers or sisters and is survived only by her husband, mother and father, the husband inherits half the property while the mother inherits one third and the father the remaining one sixth. In this particular case, the mother inherits a share that is double that of the father. It is true that as a general rule, in most cases, the female inherits a share that is half that of the male. For instance in the following cases:
1. daughter inherits half of what the son inherits,
2. wife inherits 1/8th and husband 1/4th if the deceased has no children.
3. Wife inherits 1/4th and husband 1/2 if the deceased has children
4. If the deceased has no ascendant or descendent, the sister inherits a share that is half that of the brother.
In Islam a woman has no financial obligation and the economical responsibility lies on the shoulders of the man. Before a woman is married it is the duty of the father or brother to look after the lodging, boarding, clothing and other financial requirements of the woman. After she is married it is the duty of the husband or the son. Islam holds the man financially responsible for fulfilling the needs of his family. In order to do be able to fulfill the responsibility the men get double the share of the inheritance. For example, if a man dies leaving about Rs. One Hundred and Fifty Thousand, for the children (i.e one son and one daughter) the son inherits One Hundred Thousand rupees and the daughter only Fifty Thousand rupees. Out of the one hundred thousand which the son inherits, as his duty towards his family, he may have to spend on them almost the entire amount or say about eighty thousand and thus he has a small percentage of inheritance, say about twenty thousand, left for himself. On the other hand, the daughter, who inherits fifty thousand is not bound to spend a single penny on anybody. She can keep the entire amount for herself. Would you prefer inheriting one hundred thousand rupees and spending eighty thousand from it, or inheriting fifty thousand rupees and having the entire amount to yourself?
(Information acquired at irf.net. Check it out it’s a pretty cool site)
With regards to the last verse of Ibn Warraq, the verse he quoted is only one translation. Lets look at two more translations of 4:34:

Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all). (4:34) Translation done by Abduallah Yousef Ali

SHAKIR Translation: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.(4:34)

Notice how both these translations state that men are the protectors and maintainers of women. Now why did Warraq only quote one transltation and not the other two, especially the Yousef Ali translation, which is considered the best English translation out there? There is no doubt that men are different than women, women are not the same as men, vice versa. I’ve already done through the beat verse, previously.

On page 298 Warraq quotes hadith. He tries to prove that the following hadith are migonistic. Of course this is not ture.
The first hadith he quotes states that a man is in charge of a woman, because the husband is the man of the house, he earns, he provides- so why shouldn’t the woman be grateful?!

Page 299, Ibn Warraq tries to state that Islam doesn’t allow women to be educated. Again, not true at all. Consider the following hadith:

Anas reported that the Messenger of God said: “Search for knowledge is compulsory upon every Muslim male and Muslim female.” (Ibn Majah)

Another hadith that is misunderstood by Warraq is the following:

If anything presages a bad omen it is a house, a woman, a horse.

Notice how the haidth he quoted states IF ANYTHING PRESAGES. So its just a methorical quote, that’s all.

The Quran has many good things to state about women:

And their Lord hath accepted of them, and answered them: "Never will I suffer to be lost the work of any of you, be he male or female: Ye are members, one of another: Those who have left their homes, or been driven out therefrom, or suffered harm in My Cause, or fought or been slain,- verily, I will blot out from them their iniquities, and admit them into Gardens with rivers flowing beneath;- A reward from the presence of Allah, and from His presence is the best of rewards." (3:195)

And in no wise covet those things in which Allah Hath bestowed His gifts More freely on some of you than on others: To men is allotted what they earn, and to women what they earn: But ask Allah of His bounty. For Allah hath full knowledge of all things. (4:32)

Hast thou not turned Thy vision to those who were told to hold back their hands (from fight) but establish regular prayers and spend in regular charity? When (at length) the order for fighting was issued to them, behold! a section of them feared men as - or even more than - they should have feared Allah: They said: "Our Lord! Why hast Thou ordered us to fight? Wouldst Thou not Grant us respite to our (natural) term, near (enough)?" Say: "Short is the enjoyment of this world: the Hereafter is the best for those who do right: Never will ye be dealt with unjustly in the very least! (4:77)

If any do deeds of righteousness,- be they male or female - and have faith, they will enter Heaven, and not the least injustice will be done to them. (4:124)

The Believers, men and women, are protectors one of another: they enjoin what is just, and forbid what is evil: they observe regular prayers, practise regular charity, and obey Allah and His Messenger. On them will Allah pour His mercy: for Allah is Exalted in power, Wise. (9:71)

Whoever works righteousness, man or woman, and has Faith, verily, to him will We give a new Life, a life that is good and pure and We will bestow on such their reward according to the best of their actions. (16:97)

And among His Signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that ye may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): verily in that are Signs for those who reflect. (30:21)

"He that works evil will not be requited but by the like thereof: and he that works a righteous deed - whether man or woman - and is a Believer- such will enter the Garden (of Bliss): Therein will they have abundance without measure. (Quran 40:40)

Husbands are told to treat their wives with kindess and respect:

O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may Take away part of the dower ye have given them,-except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and Allah brings about through it a great deal of good. (4:19)

Clearly what the Quran has to say about women are better than what the Bible states about women:
1 Timothy 2:11-14, 1 Corinthians 14:34, 1 corinthians 11:5-10, I Corinthians 11:13, Leviticus 12:2-5, Ecclesiastics 7:26-28, Leviticus 18:19-30.

JIHAD IN ISLAM: REBUTTAL TO IBN WARRAQ

2007-02-26T19:43:00.000-08:00

Page 217 Warraq then goes onto Jihad in Islam. Jihad does not mean Holy War, it actually means struggle. Heres a hadith that proves it:

Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri reported the Apostle of God as saying: “The best striving (Jihad) in the path of God is (to speak) a word of justice to an oppressive ruler” (Abu Dawud, hadith #4330)

So one can see that Jihad is struggle and does not mean war. As a matter of fact there is no holy war concept in Islam.

Warraq then rips verses out of context in order to prove his point. Here is one example. Warraq quotes the following Quranic verse:

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (Quran 9:5)

The part I underlined was the part he quoted in his book. Notice the complete distortion of the Quranic text. What I have quoted is the full verse of the Quranic verse. However one must read the following verse of the Quran in order to get a full scope of what the Quran is teaching:

If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge. (Quran 9:6)

One of the Pagans ask Prophet Muhammed or any other early Muslim, then they are told to grant it to him. It does not say kill the Pagan, rather it states grant him protection if he wants it.

Further verses Ibn Warraq quotes that promote “Holy war” as he says are: Quran 8:15-16, 9:39 and 4:74. Lets look further into them:

O ye who believe! when ye meet the Unbelievers in hostile array, never turn your backs to them. If any do turn his back to them on such a day - unless it be in a stratagem of war, or to retreat to a troop (of his own)- he draws on himself the wrath of Allah, and his abode is Hell,- an evil refuge (indeed)! (Quran 8:15-16)

Again, this verse is speaking about the battles against the Quraysh. It is not talking about modern day non-Muslims. Plus according to the Abdullah Yousef Ali commentary, this could even be reffering to a spiritual fight instead of physical.

Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least. For Allah hath power over all things.( 9:39)

Nowhere in this verse is it speaking about fighing. Rarther its speaking about self defense as this verse points out:

Pagans all together as they fight you all together. But know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves. (Quran 9:36). So this is speaking about the Pagans. It also states that Allah is with those who restrain themselves. So the Quran is speaking about self defense in these verses.

Regarding the last verse 4:74, it reads:

Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value).

Again, another verse telling self defense as these verses point out:

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"
"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (The Noble Quran, 8:61)"

"If thou dost stretch thy hand against me, to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee: for I do fear God, the cherisher of the worlds. (The Noble Quran, 5:28)"

Conclusions: Warraq really distorts to meaning of Jihad, and the so-called Jihad verses are quickly refuted as they incidate they were revealed at the time of war during the time of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) and do not reflect on waging war on society.

Further Rebuttals

2007-02-26T19:42:00.000-08:00

Further Rebuttals

Although I have addressed this already, I further looked into this issue in Ibn Warraq’s book. On page 216 of his book, he tells of the incident of the Banu Qurayza where the Jews were executed. Although men were executed, women and children were spared. The reason for this was for treason. What Warraq does is that he tries to make it like Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) just randomly ordered that these people be killed. Of course this is not true, as the warriors Banu Qurayza were executed for treason against the Islamic state of Madinah. Looking further into this, in Madinah, there were two Arab tribes and three Jewish tribes. So not everyone was Jewish in Madinah.

Further in 622, Prophet Muhammed and the Muslims of Makka migrated to Madinah in order to secure freedom of religion and freedom from persecution. The first Islamic state was born when Prophet Muhammed entered Makka. Moreover the Jews of Madinah were one community with the Muslisms and were allowed to practice their own religion. So one can see that Prophet Muhammed had reasons to kill the Jews of the Banu Qurayza and not all Jews were killed, only the warriors as this hadith incidates:

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 148:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said, "Get up for the best amongst you." or said, "Get up for your chief." Then the Prophet said, "O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict." Sad said, "I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives." The Prophet said, "You have given a judgment similar to Allah's Judgment (or the King's judgment)."
Not only that but Prophet Muhammed ordered that the captives be freed as well:

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 103:
Narrated Abu Musa:
The Prophet said, "Set the captives free, accept the invitation (to a wedding banquet), and visit the patients."

Quran “Contradiction” Explained

2007-02-26T10:49:00.001-08:00

Quran “Contradiction” Explained:
An alleged contradiction in the Quran addressed. By Ehteshaam Gulam

Is there a contradiction between Quran 4:157 and Quran 3:144? The answer is no. The missionaries who write for answeringislam.org who stated this don’t know what they are talking about. I’ll explain.

The Quran 4:157 states: That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:- (Quran 4:157)

The Quran 3:144 indicates: Muhammad is no more than a messenger: many Were the messenger that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then Turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah; but Allah (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude. (Quran 3:144)

The following verse is implying that MANY messengers have died before Prophet Mohammed (pbuh). It does not say ALL the messengers have died before the Prophet.
The above verse is from the Abdullah Yousef Ali Translation of the Quran. Let’s take a look at two other translations from Pickthal and Shakir:

Pickthal: Muhammad is but a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) have passed away before him. Will it be that, when he dieth or is slain, ye will turn back on your heels? He who turneth back on his heels doth no hurt to Allah, and Allah will reward the thankful. (Quran 3:144)

SHAKIR: And Muhammad is no more than a messenger; the messengers have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed will you turn back upon your heels? And whoever turns back upon his heels!s, he will by no means do harm to Allah in the least and Allah will reward the grateful. (Quran 3:144)

Notice how these two translators state that messengers have passed away before Prophet Mohammed and it doesn’t say ALL the messengers have passed away before Prophet Mohammed. Also notice the Pickthal’s translation which says messengers (the like of whom) have passed away before him, implying that prophets, messengers like Prophet Mohamemd such as Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon (PBUT), etc. have passed away. All these prophets were like Prophet Mohammed in many ways, and Jesus (PBUH) was a unique case and was different from other Biblical Prophets and from Prophet Mohammed peace be upon them.

Some Islamic commentors have stated that Quran 3:55 indicates that Jesus had died. Well not exactly. The following Quranic verse states:

Behold! Allah said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute. (Quran 3:55)

The verse says that Allah will take thee and raise thee, it doesn’t say that Jesus had died. It states that Jesus was raised or taken up to Allah as in agreement with sura 4:157. Moreover the Hadith clearly indicate that Jesus is still alive and will return one day:
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, surely (Jesus,) the son of Mary will soon descend amongst you and will judge mankind justly (as a Just Ruler); he will break the Cross and kill the pigs and there will be no Jizya (i.e. taxation taken from non Muslims). Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it, and a single prostration to Allah (in prayer) will be better than the whole world and whatever is in it." Abu Huraira added "If you wish, you can recite (this verse of the Holy Book): -- 'And there is none Of the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (i.e Jesus as an Apostle of Allah and a human being) Before his death. And on the Day of Judgment He will be a witness Against them." (Bukhari Volume 4 Book 5 #657)
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said "How will you be when the son of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you and he will judge people by the Law of the Quran and not by the law of Gospel (Bukhari Volume 4 Book 55 #658)
One more thing I should state, which is not the focus of this paper, but when Prophet Mohammed (peace and blessings be upon him) says Jesus, the son of Mary will soon descend, he means that Jesus will one day soon come back. So the end could be near, after all many of the signs of the day of judgment have come to pass. What it means by Jizya, since some Muslims have completely rejected this hadith, means that non Muslims will no longer take property of value from Muslims, which could mean oil, etc.
Conclusions:

The Quranic verses contains no error or contradiction. What one verse says is that Jesus was taken up alive and another says that many but not all messengers have died before Prophet Mohammed. For the some Muslims who reject the notion that Jesus will not return are completely wrong since both the Quran and the Hadith incidate that Jesus is alive and one day he will return. The Quran is a perfect book, with absouletly no error/contradiction. The same cant be said about the Bible though. The Bible contains many errors and contradictions:

Did Jesus tell his disciples everything?

For all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you. John 15:15 Not really…

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. (John 16:12)
God states that Cain will wonder the earth

A fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. (Genesis 4:12) Then changes his mind a few verses later

And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived, ... and he builded a city. (Genesis 4:17)
David somehow killed 700 men in chariots and 40,000 horsemen

And David slew the men of seven hundred chariots of the Syrians, and forty thousand horsemen. (2 Samuel 10:18) David went all terminator and killed a whole lot more

David slew of the Syrians seven thousand men which fought in chariots, and forty thousand footmen. (1 Chronicles 19:18)
Some people just don’t die

And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him. (Genesis 5:24

Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.
(John 8:51)

And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. (John 11:26) Everyone dies…

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men. (Romans 5:12)

And as it is appointed unto men once to die. (Hebrews 9:27)

Drinking on the cross…

Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
(John 19:29-30)

Just say no to drinking while your dying

And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not. (Mark: 15:23)

These are just some of the hundreds of errors/contradictions in the Bible. Maybe the Missionaries should try to clear up these errors (which they wont be able to do) instead of disperately looking for errors/contradictions in the Quran.

Notes:

All translations of the Quran were Abdullah Yousef Ali, Mohammed Pickthal and Shakir which are considered the best English translations of the Quran. All translations of the Bible were of NIV version of the Bible.

For rebuttals of Answering-Islam please visit examinethetruth.com, answering-christianity.com and bismilkallahuma.org.

Basic Rights of Women in Islam

2007-02-23T14:34:00.001-08:00

Basic Rights of Women in Islam

In Islam, women are guaranteed rights and are even equal to men in many areas. Islam’s views on women are to liberate or free them but at the same time remind them of their spiritual responsibilities just like men. The following list represents the basic laws all Muslim countries need in order to follow Islam properly.

1. The right and duty to obtain education
2. The right to have their own independent property.
3. The right to work to earn money if they need it or want it.
4. Equality of reward for equal deeds.
5. The right to express their opinion and be heard.
6. The right to provisions from the husband for all her needs and more.
7. The right to negotiate marriage terms of her choice.
8. The right to obtain divorce from her husband, even on the grounds that she simply can't stand him. (pls note that God deeply frowns upon divorce as a solution unless there is hardly any other alternative but it does not mean that men have more right to divorce their wives than women do.)
9. The right to keep all her own money (she is not responsible to maintain any relations).
10. The right to get sexual satisfaction from her husband.
11. custody of their children after divorce
12. To refuse any marriage that does not please them

In the West, particularly in America, the subject of women in Islam holds quite a bit of negative light. As a matter of fact, Ibn Warraq makes all sorts of bogus statements about women in Islam. However since Warraq is a secularist/humanitarian I can imagine that he really doesn’t care about what other religions have to say about women. To the Jewish/Christian reader of this book, I can state that the views on women in Christianity and Judaism are not very good, in light of the Old Testament, The New Testament, Christian and Jewish history and the Talmud. Although I will not get into that here, since this book’s focus to clear up the image of women in Islam, I’ll mainly be showing that women are truly honored in Islam.

First off, Prophet Mohammed the last messenger of God, told his followers to be kind to women, as this hadith which I have already stated, incidates:
Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying: "He who believes in Allah and the Hereafter, if he witnesses any matter he should talk in good terms about it or keep quiet. Act kindly towards woman, for woman is created from a rib, and the most crooked part of the rib is its top. If you attempt to straighten it, you will break it, and if you leave it, its crookedness will remain there. So act kindly towards women. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 008, Number 3468)"
So Prophet Mohammed is indicating that women are to be treated nicely and kindly. But one who has read Warraq’s book might argue, what about the Quranic Verse which states to beat women which would be sura 4:3. The verse is this:
Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).(Quran 4:3)
Of note, the following verse tells that women who are ill mannered or disloyal, the first step is to admonish then, then not to share their beds, then the last step is to beat them. However read the verse carefully. After beat them, the word lightly is there. So the Quran is saying to beat them lightly after you have done the previous two steps.
Another point to be considered is the Arabic word, Udhdhribuu literally means to strike. The word beat is a rather extreme translation used, and isn’t exactly accurate. The word strike can mean a host of things such as from a powerful punch to a slight tap. Moreover the Quran does not endorse physical harm that causes injury as the following hadith maintain:
Narrated Mu'awiyah al-Qushayri: "I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)"
Narrated Mu'awiyah ibn Haydah: "I said: Apostle of Allah, how should we approach our wives and how should we leave them? He replied: Approach your tilth when or how you will, give her (your wife) food when you take food, clothe when you clothe yourself, do not revile her face, and do not beat her. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2138)"
Further, Prophet Mohammed also said not to beat on the face:
Narrated Salim: "....Umar said: 'The Prophet forbade beating on the face.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Hunting, Slaughtering, Volume 7, Book 67, Number 449)"
Narrated AbuHurayrah: "The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: When one of you inflicts a beating, he should avoid striking the face. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 38, Prescribed Punishments (Kitab Al-Hudud), Number 4478)"
Of further note, the Quran indicates that men should treat women kindly and not with harshness as the following verse indicates:
"O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dowre have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good. (Quran, 4:19)"

When it comes to rape, the person who raped a woman is to be punished not the victim as the following hadith illustrates:

Book 38, Number 4366:
Narrated Wa'il ibn Hujr:
When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered (raped) her.
She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That (man) did such and such to me. And when a company of the Emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her.
She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him).
When he (the Prophet) was about to pass sentence, the man who (actually) had assaulted her stood up and said: Apostle of Allah, I am the man who did it to her.
He (the Prophet) said to her: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. But he told the man some good words (AbuDawud said: meaning the man who was seized), and of the man who had had intercourse with her, he said: Stone him to death.
He also said: He has repented to such an extent that if the people of Medina had repented similarly, it would have been accepted from them.
Now this is a lot more reasonable then what the Bible has to say about rape:

22 If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders his neighbor, 27 for the man found the girl out in the country, and though the betrothed girl screamed, there was no one to rescue her.
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. [c] He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. (Deuteronomy 22:22-29)
So the following Biblical verse is stating that when a man violates his neighbors wife, then he is to be put to death. However if a man rapes a virgin or an unmarried woman then he has to pay the victims father 50 shekels of silver and then marry her rapist. Clearly the Islamic viewpoint makes a whole lot more sense.

In regard to women allowed to exercise Free speech and to be educated the following saying of Prophet Mohammed is to be noted:

Anas reported that the Messenger of God said: “Search for knowledge is compulsory upon every Muslim male and Muslim female.” (Ibn Majah)

Of further note, Prophet Mohammed had also taught women during his time as the following hadith indicates:

Buhkari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 413:
Narrated Abu Said:
A woman came to Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Men (only) benefit by your teachings, so please devote to us from (some of) your time, a day on which we may come to you so that you may teach us of what Allah has taught you." Allah's Apostle said, "Gather on such-and-such a day at such-and-such a place." They gathered and Allah's Apostle came to them and taught them of what Allah had taught him. He then said, "No woman among you who has lost her three children (died) but that they will screen her from the Fire." A woman among them said, "O Allah's Apostle! If she lost two children?" She repeated her question twice, whereupon the Prophet said, "Even two, even two, even two!"
As noted previously, the laws of marriage and divorce have already been discussed. So women are given a pretty comfortable place in Islam and the former Taliban regime of Afghanistan does not reflect Islamic teachings along with other Muslim countries which treat women harshly and unkindly.

Bibliography

2007-02-22T20:23:00.000-08:00

Bibliography

Some articles obtained with permission by the following sites:

http://www.answering-christianity.com
http://www.islamicawareness.com
http://www.faithfreedom.com
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/
http://www.harunyahya.com/

Metzger, Bruce,"The Text of the New Testament-- Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration," Oxford University Press, 1968

Leedom, Tim C. "The Book Your Church Doesn't Want You To Read," Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, 1993

Helms, Randel McCraw , "Who Wrote the Gospels?", Millennium Press

The Complete Idiots Guide to Understanding Islam By Yahya Emerick Second Edition 2004

Understanding Islam: A Guide for the Judeao- Christian Reader By Jerald F. Dirks Amana Publishers, 2003

Abdullah Yousef Ali Translation of the Quran, copyright 2000

Further Sites Refuting the Propaganda

2007-02-22T20:12:00.000-08:00

Other sites refuting the Anti-Islamic propaganda:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org

http://www.IslamLife.com
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org

http://www.MuslimAccess.Com
http://www.invitationtothetruth.com
http://www.cair-net.org
http://www.answering-christianity.com

http://www.faithfreedom.com

http://www.thetruereligion.org/missionary.htm

http://www.islamic.org.uk/

http://www.muslim-answers.org/

http://www.sharif.org.uk/

http://www.guidedones.com/

http://www.understanding-islam.org/

http://www.ExamineTheTruth.com (Good site)

http://www.muslim-responses.com

http://islamanswersback.phpbbnow.com/index.php?sid=1cb5c16a4b4e6fc439497b554ae24000

http://www.why-christians-convert-to-islam.com/

http://www.towardsislam.com/

Other Reviews on Ibn Warraq, Conclusions, Refuting the Propaganda

2007-02-22T20:09:00.000-08:00

Review of Ibn Warraq’s “The Quest for the Historical Muhammad”

In 2000, Ibn Warraq had published the Book “The Quest for the Historical Mohammed”. To be honest that book is worse than his first one, Why I am Not a Muslim. And I am not the only one who thinks so. Fred M. Donner of the University of Chicago also agrees. He wrote a review of the book. Here it is, take from a non muslim on Warraq’s book and judge for yourself:

The study of Islam's origins, including the life of Muhammad, is a notoriously contentious undertaking. Scholars with admirable training differ sharply among themselves on how to understand it. The appearance of a volume that claims to provide "sufficient background to put the current debates, between revisionists and traditionalists about the origins of Islam, in their intellectual context" (p. 9) is thus sure to attract notice.

Unfortunately, the compiler, identified only by the pseudonym "Ibn Warraq", who also wrote the volume's long introductory essay, is triply unqualified to serve as our guide in this field. "Ibn Warraq" like the equally mysterious author of the second essay, on the sources, "Ibn Rawandi" (perhaps one and the same individual?) lacks the rigorous specialist training in Arabic studies that alone could qualify him (her?) to evaluate independently the different schools of interpretation in this field. This inadequacy is revealed by, for example, inconsistent handling of Arabic materials, and by the fact that neither "Ibn Warraq" nor "Ibn Rawandi" contributes any original arguments to this debate.

More serious still is the compiler's heavy-handed favoritism for certain revisionist theories (particularly those of John Wansbrough), resulting in a thoroughly one-sided selection of articles and translations that constitute the bulk of the volume. These include works, mostly well-known, by Ernest Renan, Henri Lammens (including a complete translation of his monograph "Fatima and the Daughters of Muhammad"), C. H. Becker, Arthur Jeffery, Joseph Schacht, Lawrence I. Conrad, Andrew Rippin, J. Koren and Y. D. Nevo, F. E. Peters, Herbert Berg, and G. R. Hawting. Most of these were landmark contributions to the lengthy debate on the origins of Islam, by scholars who had (have) strong opinions about it and were possessed of full mastery of the primary languages (especially Arabic) and sources.

"Ib Warraq's" bias, however, causes him to omit fine contributions that pose challenges for some revisionist ideas by H. Motzki, U. Rubin, and many others. This lopsided character makes The Quest for the Historical Muhammad a book that is likely to mislead many an unwary general reader.

Most problematic of all, however, is the compiler's agenda, which is not scholarship, but anti-Islam polemic. The author of an earlier book entitled Why I Am Not a Muslim (1995), "Ibn Warraq" and his co-conspirator "Ibn al-Rawandi" detest anything that, to them, smacks of apologetic; for this reason they criticize harshly several noted authors for their 'bad faith' or 'moral ambiguity.'

Yet this book is itself a monument to duplicity. The compiler never has the honesty or courage to divulge his identity, even though a list of contributors (pp. 551-54) gives a biographical sketch of all the other contributors who, unlike "Ibn Warraq" and "Ibn al-Rawandi", are already well-known.

Far more serious is the fact that this book is religious polemic attempting to masquerade as scholarship. It is a collection of basically sound articles, framed by a seriously flawed introduction, and put in the service of anti-Islamic polemic dedicated to the proposition that Islam is a sham and that honest scholarship on Islam requires gratuitous rudeness to Muslim sensibilities.

By associating these articles with "Ibn Warraq's" polemical agenda, The Quest for the Historical Muhammad will raise suspicions among some Muslims that all revisionist scholarship is motivated by such intolerance.

This is likely to make the future progress of sound historical scholarship on Islam's origins harder, rather than easier. The publication of The Quest for the Historical Muhammad is, therefore, a most unfortunate event.

More Rebuttals:

The Origins of the Koran: Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book

BOOK’s Critical REVIEW by Prof Y. Dutton, lecturer in the department of Islamic Studies, University of Edinburgh, taken from the Journal of Islamic Studies, May 2000 edition. (Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, 2000)

This book, edited by the rather nebulous personage of "Ibn Warraq" (neither his full name nor his institutional affiliation, if any, are anywhere given), consists of thirteen previously published essays on the history and nature of the Qur'anic text, twelve of them dating from the half-century between 1890 and 1940 and only the thirteenth dating from as recently as 1985. The book is divided into four parts. Part One contains an Introduction by the editor which summarises recent, mostly "revisionist", Western scholarship on the origins of the Islam and its written tradition, and also a general essay, described in the blurb rather grandiosely and, one has to say, rather nonsensically as "the first truly scientific study of the Qur'an; by Theodor Noldeke. Part Two, "The Collection and the Variants of the Koran; consists of essays by Leone Caetani, Alphonse Mingana (two), Arthur Jeffrey (four) and David Margoliouth, on the general theme of how the present text came to be established. Part three, "The Sources of the Koran"; presents three long essays by Abraham Geiger, W. St Clair-Tisdall and Charles Torrey, all of which explore the supposed Jewish, Christian, and Zoroastrian sources of the Qur'an. Part Four, "Modern Textual Criticisms of the Koran"; consists of a single essay by Andrew Rippin, the only contemporary scholar represented in the collection, which presents the methodologies of John Wansbrough and his use of literary analysis to question the standard Muslim dating of the earliest Islamic texts.

The problem with this collection is its orientation. The editor purports to be concerned only with "those truths that are yielded by a process of rational enquiry, by scientific examination" (9), ostensibly to achieve, in Arthur Jeffrey's words, a "critical investigation of the text of the Qu'ran" (9). However, what we see exhibited by the choice of essays is in fact quite different. Ibn Warraq himself rejects most, if not all, Muslim scholarship on the issue, while at the same time seeming to accept without question anything produced by the "revisionist" wing of modern Western scholarship, neither of which positions would seem tenable for one seeking to produce by "rational enquiry". Moreover, he seems to have ignored even that amount of criticism of the "revisionist" position that exists in his own chosen essays: thus, for example, in his Introduction he praises the work of Crone and Cook, whose book Hagarism he describes as "fascinating" (33) and "intellectually exhilarating" (29), without seeming to be aware of Rippin's caveat elsewhere in the collection that "although they (Crone and Cook) successfully draw attention to the problems involved in the study of Islam, they have not been able to get beyond the limitations in the sources, for they are all of questionable historical authenticity and, more importantly, all are treatises based in polemic" (352). In other words, the non-Islamic sources are no more free from potential bias than the Muslim ones. Indeed, the words that best seem to describe Ibn Warraq's attitude are those that he quotes from Rippin, who refers to those who approach Islam "with less than academic candour" (10), and Crone, who warns us that "the entire tradition is tendentious; which, although intended to refer to Muslim historiography, applies as much, if not more so, to modern revisionist scholarship.

But not only is Ibn Warraq's own position "based on polemic" and an uncritical acceptance of certain sources (in this case, modern revisionist scholarship), but so too are the highly "Christianised" critiques - or attempts at critique - of, for example, Mingana and St Clair-Tisdall, for whom nothing is ultimately acceptable unless it accords with Christian scripture (e.g. 79, 235, 259), and for whom, it seems, "the opinions of Arab authors?are too worthless to be quoted" (95). Similar assumptions of the primacy of Judaism and/or Christianity also seem to underlie many if not most of the other essays in the book. However, what in fact for the majority of these essays show is not a Jewish, Christian, or even Zoroastrian, source for some Qur'anic narrative or narratives (one is reminded of how the unbelievers in the Qur'anic narrative always reject the Qur'an as "tales of the ancients"), but rather the existence of parallels: any conclusions about direct borrowing in a derivatory sense are, and can only remain, speculation.

Nevertheless, there is some benefit to be gained from this book. This reviewer in particular found the essays by Jeffrey and Margoliouth on the variants of the Qu'ran (Chapter 6 and 10 respectively) to be of more than passing interest in that they collect together many useful references and suggest many lines for future research. But otherwise, this book is lacking in interest for the serious scholar of "the origins of the Koran"; for the simple reason that it seems to miss, or bypass, the essential issue of the nature of revelation itself and the claims made about it. Put simply, either the Prophet was telling the truth or he wasn't. Again and again the Qur'an emphasises that this is not the speech of a mere human but rather "a sending down from the Lord of all the worlds". Now, either the Prophet was correct in his accepting and saying this or he was not; and if he was not, then either he was inadvertently mistaken or he was an outright impostor. To countenance his being an impostor does not, quite frankly, tally with everything we know of the excellence of his human behaviour, nor does it tally with the love that others had for him and the spirit of self-sacrifice expressed so clearly by all who took his path. Nor can we accept that he was mistaken: it is recorded that when he first experienced the phenomenon of revelation, he was afraid that he might be going mad. His wife, Khadija, however, had the decisive argument on that point: it did not make sense that someone who so selflessly looked after the sick and the poor, helped those in need, and treated his guests and neighbours well-in short, someone who was always so outgoing and helpful to others-should be mad. Madness and altruism do not go together. Rather, it is outward social action that indicates a deep sanity in the human being.

Either one accepts this argument of Khadija, along with the testimony of tradition to the Prophet's honesty and trustworthiness both before and after the onset of his revelationary experiences, bolstered by the evidence of the unconditional love that he engendered in those around him-which is hardly the effect of a liar and a cheat-or one does not. As for his being mistaken, either one rejects the testimony on his own tongue that the Qu'ran was revealed "on his heart" and was then expressed outwardly by his own speech but was nevertheless the "sending down of the Lord of all the worlds" and not of his own volition, or one does not. And either one accepts Khadija's argument that someone with such praiseworthy outward behaviour-the basic mark of sanity-could not be the object of demonic possession but rather was in full possession of his faculties, or one does not.

If one takes the Muslim position and accepts these arguments-or rather we should say positions, since there is no argument about these points but rather a recognition and acceptance of them-then the nature of revelation is defined by what actually happened, rather than by any expectations people might have about what they think should have happened. One can impose no prior expectations on this material: rather, the nature of the revelation is at it was, variants and all. And with respect to this latter point, we should remember that Muslim scholars have never been embarrassed by the presence of variants, not even the Shadhdh, or non-standard ones: rather, they have accepted their existence, and the fact that people used them at the time they did, while at the same recognising that there was a need to simplify and systematise matters for latter generations to prevent an unacceptable proliferation, thus leading first to "Uthman's decision to restrict the written form of the Qur'an so that, as the reports put it, "the community would not become divided about their scripture as had the Jews and Christians", and, secondly, to the subsequent systematisation of the various possibilities into the accepted systems of the Seven, Ten, or even Fourteen, Readers.

From this perspective, the contents of the present book seem little more than a polemical attempt to debunk the Qur'an and, by extension, Islam. As St Clair-Tisdall put it in his essay on the supposed Jewish, Christian and Zoroastrian sources of the Qur'an: "If we can trace the teaching of the Koran, or any part of it, to an earthly source, or to human systems existing previous to the Prophet's age, then Islam at once falls to the ground" (232; cf.227, where William Muir, in his Introduction to the same piece, repeats the same claim). The rest of the book is not, as we have suggested above, in a very different mode.

Rather, it seems to me that one has to accept a reality of revelation, experienced and mediated not only by the Prophet Muhammad but also by many, many Prophets and Messengers before him. From this perspective, one would indeed expect a great deal of similarity in content between previous divinely inspired messages. But it remains true that, of these messages, that which we know today as the Qu'ran is our best and most complete example and therefore the best starting point for anyone who wants to better understand this phenomenon.

Evidence for Islam

2007-02-22T20:07:00.000-08:00

Evidence for Islam

There are many scientific statements in the Holy Quran that point to a divine origin. However some secularists, atheists, and agnostics have stated that Prophet Mohammed had copied off another source to get that information. However as I pointed out there is a hadith that refutes that charge:

Volume 3, Book 31, Number 137:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

The Prophet said, "We are an illiterate nation; we neither write, nor know accounts. The month is like this and this, i.e. sometimes of 29 days and sometimes of thirty days."

So there are no books or information that the Prophet could’ve taken from. Lets take a look at where the scientific facts in the Quran could’ve came from:

IF Statement = Scientific fact THEN

(it can be one or more of the following 8 possibilities)

A. Perhaps the author of the statement was a genius

B. A very good guess, luck

C. Perhaps the author of the statement was a great scientist

D. Coincidence (ex: a poetic statement which just happened to match

up with science),luck, and the author had no intention of talking

about science; it was an accident. No intention.

E. Common sense (ex: rain causes grass to grow)

F. The scientific fact is observable.

G. The information already pre-existed in history

(this can only be entertained if we have historical errors)

H. A source greater than man was involved

In the Quran there are many scientific statements which couldn’t have been known by man. Here are a few of them:

THE BIRTH OF A HUMAN BEING

Many diverse subjects are mentioned in the Qur'an while also inviting people to believe. Sometimes the heavens, sometimes animals, and sometimes plants are mentioned as evidence of Allah's existence. In many of these verses, people are called upon to consider their own creation. They are often reminded how man came into the world, which stages he has passed through, and what his essence is:

It is We Who have created you. Why, then, do you not accept the truth? Have you ever considered that [seed] which you emit? Is it you who create it? Or are We the Creator? (Qur'an, 56:57-59)

The miracle of man's creation is emphasised in many verses. Some of the information within these verses is so detailed that it was impossible for anyone living in the 7th century to have known it. Examples of these are as follows:

1. Man is not created from the entire semen, but only a very small portion of it (sperm).

2. It is the male that determines the sex of the baby.

3. The human embryo adheres to the mother's uterus like a leech.

4. The embryo develops in three dark regions in the uterus.

The items of information just quoted were far above the level of learning of the people living at that time. The discovery of these facts could only become possible by the technology attained in the 20^th century.

Now, let us examine these items one at a time.

A Drop of Semen

Sperm undertake a journey into the mother's body until they reach the ovum. Only a thousand out of 250 million sperm succeed in reaching the ovum. At the end of this five-minute race, the ovum, half the size of a grain of salt, will let only one of the sperms in. That is, the substance of man is not the whole semen, but only a small part of it. This is explained in the Surat al-Qiyama as follows:

Does man reckon he will be left uncontrolled [without purpose]? Was he not once a drop of ejected semen? (Qur'an, 75:36-37)

As we have seen, the Qur'an informs us that man is made not from the entire semen, but only a small part of it. That the particular emphasis in this verse announces a fact only discovered by modern science is evidence that the Qur'an is the Word of Allah.

The Mixture in the Semen

The fluid referred to as semen, which contains the sperm, does not consist of sperm alone. On the contrary, it is made up of a mixture of different fluids. Seminal fluid is a collection of substances secreted from the testicles, the seminal vesicles, the prostate gland and glands linked to the urinary tract. A detailed analysis of this fluid shows that it consists of a great many separate substances, such as citric acid, prostaglandin, flavin, ascorbic acid, ergothioneine, cholesterol, phospholipids, fibrinolysin, zinc, phosphatase acid, phosphase, hyaluronidase and sperm. These fluids exercise different functions, such as containing the sugar necessary for providing energy for the sperm, neutralizing the acids at the entrance of the uterus, and providing a slippery substance for the easy movement of the sperm.

When semen is mentioned in the Qur'an, this fact, which was discovered by modern science, is also referred to, and semen is defined as a mixed fluid:

We created man from a mingled drop to test him, and We made him hearing and seeing. (Qur'an, 76:2)

In other verses, semen is again referred to as a mixture, and it is stressed that man is created from the "extract" of this mixture:

He Who has created all things in the best possible way. He commenced the creation of man from clay; then He made his progeny from an extract of discarded fluid. (Qur'an, 32:7-8)

The Arabic word "sulala," translated as "extract," means the essential or best part of something. By either meaning, it refers to "part of a whole." This shows that the Qur'an is the Word of Allah, Who knows the creation of man to its minute details.

The Sex of the Child

Until fairly recently, it was thought that a baby's sex was determined by the mother's cells. Or at least, it was believed that the sex was determined by the male and female cells together. But, we are given different information in the Qur'an, where it is stated that masculinity or femininity is created out of "a drop of sperm which has been ejected."

He has created both sexes, male and female from a drop of semen which has been ejected. (Qur'an, 53:45-46)

Was he not a drop of ejaculated sperm, then a blood-clot which He created and shaped, making from it both sexes, male and female? (Qur'an, 75:37-39)

The developing disciplines of genetics and molecular biology have scientifically validated the accuracy of this information given by the Qur'an. It is now understood that sex is determined by the sperm cells from the male, and that the female has no role in this process.

Chromosomes are the main elements in determining sex. Two of the 46 chromosomes that determine the structure of a human being are identified as the sex chromosomes. These two chromosomes are called "XY" in males, and "XX" in females, because the shapes of the chromosomes resemble these letters. The Y chromosome carries the genes that code for masculinity, while the X chromosome carries the genes that code for femininity.

The formation of a new human being begins with the cross combination of one of these chromosomes, which exist in males and females in pairs. In females, both components of the sex cell, which divides into two during ovulation, carry X chromosomes. The sex cell of a male, on the other hand, produces two different kinds of sperm, one that contains X chromosomes and the other Y chromosomes. If an X chromosome from the female unites with a sperm that contains an X chromosome, then the baby is female. If it unites with the sperm that contains a Y chromosome, the baby is male.

In other words, a baby's sex is determined by which chromosome from the male unites with the female's ovum.

None of this was known until the discovery of genes in the 20th century. Indeed, in many cultures, it was believed that a baby's sex was determined by the female. That was why women were blamed when they gave birth to girls.

Fourteen centuries before human genes were discovered, however, the Qur'an revealed information that denies this superstition, and referred to the origin of sex lying not with women, but with the semen deriving from men.

The "Clot" Clinging to the Uterus

If we continue to examine the facts announced to us in the Qur'an, about the formation of human beings, we again encounter some very important scientific truth.

When the sperm of the male unites with the ovum of the female, the essence of the baby to be born is formed. This single cell, known as a "zygote" in biology, will instantly begin reproducing by dividing, and eventually become a "piece of flesh," called an embryo. This, of course, can only be seen by human beings with the aid of a microscope.

The embryo, however, does not spend its developmental period in a void. It clings to the uterus, with something like roots that is firmly fixed to the earth by its tendrils. Through this bond, the embryo can obtain the substances essential to its development from the mother's body.85

Here, an important miracle of the Qur'an is revealed. While referring to the embryo developing in the mother's womb, Allah uses the word "alaq" in the Qur'an:

Recite: In the name of your Lord Who created man from alaq. Recite: And your Lord is the Most Generous. (Qur'an, 96:1-3)

The meaning of the word "alaq" in Arabic is "a thing that clings to some place." The word is literally used to describe leeches that cling to a body to suck blood.

Certainly, the use of such a specific word for the embryo developing in the mother's womb, proves once again that the Qur'an is the Word of Allah, the Lord of all the Worlds.

The Wrapping of Muscles over the Bones

Another important item of information provided in the verses of the Qur'an is the developmental stages of a human being in the mother's womb. It is stated in these verses that in the mother's womb, the bones develop first, and then the muscles form which wrap around them.

[We] then formed the drop into a clot and formed the clot into a lump and formed the lump into bones and clothed the bones in flesh; and then brought him into being as another creature. Blessed be Allah, the Best of Creators! (Qur'an, 23:14)

Embryology is the branch of science that studies the development of the embryo in the mother's womb. Until very recently, embryologists assumed that the bones and muscles in an embryo developed at the same time. Yet, advanced microscopic research conducted by virtue of new technological developments has revealed that the revelation of the Qur'an is word for word correct.

These observations at the microscopic level showed that the development inside the mother's womb takes place in just the way it is described in these verses. First, the cartilage tissue of the embryo ossifies. Then, muscular cells that are selected from amongst the tissue around the bones come together and wrap around the bones.

This event is described in a scientific publication titled Developing Human in the following words:

… [T]he shape of the skeleton determines the general appearance of the embryo in the bones stage during the 7^th week; muscles do not develop at the same time but their development follows soon after. The muscles take their positions around the bones throughout the body and therefore clothe the bones. Thus, the muscles take their well known forms and structures… The stage of clothing with muscle occurs during the 8^th week…86

In short, developmental stages of man, as described in the Qur'an, are in perfect harmony with the findings of modern embryology.

Three Dark Stages of the Baby in the Womb

In the Qur'an, it is related that man is created through a three-stage process in the mother's womb.

... He creates you stage by stage in your mothers' wombs in threefold darkness. That is Allah, your Lord. Sovereignty is His. There is no god but Him. So what has made you deviate? (Qur'an, 39:6)

The expression "fee thulumatin thalathin," translated into English as "a threefold darkness," indicates three dark regions involved during the development of the embryo. These are:

The darkness of the abdomen

The darkness of the womb

The darkness of the placenta

As we have seen, modern biology has revealed that the embryological development of the baby takes place in the manner revealed in the verse, in three dark regions. Moreover, advances in the science of embryology show that these regions consist of three layers each.

The lateral abdominal wall comprises three layers: the external oblique, the internal oblique, and transverses abdominis muscles.87

Similarly, the wall of the womb also consists of three layers: the epimetrium, the myometrium and the endometrium.88

Similarly again, the placenta surrounding the embryo also consists of three layers: the amnion (the internal membrane around the fetus), the chorion (the middle amnion layer) and the decidua (outer amnion layer.)89

It is also pointed out in this verse that a human being is created in the mother's womb in three distinct stages.

Indeed, modern biology has also revealed that the baby's embryological development takes place in three distinct regions in the mother's womb. Today, in all the embryology textbooks studied in departments of medicine, this subject is taken as an element of basic knowledge. For instance, in Basic Human Embryology, a fundamental reference text in the field of embryology, this fact is stated as follows:

The life in the uterus has three stages: pre-embryonic; first two and a half weeks, embryonic; until the end of the eight week, and fetal; from the eight week to labor.90

These phases refer to the different developmental stages of a baby. In brief, the main characteristics of these developmental stages are as follows:

- Pre-embryonic Stage

In this first phase, the zygote grows by division, and when it becomes a cell cluster, it buries itself in the wall of the uterus. While they continue growing, the cells organize themselves in three layers.

- Embryonic Stage

The second phase lasts for five and a half weeks, during which the baby is referred to as an "embryo." During this stage, the basic organs and systems of the body start to appear from the cell layers.

- Foetal Stage

From this stage onward, the embryo is called a "foetus." This phase begins at the eighth week of gestation, and lasts until the moment of birth. The distinctive characteristic of this stage is that the foetus looks much like a human being, with its face, hands and feet. Although it is only 3 cm long initially, all of its organs have become apparent. This phase lasts for about 30 weeks, and development continues until the week of delivery.

Information on the development in the mother's womb became available only after observations with modern devices. Yet, just like many other scientific facts, in a miraculous way, Allah draws our attention to these items of information in the verses of the Qur'an. The fact that such detailed and accurate information was given in the Qur'an at a time when people had scarce information on medical matters is clear evidence that the Qur'an is the Word of Allah.

References

85. Keith L. Moore, et al., Human Development as Described in the Qur'an and Sunnah (Makkah: Commission on Scientific Signs of the Qur'an and Sunnah, 1992), 36.
86. Keith L. Moore, Developing Human, 3rd ed. (W. B. Saunders Company: 1982), 364a.
87. http://anatomy.med.unsw.edu.au/cbl/embryo/Notes/git4.htm; and www.yoursurgery.com/ProcedureDetails.cfm?BR=1&Proc=74.
88. http://virtual.yosemite.cc.ca.us/uyeshiros/AP50/Repro.htm.
89. Kazi, 130 Evident Miracles in the Qur'an, 84.
90. Williams P., Basic Human Embryology, 3rd ed., 1984, 64.

Commonly asked questions about Islam

2007-02-22T20:06:00.000-08:00

Commonly asked questions about Islam

Question:

Why is a man allowed to have more than one wife in Islam? i.e. why is polygamy allowed in Islam?

Answer:

Definition of Polygamy

1. Polygamy means a system of marriage whereby one person has more than one spouse. Polygamy can be of two types. One is polygyny where a man marries more than one woman, and the other is polyandry, where a woman marries more than one man. In Islam, limited polygyny is permitted; whereas polyandry is completely prohibited.

Now coming to the original question, why is a man allowed to have more than one wife?

2. The Qur’an is the only religious scripture in the world that says,"marry only one".

The Qur’an is the only religious book, on the face of this earth, that contains the phrase ‘marry only one’. There is no other religious book that instructs men to have only one wife. In none of the other religious scriptures, whether it be the Vedas, the Ramayan, the Mahabharat, the Geeta, the Talmud or the Bible does one find a restriction on the number of wives. According to these scriptures one can marry as many as one wishes. It was only later, that the Hindu priests and the Christian Church restricted the number of wives to one.

Many Hindu religious personalities, according to their scriptures, had multiple wives. King Dashrat, the father of Rama, had more than one wife. Krishna had several wives.

In earlier times, Christian men were permitted as many wives as they wished, since the Bible puts no restriction on the number of wives. It was only a few centuries ago that the Church restricted the number of wives to one.

Polygyny is permitted in Judaism. According to Talmudic law, Abraham had three wives, and Solomon had hundreds of wives. The practice of polygyny continued till Rabbi Gershom ben Yehudah (95% C.E to 1030 C.E) issued an edict against it. The Jewish Sephardic communities living in Muslim countries continued the practice till as late as 1950, until an Act of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel extended the ban on marrying more than one wife.

3. Hindus are more polygynous than Muslims

The report of the ‘Committee of The Status of Woman in Islam’, published in 1975 mentions on page numbers 66 and 67 that the percentage of polygamous marriages between the years 1951 and 1961 was 5.06% among the Hindus and only 4.31% among the Muslims. According to Indian law only Muslim men are permitted to have more than one wife. It is illegal for any non-Muslim in India to have more than one wife. Despite it being illegal, Hindus have more multiple wives as compared to Muslims. Earlier, there was no restriction even on Hindu men with respect to the number of wives allowed. It was only in 1954, when the Hindu Marriage Act was passed that it became illegal for a Hindu to have more than one wife. At present it is the Indian Law that restricts a Hindu man from having more than one wife and not the Hindu scriptures.

Let us now analyse why Islam allows a man to have more than one wife.

4. Qur’an permits limited polygyny

As I mentioned earlier, Qur’an is the only religious book on the face of the earth that says ‘marry only one’. The context of this phrase is the following verse from Surah Nisa of the Glorious Qur’an:

"Marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one."

[Al-Qur’an 4:3]

Before the Qur’an was revealed, there was no upper limit for polygyny and many men had scores of wives, some even hundreds. Islam put an upper limit of four wives. Islam gives a man permission to marry two, three or four women, only on the condition that he deals justly with them.

In the same chapter i.e. Surah Nisa verse 129 says:

"Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women...."

[Al-Qur’an 4:129]

Therefore polygyny is not a rule but an exception. Many people are under the misconception that it is compulsory for a Muslim man to have more than one wife.

Broadly, Islam has five categories of Do’s and Don’ts:

i. ‘Fard’ i.e. compulsory or obligatory

ii. ‘Mustahab’ i.e. recommended or encouraged

iii. ‘Mubah’ i.e. permissible or allowed

iv. ‘Makruh’ i.e. not recommended or discouraged

v. ‘Haraam’ i.e. prohibited or forbidden

Polygyny falls in the middle category of things that are permissible. It cannot be said that a Muslim who has two, three or four wives is a better Muslim as compared to a Muslim who has only one wife.

5. Average life span of females is more than that of males

By nature males and females are born in approximately the same ratio. A female child has more immunity than a male child. A female child can fight the germs and diseases better than the male child. For this reason, during the pediatric age itself there are more deaths among males as compared to the females.

During wars, there are more men killed as compared to women. More men die due to accidents and diseases than women. The average life span of females is more than that of males, and at any given time one finds more widows in the world than widowers.

6. India has more male population than female due to female foeticide and infanticide

India is one of the few countries, along with the other neighbouring countries, in which the female population is less than the male population. The reason lies in the high rate of female infanticide in India, and the fact that more than one million female foetuses are aborted every year in this country, after they are identified as females. If this evil practice is stopped, then India too will have more females as compared to males.

7. World female population is more than male population

In the USA, women outnumber men by 7.8 million. New York alone has one million more females as compared to the number of males, and of the male population of New York one-third are gays i.e sodomites. The U.S.A as a whole has more than twenty-five million gays. This means that these people do not wish to marry women. Great Britain has four million more females as compared to males. Germany has five million more females as compared to males. Russia has nine million more females than males. God alone knows how many million more females there are in the whole world as compared to males.

8. Restricting each and every man to have only one wife is not practical

Even if every man got married to one woman, there would still be more than thirty million females in U.S.A who would not be able to get husbands (considering that America has twenty five million gays). There would be more than four million females in Great Britain, 5 million females in Germany and nine million females in Russia alone who would not be able to find a husband.

Suppose my sister happens to be one of the unmarried women living in USA, or suppose your sister happens to be one of the unmarried women in USA. The only two options remaining for her are that she either marries a man who already has a wife or becomes public property. There is no other option. All those who are modest will opt for the first.

In Western society, it is common for a man to have mistresses and/or multiple extra-marital affairs, in which case, the woman leads a disgraceful, unprotected life. The same society, however, cannot accept a man having more than one wife, in which women retain their honourable, dignified position in society and lead a protected life.

Thus the only two options before a woman who cannot find a husband is to marry a married man or to become public property. Islam prefers giving women the honourable position by permitting the first option and disallowing the second.

There are several other reasons, why Islam has permitted limited polygyny, but it is mainly to protect the modesty of women.

Question

How can you prove the existence of hereafter, i.e. life after death?

Answer

1. Belief in the hereafter is not based on blind faith?

Many people wonder as to how a person with a scientific and logical temperament, can lend any credence to the belief of life after death. People assume that anyone believing in the hereafter is doing so on the basis of blind belief.

My belief in the hereafter is based on a logical argument.

2. Hereafter a logical belief

There are more than a thousand verses in the Glorious Qur’an, containing scientific facts (refer my book "Qur’an and Modern Science-Compatible or Incompatible?"). Many facts mentioned in the Qur’an have been discovered in the last few centuries. But science has not advanced to a level where it can confirm every statement of the Qur’an.

Suppose 80% of all that is mentioned in the Qur’an has been proved 100% correct. About the remaining 20%, science makes no categorical statement, since it has not advanced to a level, where it can either prove or disprove these statements. With the limited knowledge that we have, we cannot say for sure whether even a single percentage or a single verse of the Qur’an from this 20% portion is wrong. Thus when 80% of the Qur’an is 100% correct and the remaining 20% is not disproved, logic says that even the 20% portion is correct. The existence of the hereafter, which is mentioned in the Qur’an, falls in the 20% ambiguous portion which my logic says is correct.

3. Concept of peace and human values is useless without the concept of hereafter

Is robbing a good or an evil act? A normal balanced person would say it is evil. How would a person who does not believe in the hereafter convince a powerful and influential criminal that robbing is evil?

Suppose I am the most powerful and influential criminal in the world. At the same time I am an Intelligent and a logical person. I say that robbing is good because it helps me lead a luxurious life. Thus robbing is good for me.

If anybody can put forward a single logical argument as to why it is evil for me, I will stop immediately. People usually put forward the following arguments:

a. The person who is robbed will face difficulties

Some may say that the person who is robbed will face difficulties. I certainly agree that it is bad for the person who is robbed. But it is good for me. If I rob a thousand dollars, I can enjoy a good meal at a 5 star restaurant.

b. Someone may rob you

Some people argue that someday I may be robbed. No one can rob me because I am a very powerful criminal and I have hundreds of bodyguards. I can rob anybody but nobody can rob me. Robbing may be a risky profession for a common man but not for an influential person like me.

c. The police may arrest you

Some may say, if you rob, you can be arrested by the police. The police cannot arrest me because I have the police on my payroll. I have the ministers on my payroll. I agree that if a common man robs, he will be arrested and it will be bad for him, but I am an extraordinarily influential and powerful criminal.

Give me one logical reason why it is bad for me and I will stop robbing.

d. Its easy money

Some may say its easy money and not hard-earned money. I agree completely that it is easy money, and that is one of the main reasons why I rob. If a person has the option of earning money the easy as well as the hard way, any logical person would choose the easy way.

e. It is against humanity

Some may say it is against humanity and that a person should care for other human beings. I counter argue by asking as to who wrote this law called ‘humanity’ and why should I follow it?

This law may be good for the emotional and sentimental people but I am a logical person and I see no benefit in caring for other human beings.

f. It is a selfish act

Some may say that robbing is being selfish. It is true that robbing is a selfish act; but then why should I not be selfish? It helps me enjoy life.

1. No logical reason for robbing being an evil act

Hence all arguments that attempt to prove that robbing is an evil act are futile. These arguments may satisfy a common man but not a powerful and influential criminal like me. None of the arguments can be defended on the strength of reason and logic. It is no surprise that there are so many criminals in this world.

Similarly raping, cheating etc. can be justified as good for a person like me and there is no logical argument that can convince me that these things are bad.

2. A Muslim can convince a powerful and influential criminal

Now let us switch sides. Suppose you are the most powerful and influential criminal in the world, who has the police and the ministers on his payroll. You have army of thugs to protect you. I am a Muslim who will convince you that robbing, raping, cheating, etc. are evil acts.

Even if I put forth the same arguments to prove that robbing is evil the criminal will respond the same way as he did earlier.

I agree that the criminal is being logical and all his arguments are true only when he is the most powerful and influential criminal.

3. Every human being wants justice

Each and every human being desires justice. Even if he does not want justice for others he wants justice for himself. Some people are intoxicated by power and influence and inflict pain and suffering on others. The same people, however, would surely object if some injustice was done to them. The reason such people become insensitive to the suffering of others is that they worship power and influence. Power and influence, they feel, not only allows them to inflict injustice on others but also prevents others from doing likewise to them.

4. God is Most Powerful and Just

As a Muslim I would convince the criminal about the existence of Almighty God (refer to answer proving the existence of God). This God is more powerful than you and at the same time is also just. The Glorious Qur’an says:

"Allah is never unjust
In the least degree"

[Al-Qur’an 4:40]

5. Why does God not punish me?

The criminal, being a logical and scientific person, agrees that God exists, after being presented with scientific facts from the Qur’an. He may argue as to why God, if He is Powerful and Just, does not punish him.

6. The people who do injustice should be punished

Every person who has suffered injustice, irrespective of financial or social status, almost certainly wants the perpetrator of injustice to be punished. Every normal person would like the robber or the rapist to be taught a lesson. Though a large number of criminals are punished, many even go scot-free. They lead a pleasant, luxurious life, and even enjoy a peaceful existence. If injustice is done to a powerful and influential person, by someone more powerful and more influential than he, even such a person would want that person perpetrators of injustice to be punished.

7. This life is a test for the hereafter

This life is a test for the hereafter. The Glorious Qur’an says:

"He who created Death
And life that He
May try which of you
Is best in deed;
And He is the Exalted
In Might, Oft-Forgiving"
[Al-Qur’an 67:2]

8. Final justice on day of judgement

The Glorious Qur’an says:

"Every soul shall have
A taste of death:
And only on the Day
Of Judgement shall you
Be paid your full recompense.
Only he who is saved
Far from the Fire
And admitted to the Garden
Will have attained
The object (of life):
For the life of this world
Is but goods and chattels
Of deception."
[Al-Qur’an 3:185]

Final justice will be meted out on the Day of Judgement. After a person dies, he will be resurrected on the Day of Judgement along with the rest of mankind. It is possible that a person receives part of his punishment in this world. The final reward and punishment will only be in the hereafter. God Almighty may not punish a robber or a rapist in this world but he will surely be held accountable on the Day of Judgement and will be punished in the hereafter i.e. life after death.

9. What punishment can the human law give Hitler?

Hitler incinerated six million Jews during his reign of terror. Even if the police had arrested him, what punishment can the human law give Hitler for justice to prevail? The most they can do is to send Hitler to the gas chamber. But that will only be punishment for the killing of one Jew. What about the remaining five million, nine hundred and ninety nine thousand, nine hundred and ninety-nine Jews?

10. Allah can burn Hitler more than six million times in hellfire

Allah say in the Glorious Qur’an:

"Those who reject
Our signs, We shall soon
Cast into the Fire;
As often as their skins
Are roasted through,
We shall change them
For fresh skins,
That they may taste
The penalty: for Allah
Is Exalted in Power, Wise"
[Al-Qur’an 4:56]

If Allah wishes he can incinerate Hitler six million times in the hereafter in the hellfire.

11. No concept of human values or good and bad without concept of hereafter

It is clear that without convincing a person about the hereafter, i.e. life after death, the concept of human values and the good or evil nature of acts is impossible to prove to any person who is doing injustice especially when he is influential and powerful.

ALL RELIGIONS TEACH MEN TO BE RIGHTEOUS, THEN WHY FOLLOW ONLY ISLAM?

Question

All religions basically teach followers to do good deeds. Why should a person only follow Islam? Can he not follow any of the religions?

Answer

1. Major difference between Islam and most other religions

All religions basically exhort mankind to be righteous and eschew evil. But Islam goes beyond that. It guides us towards practical ways of achieving righteousness and eliminating evil from our individual and collective lives. Islam takes into account human nature and the complexities of human society. Islam is guidance from the Creator Himself. Therefore, Islam is also called the Deen-ul-Fitrah (the natural religion of Man).

2. Example - Islam commands us to shun robbery and also prescribes method of eleminating robbery

a. Islam prescribes method of eliminating robbery
All major religions teach that theft is an evil act. Islam teaches the same. So what is the difference between Islam and the other religions? The difference lies in the fact that Islam, besides teaching that robbing is evil, shows a practical way of creating a social structure in which people will not rob.

b. Islam prescribes Zakaat
Islam prescribes a system of Zakaat (obligatory annual charity). Islamic law prescribes that every person who has a saving that exceeds the nisaab level i.e. more than 85 grams of gold, should give 2.5% of that saving every lunar year in charity. If every rich person in the world gave Zakaat sincerely, poverty will be eradicated from this world. Not a single human being would die of hunger.

c. Chopping off the hands as punishment for robbery
Islam prescribes chopping off the hands of the convicted robber. The Glorious Qur’an says in Surah Maidah:
"As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands:a punishment by way
of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power, full of wisdom."
[ Al-Qur’an 5:38]
The non-Muslim may say, "Chopping off the hands in this 20th century. Islam is a barbaric and ruthless religion!"

d. Results achieved when Islamic Shariah Implemented
America is supposed to be one of the most advanced countries in the world. Unfortunately it also has one of the highest rates of crime, theft, and robbery. Suppose the Islamic shariah is implemented in America i.e. every rich person gives Zakaat ( 2.5% of his savings in charity above 85 grams of gold every lunar year), and every convicted robber has his or her hands chopped off as a punishment. Will the rate of theft and robbery in America increase, remain same or decrease? Naturally it will decrease. Moreover the existence of such a stringent law would discourage many a potential robber.

I agree that the amount of theft that takes place in the world today is so tremendous that if you chop off the hands of all the thieves, there will be tens of thousands of people whose hands will be chopped off. The point here is that the moment you implement this law the rate of theft will decline immediately. The potential robber would give it a serious thought before jeopardizing his limbs. The mere thought of the punishment itself will discourage majority of the robbers. There will barely be a few who would rob. Hence only a few person’s hands would be chopped off but millions would live peacefully without fear of being robbed.

Islamic Shariah is therefore practical, and achieves results.

3. Example: Islam prohibits the molestation and rape of women. It enjoins hijaab and prescribes capital punishment for a convicted rapist.

Islam prescribes method of eliminating molestation and rape
All the major religions declare the molestation and rape of women as grave sins. Islam teaches the same. What then is the difference between Islam and the other religions? The difference lies in the fact that Islam does not merely preach respect for women, or abhor molestation and rape as serious crimes, but also gives clear guidance as to how society can eliminate such crimes.

Hijaab for men
Islam has a system of hijaab. The Glorious Qur’an first mentions hijaab for the men and then for the women. Hijaab for the men is mentioned in the following verse:

"Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: and Allah is well acquainted with all that they do."
[Al-Qur’an 24:30]

The moment a man looks at a woman and if any brazen or unashamed thought comes to his mind, he should lower his gaze.

Hijaab for women
Hijaab for women is mentioned in the following verse:

"And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons...."

[Al-Qur’an 24:31]

The extent of hijaab for a woman is that her complete body should be covered. The only part that can be seen, are the face and the hands up to the wrists. If they wish to cover, they can even cover these parts of the body. However some Islamic scholars insist that even the face should be covered.

Hijaab prevents molestation
The reason why Allah has prescribed Hijaab for the women is given in the Qur’an in the folowing verse of Surah Al-Ahzab:

"O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women,that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, most Merciful."

[Al-Qur’an 33:59]

The Qur’an says that Hijaab has been prescribed for the women so that they are recognized as modest women this would prevent them from being molested.

Example of twin sisters
Suppose two sisters who are twins and who are equally beautiful, walk down a street. One of them is wearing the Islamic Hijaab i.e. the complete body is covered except for the face and the hands up to the wrists, and the other twin is wearing a mini skirt or shorts. Around the corner there is a hooligan who is waiting for an opportunity to tease a girl. Who will he tease? The girl wearing the Islamic Hijaab or the girl wearing the mini skirt or shorts? Dresses that expose more than they conceal, are an indirect temptation to the opposite sex for teasing, molestation and rape. The Qur’an rightly says that the hijaab prevents women from being molested.

Capital punishment for rapist
The Islamic shariah prescribes capital punishment for a convicted rapist. The non-Muslim may be horrified at such a stringent punishment in this age. Many accuse Islam of being ruthless and barbaric. I have asked a common question to hundreds of non-Muslim men. Suppose God-forbid, some one rapes your wife, your mother or your sister and you are made the judge. The rapist is brought in front of you. What punishment would you give him? All of them said, "we would put him to death." Some went to the extent of saying, "we would torture him to death", If your wife or your mother is raped you want the rapist to be put to death. But if someone else’s wife or mother is raped, capital punishment is a barbaric law. Why the double standards?

U.S.A. has one of the highest rate of Rape
The United States of America is supposed to be one of the most advanced countries of the world. An F.B.I report in the year 1990 says that 1,02,555 cases of rape were reported. It further says that only 16% of the cases of rapes are reported. Thus, in order to know the actual number of rapes that took place in 1990, the reported figure should be multiplied by 6.25. We get a total of 6,40,968 rape cases that took place in the year 1990. If the total is divided by 365 the number of days in a year, we get an average of 1,756 rape incidents everyday.

Later another report said that an average of 1900 cases of rape are committed in U.S.A every day. According to National Crime Victimization Survey Bureau of Justice Statistics (U. S. Dept. of Justice) in 1996 alone 3,07,000 cases of rape were reported. Only 31% of the actual cases of rape were reported. Thus, 3,07,000 X 3.226 = 9,90,322 rapes took place in 1996. That is, an average of 2,713 cases of rape took place everyday in America in 1996. Every 32 seconds one rape is taking place in America. Maybe American rapists got bolder. The FBI report of 1990 continues and says that out of the rape cases that were reported only 10% of the rapist were arrested, that is only 1.6% of the actual rapes committed. Out of those arrested, 50% were let free before the trial. This would mean that only 0.8% of the rapists faced a trial. In other words if a person commits 125 rapes the chances that he will get a punishment for rape is only once. Many would consider this a good gamble. And the report says that of those people who faced trial 50% received sentences of less than a year’s imprisonment though the American law says rape carries a seven year sentence of imprisonment. For a rapist, the judge is lenient to first time offenders. Imagine a person commits 125 rapes and the chances of being convicted is only once, and 50% of the time the judge will grant leniency and give a sentence of less than a year!

Results achieved when Islamic Shariah Implemented
Suppose the Islamic shariah is implemented in America. Whenever a man looks at a woman and if any brazen or unashamed thought comes to his mind, he lowers his gaze. Every woman wears the Islamic Hijaab, that is the complete body is covered except the face and the hands upto the wrists. After this if any man commits rape, he gets capital punishment. The question is, will the rate of rape in America increase, will it remain the same or will it decrease? Naturally it will decrease. Islamic Shariah gets results.

4. Islam has Practical Solutions for the Problems of Mankind

Islam is the best way of life because its teachings are not doctrinaire rhetoric but practical solutions for the problems of mankind. Islam achieves results both at the individual and collective levels. Islam is the best way of life because it is a practical, universal religion not confined to any ethnic group or nationality.

Question:

If Islam is the best religion, why are many of the Muslims dishonest, unreliable, and involved in activities such as cheating, bribing, dealing in drugs, etc.?

Answer:

1. Media maligns Islam

Islam is without doubt the best religion but the media is in the hands of the westerners who are afraid of Islam. The media is continuously broadcasting and printing information against Islam. They either provide misinformation about Islam, misquote Islam or project a point out of proportion, if any.
When any bomb blasts take place anywhere, the first people to be accused without proof are invariably the Muslims. This appears as headlines in the news. Later, when they find that non-Muslims were responsible, it appears as an insignificant news’ item.
If a 50 year old Muslim marries a 15 year old girl after taking her permission, it appears on the front page but when a 50 year old non-Muslim rapes a 6 year old girl, it may appear in the news in the inside pages as ‘Newsbriefs’. Everyday in America on an average 2,713 cases of rape take place but it doesn’t appear in the news, since it has become a way of life for the Americans.

2. Black sheep in every community:

I am aware that there are some Muslims who are dishonest, unreliable, who cheat, etc. but the media projects this as though only Muslims are involved in such activities. There are black sheep in every community. I know Muslims who are alcoholics and who can drink most of the non-Muslims under the table.

3. Muslims best as a whole:

Inspite of all the black sheep in the Muslim community, Muslims taken on the whole, yet form the best community in the world. We are the biggest community of tee-totallers as a whole, i.e. those who don’t imbibe alcohol. Collectively, we are a community which gives the maximum charity in the world. There is not a single person in the world who can even show a candle to the Muslims where modesty is concerned; where sobriety is concerned; where human values and ethics are concerned.

4. Don’t judge a car by its driver:

If you want to judge how good is the latest model of the "Mercedes" car and a person who does not know how to drive sits at the steering wheel and bangs up the car, who will you blame? The car or the driver? But naturally, the driver. To analyze how good the car is, a person should not look at the driver but see the ability and features of the car. How fast is it, what is its average fuel consumption, what are the safety measures, etc. Even if I agree for the sake of argument that the Muslims are bad, we can’t judge Islam by its followers? If you want to judge how good Islam is then judge it according to its authentic sources, i.e. the Glorious Qur’an and the Sahih Hadith.

5. Judge Islam by its best follower i.e. Prophet Mohammed (pbuh):

If you practically want to check how good a car is put an expert driver behind the steering wheel. Similarly the best and the most exemplary follower of Islam by whom you can check how good Islam is, is the last and final messenger of God, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Besides Muslims, there are several honest and unbiased non-Muslim historians who have acclaimed that prophet Muhammad was the best human being. According to Michael H. Hart who wrote the book, ‘The Hundred Most Influential Men in History’, the topmost position, i.e. the number one position goes to the beloved prophet of Islam, Muhammad (pbuh). There are several such examples of non-Muslims paying great tributes to the prophet, like Thomas Carlyle, La-Martine, etc.

How the Bible got corrupted

2007-02-22T19:52:00.000-08:00

How the Bible got corrupted

Torah

The Pentateuch (the five books of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) was a composite work in which one could discern the hand of four different writers usually referred to by the four letters of J, E P and D. These five books were written about a 1000 years after Prophet Moses peace be upon him. The unknown authors of these works must have worked on them some point between c. 520 and 400 B.C. the latter date being most probable. As the unknown editor interwoven these sources, he tried to save their contents and have the best several worlds and creations.

Psalms

Prophet David lived around 1000 B.C. but we know that the Psalms were put together much later in the post-exilic period, that is after 539 B.C. The Book of Psalms consists of five collections of hymns, mostly written for use in the second temple (the temple of Zerubbabel). Through the writings of Prophet David could be here and there in the Psalms, However most of the psalms were post exilian. Probably mist of the Psalms should not be attributed to Prophet David. Most of them are praising some highly idealized monarch, and seem to be honoring one of the other of the Hasmanean Kings in 142-63 B.C. The form of the psalms and their use in worship services originated with Pagan nations surrounding Israel: Assyria, Babylon, Canaan and Egypt. The Jewish psalms were written during the various monarchies, prior to the exile of 586 BCE. The unknown persons who edited the Psalms tended to attribute to David all psalms which were written during the era of the Monarchy, regardless of their actual authorship. A few of the psalms can be dated because they with specific historical events. Actual authorship is mostly unknown.

Gospels

The four Gospels (Mark, Matthew, Luke and John) were not written by the actual disciples of Prophet Jesus. As a matter of fact, they were written by unknown people that the Church assigned them to. It seems unlikely that any of the alleged sayings of Prophet Jesus peace be upon him were spoken by a historical figure. Scholars are now saying that most of what the Gospels are saying are compilations of “traditions” cherished by the early Christians rather than historical annals. Mark, Matthew and Luke seem to be synoptic gospels, meaning that they had a common source, most probably the three Q documents that made up these gospels. Another problem is Paul’s letters. The problem they pose is that non of them have allusions to Mary the mother of Jesus, may Allah be pleased with her, or to the Virgin birth or to Jesus place of birth, no John the Baptist, Judas or Peters denial. Paul’s letters were all written before the Gospels at around 50-60 CE. What could’ve happened is that the Gospels were written to reflect Paul’s ideology. However most of the material in the Gospels are absent in the Pauline documents.

New Testament scholars date the Gospel of Mark to about 70 AD. However G.A. Wells maintains that it was written in 90 AD when “ Palestinan Christianity had been overwhelmed by Jewish war with Rome and the gentile Christians who then first linked Jesus with Pilate and first gave his life altogether a real historical setting, could have had only very imperfect knowledge of what really happened in Palestine in 30AD.

Other New Testament writings:

Even in antiquity people like Origen and Eusebius raised doubts about the authenticity of other books in the New Testament such as Hebrews, James, John 2 & 3, Peter 2, Jude, and Revelation. Martin Luther rejected the Epistle of James calling it worthless and an "epistle of straw" and questioned Jude, Hebrews and the Apocalypse in Revelation. Nevertheless, all New Testament writings came well after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus from unknown authors (with the possible exception of Paul, although still after the alleged death).

Epistles of Paul: Paul's biblical letters (epistles) serve as the oldest surviving Christian texts, written probably around 60 C.E. Most scholars have little reason to doubt that Paul wrote some of them himself. However, there occurs not a single instance in all of Paul's writings that he ever meets or sees an earthly Jesus, nor does he give any reference to Jesus' life on earth. Therefore, all accounts about a Jesus could only have come from other believers or his imagination. Hearsay.

Epistle of James: Although the epistle identifies a James as the letter writer, but which James? Many claim him as the gospel disciple but the gospels mention several different James. Which one? Or maybe this James has nothing to do with any of the gospel James. Perhaps this writer comes from any one of innumerable James outside the gospels. James served as a common name in the first centuries and we simply have no way to tell who this James refers to. More to the point, the Epistle of James mentions Jesus only once as an introduction to his belief. Nowhere does the epistle reference a historical Jesus and this alone eliminates it from an historical account.

Epistles of John: The epistles of John, the Gospel of John, and Revelation appear so different in style and content that they could hardly have the same author. Some suggest that these writings of John come from the work of a group of scholars in Asia Minor who followed a "John" or they came from the work of church fathers who aimed to further the interests of the Church. Or they could have simply come from people also named John (a very common name). No one knows. Also note that nowhere in the body of the three epistles of "John" does it mention a John. In any case, the epistles of John say nothing about seeing an earthly Jesus. Not only do we not know who wrote these epistles, they can only serve as hearsay accounts.

Epistles of Peter: Many scholars question the authorship of Peter of the epistles. Even within the first epistle, it says in 5:12 that Silvanus wrote it. Most scholars consider the second epistle as unreliable or an outright forgery (for some examples, see the introduction to 2 Peter in the full edition of The New Jerusalem Bible, 1985. In short, no one has any way of determining whether the epistles of Peter come from fraud, an unknown author also named Peter (a common name) or from someone trying to further the aims of the Church.

Of the remaining books and letters in the Bible, there occurs no other stretched claims or eyewitness accounts for a historical Jesus and needs no mention of them here for this deliberation.

As for the existence of original New Testament documents, none exist. No book of the New Testament survives in the original autograph copy. What we have then come from copies, and copies of copies, of questionalbe originals (if the stories came piecemeal over time, as it appears it has, then there may never have existed an original). The earliest copies we have got written more than a century later than the autographs, and these exist on fragments of papyrus. [Pritchard; Graham] According to Hugh Schonfield, "It would be impossible to find any manuscript of the New Testament older than the late third century, and we actually have copies from the fourth and fifth. [Schonfield]

What others say about the Gospels

Christians repeatedly state that the Gospels are eyewitness acconts and written by the actual disciples of Jesus. They go on to say that many scholars and historians agree with them. Really? As seen above, the Gospels are not historical information about Jesus. Here we have quotes from respectable scholars about the Gospels who agree with the Holy Quran that the Christians follow nothing but conjecture:

The gospels are not eyewitness accounts

-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School

The gospels are very peculiar types of literature. They're not biographies.

-Paula Fredriksen, Professor and historian of early Christianity, Boston University (in the PBS documentary, From Jesus to Christ, aired in 1998)

The narrative conventions and world outlook of the gospel prohibit our using it as a historical record of that year.

-Paul Q. Beeching, Central Connecticut State University (Bible Review, June 1997, Vol. XIII, Number 3, p. 54)

The bottom line is we really don't know for sure who wrote the Gospels.

-Jerome Neyrey, of the Weston School of Theology, Cambridge, Mass. in "The Four Gospels," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)

Most scholars have come to acknowledge, was done not by the Apostles but by their anonymous followers (or their followers' followers). Each presented a somewhat different picture of Jesus' life. The earliest appeared to have been written some 40 years after his Crucifixion.

-David Van Biema, "The Gospel Truth?" (Time, April 8, 1996)

So unreliable were the Gospel accounts that "we can now know almost nothing concerning the life and personality of Jesus."

-Rudolf Bultmann, University of Marburg, the foremost Protestant scholar in the field in 1926

The Synoptic Gospels employ techniques that we today associate with fiction.

-Paul Q. Beeching, Central Connecticut State University (Bible Review, June 1997, Vol. XIII, Number 3, p. 43)

The letter of Jude also is considered too late to have been written by the attested author-- "the brother of James" and, thus, of Jesus. The letter, believed written early in the second century.