Mahjoor Quran

From Blog to Website

2008-06-22T07:05:00.000-07:00

The Mahjoor Quran group have created an organisation called Deen Research Center (DRC) and also now a website where many of the articles and books can be viewed and downloaded in PDF and much much more.

Deen Research Center (DRC) is a Think Tank who research the Quranic cosmology and social system based on the Arabic language used in the Quran and its connection with science of cosmology, biology, archeology, history, psychology, sociology, economics, politics and philosophy.

We renounce all aggression done in the name of Islam and we reject any tradition, belief or history that contradicts the Quran, science and humanism.

We believe the Quran rejects all forms supernatural beliefs, blind worship, oppression, aggression, autocracy, theocracy, tradition, blind-following and anti-scientism. We believe the Quran presents a scientific, secular socio-economic system where in mankind can solve all of their problems pertaining to war, oppression, hunger, racism, discrimination, backwardness and crime that has been present among mankind since it formed its first civilizations. And that the Quran was transmitted to Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allāh al-Hashimi al-Qurashi in the 6-7th century CE in Arabia, by the Developing Force that has created and controls the universe, which in Arabic is called Allah, God in English.

http://www.deenresearchcenter.com/

The site contains articles and books in PDF on several subjects as:

- Human Rights
- Reform of Muslims
- Quranic message on how to form societies
- Research into Quranic subjects
- Quran translations
- Quran and science
- Philosophy

And a long list of free Dictionaries on the Arabic and Quranic language, online Quran tools, research websites and much more.

Abu Muslim Ispha'Hani's work

2007-11-18T19:58:00.000-08:00

http://www.driveway.com/lfqdv26938

2006-11-30T12:15:00.000-08:00

The Basic Human Rights in the Light of The Qura’n

by Ghulam Ahmad Parwez ; English Rendering by A. Rashid Samnakay

Purely on the basis that humankind belongs to the species of Human being, it has certain basic rights, according to the Qura’n. These rights are not in any way dependent upon an understanding or promise nor are they a reward for righteous deeds. Every Human Being is entitled to these with no conditions attached; reward, discrimination on the basis of religion, sect, community, language, colour of skin, race and citizenship. Let us see what these rights are which all Human Beings can demand in a Qura’nic social system.

1. Dignity of Humankind
Every human child, at birth, has the right of dignity. ‘WE have created all humankind as worthy of dignity’ (17-70). Hence, differences between humankind of birth (status, genealogy, race, family etc), wealth, trade and profession are against these basic birth rights. In short, gradation of for any reason is an abrogation of Human Rights. “Dignity of humankind” without any conditions attached is the first and basic law of the Qura’n.

2. Gender Equality
According to the Qur’an, gender difference is neither the means of lowering nor raising of status. That is, neither the male on the basis of being male is better nor is the female on the basis of being female worst off. The genesis of life is from the ‘one self (4-1)’. Qura’n says “every human child, weather boy or a girl has a part in it of male and female’’ (49-13).
Therefore the male is neither a special being nor is the female a different specie. Both genders are of one being and are partners in the one status as human being. There is no aspect which has its door open for one and closed for the other. Biologically the difference that exists between man and woman is from natural inheritance. On human level there is no difference. On this level the field of action is the same for both and the reaction in the law of nature is the same (3-194). ‘None of you will have your actions wasted whether you are a male or female’---What is the meaning of male and female (thafis)……..? ‘you are part of each other’---‘You share equally in all aspects of life’. ‘You are part of the same group of people’. Have a look at verses 33-35 and 9-71. How does the Qura’n make man and woman stand shoulder to shoulder in matters of lie.
Gender Equality is the basic right of humanity and cannot be usurped in any way. The Qura’nic social system is responsible for maintaining that equality.

3. The Standard of Deeds as Higher Status
Following the issue of Dignity, the varying status of Humankind comes to the fore. The rule for it is as follows:
46-19 The status and position of every body is dependent upon their actions. That is the dignity of humankind on the basis of human being will be followed by taking into account the personal character and actions of the individual, and the society as a whole will establish their status and position accordingly. The person of higher capabilities will have the right to higher position in society (49-13). From the highest to the lowest all positions will be open to every body, who according to their capabilities will be able to claim for themselves. This right of status cannot be usurped by any body nor will any other standard be adopted for it.

4. Right of Freedom
You must have heard this slogan many a times “ Freedom is every body’s birth right” yet its true meaning has seldom been obvious. The place from whence you might have heard this slogan proclaimed, would be the same place from where rules are proclaimed putting all sorts of restrictions on rights of the people. So, one is at a loss to understand that if Freedom is a basic right then why are these restrictions imposed. The answer given is that these restrictions are imposed according to the Law and as such these do not restrict humankind’s freedom; and if these laws were not there then nothing would be safe. ---hence for freedom these laws are imperative.

It is true that for the safety of individuals these restrictions are necessary, but it is also obvious that those given the authority to enact these laws perpetrate transgressions, behind the veil of authority that assertion of lawlessness is of no value. The lawlessness (anarchy) is an open revolt but their transgressions take place behind legal curtains. These people in authority first go through the ritual of law-making and then this knife ‘blown upon with Bismillah from Shah Madar’ is used to cut the throat of whoever, thus making the slaughter as halal. (i) This is a very important question which has not been answered yet, as to how can the preservation of Right and the necessity of making Laws be reconciled that both remain intact. The solution is given by the Qura’n. It first explained in 3-78/79 ‘No human being, even though Allah may have given him/her a code of laws or the power to enforce it or even prophethood- has the right to say to others: “you should obey me rather than God” Qura’n has established the constitution of human right at such a high level that humankind could not even envisage. (ii) This is the reality of Human Rights. Now look at Law making. In the same verse by saying min dunillaah it explained that though it is necessary to enact laws they cannot be man-made laws.

Only God has that right. Now the question arises as to how are these divine laws to be enacted? Will it be theocracy which in God’s name the clergy will do as it pleases? Qura’n says ‘NO’, theocracy is the worst example of transgression. That is why Qura’n has juxta positioned Haman who was the representative of the clergy, with Pharaoh as an equal criminal. With regard to restriction imposed by law it says in 3-78,79 ‘no body has the right to tamper with these restrictions or impose others’. This is the practical meaning of laailaahaa illallaah that none has the power and authority to subjugate (let alone enslave) any other person. Now it raises the question as to how to practically implement these limits and restrictions given in the Book of God. It is clearly explained that this right is not given to any particular group or community but that it is the collective responsibility of all the individuals of the society and these matters will be “addressed in consultation” (42-38). These rights of consultation are also included in the list. The practical machinery for consultation will be constructed according to the conditions then prevailing.

So the Qura’n has given the laws which must be followed or has established those limits within which the community will consult to change them as required. No one has the right to transgress these limits or to implement others instead, because this will equate to means of usurping the Human freedom and no body can be given that permission. Qura’n equates this to Shirk. Sura Shuaraa 42-41says ‘have these people got other partners who enact such rules for which they have no permission from God?’ Thus the Qura’n gives no permission to enact such laws for the society.
This is the method by which the Qura’n prevents assault on any Human Rights so that lawlessness does not spread in the society. This collection of distributed right is the unique quality of the Quran.

5. Rights of Labour
Qura’ns pronouncement is that ‘every one will get the full reward for their work’ (39-70).
No body will usurp the rewards of his/her effort, nor reduce its return. In this respect it said at other place ‘except those who are incapacitated to work (which will be discussed later) no body will gain without endeavour’. That is to say that in such a society parasites who sponge off others and live a life of comfort and luxury will have no place. It is therefore obvious that in such a society where ones endeavours will not be exploited, will obtain their rights of just reward. Under this rule the roots of capitalism’s are cut off. Its very existence depends upon the exploitation of labour.
Remember that those who, in spite of the capacity to work, sponge off others labour, are in fact beggars however rich they may be.

6. Justice and Fairness
This is what is meant by “Justice”- That every body receives a fair share. According to the Qura’n Justice is a very composite expression in which all rights are preserved. Legal right is the same thing in that its purpose is to restore through the courts the rights of a person whose share has been usurped. On this issue the Qura’n is so careful as to warn: “watch out that in the matter of justice you do not differentiate between a friend and a foe’ and ‘lest it may happen that as a result of an enemy-nation’s behaviour towards you, it may induce you to injustice. You should always treat them with justice, for justice is not a tit-for tat issue. On the basis of humanity it is their right and your obligation” (5-8).
Legal justice means that quarrels and disputes are resolved within the framework of the limits of God’s laws. Since Qura’n has not given the power to rule to mankind it means that it has not given the right to enact laws to any person or a group either. Justice is the name given to the establishment of God’s laws. If the State’s law happens to be against that of Qura’n, every citizen has the right to demand change in it and the State is obliged to change it.

But Qura’n just does not stop at Justice. It goes beyond (as has been said before). Justice means that whatever is due to people, is given. But what if that is not enough for their necessities? Qura’n says that in that case the society makes up for the shortfall in order to maintain the balance (ehsaan) of the social system (16-90). This ehsaan is also included in the basic rights. The world encourages ‘charity’ in such cases. But charity tramples humanity and it is obvious how it destroys self respect of the receiver of charity! That is why Qura’n does not refer to ehsaan as charity but says that to demand the topping up of this shortfall is a Right. (70-24) Those who’s endeavours are not enough or those who are incapable to provide for themselves have a share in the wealth of those who have more than their requirement. This right is not under cover or secret but is transparent to the Qura’nic social system. To make up for the shortfall of people as a basic right will not be found in any other document except the Quran.

7. The Right of Sustenance
The life source of humanity (indeed of all living things) is the provision of sustenance. The world has decreed that every individual fulfils his responsibility to provide for all their needs and that of their children. But Qura’n in this respect differs from the world. It says ‘ there is no living being in this world, the responsibility of whose providing for its provision is not on Allah11-6’.
It has to be understood that those responsibilities that Allah has taken upon Himself are to be fulfilled by the State that runs on Qura’nic system. Hence it is the responsibility of any State that runs on Qura’nic system, to ensure that it establishes a system wherein no living creature lacks the necessities of life and declares to all its citizens ‘we are responsible to provide for your and your progeny’s basic necessities too 6-152’. The provision of basic necessities of life is a right of every human being and he can demand it from a system based on Qura’nic principles. This right is not written in any other Charter in the world.

The clarification of this can be found in my book “Nizam-e-Rabubiyat”.
With respect to the provision for the progeny, it also includes the provision of resources for their eduction and training. ‘Do not murder your children due to the lack of resources 6-152’. Here the word ‘murder’ does not only mean to kill. It also means to destroy by denying education and training (soul destroying). Hence it is the obligation of the Qura’nic system to provide for the best education and training of children. As a result every child can demand best education and training as a right in a Quranic system of State and no body can deny them this right.

8. Sanctity of Life
But before the provision of necessities of life, the protection of life becomes an issue. The Qura’n has clearly expounded ‘God has declared the sanctity of life, hence no body can be given the permission to take life, except when Right demands it (6-152)’. Qura’n explains in another context what this demand is. If one murders another unjustly then the former can be sentenced to death in response, or if one causes disruption in the justice and social system and cannot be refrained from it after repeated attempts, a death sentence can be given. Outside these conditions if one is to take life for no reason, it would be construed as if the whole of humanity is murdered. On the other hand if one saves one life it is equated to the saving of the whole of humanity. (5-32). Have you noted that under which special conditions has Qura’n allowed taking of a life (that is taking of a life legally)? That too is for the purposes of universal protection of life. That is what it calls bil haq.

9. Sanctity of Wealth
Along with the sanctity of life, the sanctity of wealth which remains for the individuals use, is also included in the basic rights. No body is allowed to usurp what others have for their legitimate use. For it says that you should not usurp each others wealth (4-29). Wealth is a compound word and includes possessions of every kind and its protection is a basic right.
One aspect of this comes to fore here. If ones place is burgled, the universal legal justice punishes the thief, but the one who’s wealth was stolen, has no redress to his/her loss. If the theft was not due to their negligence or lack of care, then they have a right to redress the loss. This rule applies within limits to other losses too.

10. Protection of Residence
Following the protection of life and wealth the Qura’n also provides the right to safety of residence. The allegations Qura’n lays at the feet of Jews is this ‘You are the people who unjustly murder and drive out people from their homes 2-85’. Hence to provide roof over the head is also an obligation of the State and to deny it is an abrogation of the individual’s basic right.

11. Sanctity of Honour
Human honour is invaluable commodity. This thing of the highest standard is not found in the animal kingdom and is only a human speciality. Sexual urge is common among both animals and human, but the sense of honour is only found in the domain of humanity. Hence Qura’n gives the protection of honour a permanent value of Right. Therefore it has ordained the flouting of honour as a major crime and has prescribed a heavy penalty. Adulterer, ‘be it male or female, punish them with hundred lashes.24-2’.
Not only in adultery but to cast unproven aspersions on the honour of a respectable woman is to be punished with eighty lashes 24-4. It is so because this is also an assault on her honour.
To accost and tease respectable women, to pass derogatory and incite-full comments upon them is even greater crime. In this respect it says that such people should be exiled. Such people should be stripped of their citizenship. If they do not recant, they should be taken in custody and on proof of their guilt executed, 33-60.This is that divine rule about which it says ‘this is the law that was given to the previous nations and it is of such permanent value that there can be no change made to it.22-61. The maintenance of all these laws is the State’s responsibility.

12. Right of Choice in Marriage
With respect to married couples, Qura’n has ordained that the choice of a spouse is a basic human right. It addressed men ‘you marry women according to your choice 4-3’ and on the other hand has protected the right of choice of women in addressing men ‘you can not be their master by force 4-19’. Marriage is a contract for which the agreement of the two parties is the basic condition.
In this context it must be emphasised that after the ‘contract of marriage’ the responsibilities of husband and wife according to Qura’n are equal in all spheres of life. There is only one exception to the rule. In the situation of divorce or widow-hood, the woman is not allowed to remarry during the period known as iddat. There is no such iddat for man and its rationale is obvious. The period establishes if the woman is pregnant. This rule is for the protection of the child’s right, in order to establish the biological father of the child. In Surah Baqara it said ‘the women have similar rights commensurate with their responsibilities. There is only one aspect where the men have an advantage in that they do not have to wait for the passing of the iddat 2-228’.
The protection of these rights is a State’s responsibility.

13. Aesthetic Right
The Qura’n respects an individual’s aesthetic taste and does not allow any body to deprive the person of this right. It emphasises ‘who is it that can deny the aesthetic resources that HE has provided for HIS servants and make unlawful for them to enjoy it 7-32.’ It is every body’s basic right to enjoy them while staying within the divine limits. No body can deny them of the right. As a rule it must be understood that what God has not forbidden, no one can declare it as forbidden. This is equal to usurping the basic rights which nobody has the authority. It must also be understood that Qura’n does not restrict the manner of food consumption and people’s life style. Instead it has given the right of choice to all according to ones taste. It says that you are free to eat and drink at any body’s house including that of your relatives and friends, wether you eat separately or together 24-61. Similarly it does not place any restrictions on style and type of dress and encourages every body’s sense of aesthetics.

It also says that in addition to covering ones modesty, the dress is also for decoration 7-26. Gold ornaments, silver and glass utensils, soft and smooth silk clothes, and even high class furniture (76-13to 15 and 18-31) and similar objects are manifestation of jannah. Although it is necessary to realise that the whole society is in a position to afford such a standard. It is never said that this heavenly life is a prerogative of only a select group and others will go without. The heavenly life that an individual can afford must be available to all the members of the society.

14. Religious Freedom
The Qura’n gives full freedom of religion. It maintains that the Iman (belief) is the name of accepting the truth with the application of higher intellect, contemplation and vision. ‘Tell them that Truth has come in Qura’n from your Sustainer, you should contemplate on it and then whoever wishes to accept it, do so and who ever wishes to reject it, do so18-29.’ It has also emphasised that the difference between the other creations of universe and mankind is that every thing in the universe is obliged to obey the rule that has been set for it, but humankind is created to exercise a choice. It has been shown the path and left alone to it own choice to either follow the path or digress from it. If it follows the shown path it will lead a pleasant life; if not, it will be at a loss. If it was God’s wish to force it to follow a certain path it would have been created similar to other objects in the universe but it is not so. It has been created with power of exercising choice.
It would be against the divine will that humankind should be compelled to follow a certain path. Qura’n has addressed humankind ‘if it was in your Lord’s programme that humankind was to be compelled to follow the path of iman, then there was nothing to stop HIM, but HE has not created humankind so; it has been given a choice in this matter, so would you compel it to believe? That would be against Divine will. Your duty is only to pass on the message, you are not expected to do more10-99’. The right and wrong has been made evident by the Qura’n. ‘After this there is no compulsion in the matter of Deen2-256’.

The reality is that Islam is not a Religion (mazhab). This word is not in the Qura’n. So it does not accept other religions of the world as its worthy opponent. It is a Code for life or a system of government. It cannot allow that those of other religions should set up a different system of government within its borders. This would be equivalent to setting up a State-with-in-a-State which is not allowed anywhere else either. But it does not oppose that people who live within its State boundaries chose their religion. It gives them the freedom to do so. It takes upon itself the responsibility of the security of their houses of worship in the same manner as it does for the mosques. Qura’n establishes the reason for an Islamic State thus-‘if God were not to have controlled through humankind the rebellious elements in society then certainly the monk’s monasteries, Christian churches, other houses of worship and mosques, where God’s name is taken in abundance, would be demolished 22-40’. Hence the security of all houses of worship rests with the States operating on Qura’nic system of government where all non Muslims can demand security as their basic right.
Not only that but it has stressed upon the community of believers that –you should not swear at their Gods lest the non-believers, in their ignorance swear at Allah.
As you would be offended, they too are offended by your disrespect to their idols. The fact is that every body loves and respects their own object of worship 6-109. You should convey to them the truth. When, with vision and understanding they are able to differentiate between right and wrong they will discard their false Gods and adopt the right path to lead their life. You will not be able to compel them to do so.
Hence the Qura’an not only gives humankind the freedom but gives assurance that their religion is protected from abuse.

At this stage I apologise for digressing a bit. Although God has given total freedom to humankind in respect of religion, the Muslim sharia leadership allows non-Muslims to choose and change their religion but a Muslim has no right to do so. If a Muslim converts he/she is put to death. The death penalty is applicable not only in respect of conversion but if a Muslim expresses opinion different to theirs and they declare the person murtad (blasphemer), the death penalty applies there too.
It should be realised that one has the basic right to either adopt the Deen and live within an Islamic system or exercise the choice to live outside it, but it is not allowed that a person would accept the system superficially and then select those codes that suit him/her and reject the others. This sort of freedom is not available in any system.
All rule of the State have to be obeyed. But if the person converts to other religion and still wishes to live in the Islamic State then there are choices that he/she stays there as a non-Muslim Dhimmi or goes some where else to live.
After this digression I come back to the main theme. According to Qura’n the next right is that of the right to speak the truth.

15. The Right to Speak the Truth
Qura’n has not only given us the Right to speak the Truth, but has ordained upon us to practice it. There is no choice given in it. It has ordained that whereever there is the necessity, speak out truthfully. Let us see how far Qura’n goes in this respect. ‘oh you the people of belief, it is obligatory upon you to maintain justice in the world’. It is imperative in order to maintain justice that truth should be told without fear or favour’. ‘When called upon to give witness you should not consider as to which party or group you are speaking against, you should think that you are a witness to God and tell the truth even if it is against your own self’ (see how Qura’n elevates the position of humankind). ‘even if it goes against your parents or relatives’, ‘whether rich or poor’, for ‘Allah’s right is bigger than theirs’. ‘Remember that your vested interests, the relationship of relatives and friends and the fear of reprisal from the rich and influential, can stand in the way’. ‘But you should not consider these issues and stand firm in your resolve’. ‘Nor should you speak with forked tongue nor should you avoid the truth, you may be able to fool people but you can’t fool Allah, HE knows all’4-135. Speak the truth openly.
Having given the above edict, it warns the society that it should implement such a system that the witness suffers no reprisals on giving witness 2-282.

16. Freedom of Expression
To express ones opinion also fall in this area. One of the differences between animal kingdom and humankind, according to Qura’n is that the former do not have the capacity to express its consciences. humankind has been given this capability. God has created humankind and has given it the capacity to express itself 55-4, and at other place it says that HE has given humankind the capacity to express itself ‘with the pen 96-4’.
Humankind has the right to express its opinion with the help of a tongue (language) and with pen as well.
It must be understood that expression of opinion or the use of any other God-given faculty in contravention of HIS laws is a crime and worthy of punishment. It is different thing to restrict or curtail these God given capacities. The wrong use of these capacities can be rendered as crime but the right to use them cannot be usurped. To do so would be akin to turn humankind into an animal.

17. The right of protection of privacy
Qura’n prevents us from unnecessarily scrutinising individual’s privacy 49-12. It means that it gives the individual the assurance that their privacy will not be encroached upon.(In the matter of crime investigation it becomes a different issue). The protection of the content of letters and correspondence falls in this category. It thus gives the right of privacy to an individual when it says ‘except in your own, you should not enter into others houses without the resident’s permission 24-27.

18. Protection against Slander
Qura’an provides for protection against slander. It says ‘Allah does not like that a persons weakness be propagated maliciously 4-148’. If correction is intended then it should be under taken quietly, then it says ‘a group or party should not belittle another 49-11. No derogatory names be given. One must not be teased, just on the basis of rumour 49-12. This explains why one should be presumed innocent till proved guilty and no talk behind the back be indulged into 24-12 and 24-16. Back-biting is strictly forbidden in Qura’n 49-12. With these given warnings, Qura’n protects individuals privacy.

19. Assurance of Peace
Qura’n steps further after giving all the above rights. ‘These people will have no fear and stress 2-38’.Fear is an anxiety caused by the external dangers. Hence this society will be protected from external dangers by the State. Stress is the name given to the trauma caused by these anxieties. Thus in a system where the State has taken the responsibility of protecting the people from external dangers, it is also its responsibility to remove the causes of anxieties. The protection from fear and stress is such a composite statement that it conjures up the concept of total bliss. In this protection also lies the idea ‘no body who can a carry a burden will carry the burden of another 6-165’. It will not happen that one will take the action but some one else will reap the reward. That the responsibility should be of some one but some one else would fulfil the responsibility. Some one should commit a crime but some one else would suffer the consequences. This is the security with which all will get true contentment. The acquisition of it is the basic right of every individual.

These are the basic right that Quran accepts as the Human Rights, and their sanctity is given by the Quranic System.

2006-11-30T12:10:00.000-08:00

Muslims Successful in turning Precious Gold into Worthless Dust

by Muhammad Iqbal Khawaja

"Why I am not a Christian" is the title of an article written by Dr Shabbir Ahmed M.D. (Florida) that appeared in the May, June, and July 1999 editions of the Tolu-e-Islam Magazine. Such was the allure and magnetism of this scholarly, magnificent and an extremely powerful article that I had already read it inter- alia five times. Resting in my sitting room, my gaze fell on the June edition of the Tolu-e-Islam Magazine. I picked it up and proceeded yet again, to read the second instalment of this article.
Readers will appreciate that when one reads an article or book more than once, each time one derives new depth and new knowledge from it. That is exactly what had happened to me with this article. On the previous readings, I had read and understood the paragraph on the Pillars of Islam and then moved on. But on this occasion when I read: (Quote;" The term "Pillars of Islam" does not appear in the Quran. According to a saying of the Holy Messenger, "the building of Islam rests on five [Pillars]"), these words kept repeating themselves in my head so much that I was forced to put the magazine down and think.

The Building of Islam rests on Five Pillars! The Building of Islam! What a magnificent building it would be! The Pillars on which this building would be supported, just how magnificent and powerful structures they would have to be? Indeed, that is how it should be. For the building of Islam and the structures that would support it, are nothing that this world has ever seen, as Islam is a divine message from Allah for the entire Humankind. The structures (Pillars) that would support the building of Islam would have to be strong, purposeful, powerful and pragmatic, because Islam is not a dogma. Let us remain focused on this truth and examine the five Pillars of Islam.
Kalema: Quote:(or the creed of Islam): "I solemnly declare from the depth of my heart that there is no God (in the Universe worthy of my obedience, submission and subservience) but ALLAH , and Muhammad is His Messenger"].
It is generally believed by Muslims, that in order to convert to Islam or to renew ones affirmation, one has only to recite the Kalema . Is it really that easy to be a Muslim? Simply recite these words and hey presto! you are a Muslim! Or do the words have a meaning and a practical aspect to them, which are indispensable, intrinsic and absolutely fundamental to the very foundation of a Muslim's life?
Obedience: derived from obey; which means to do and be willing to do what one is told to do.; carry out (a command).
Submission: derived from submit; which means put oneself under the control of another; submission; act of submitting; accepting of another's power or authority; obedience; humility; with profound respect.
Subservience: derived from subserve; which means to serve as a means to helping (an end or purpose).
When we recite the Kalema, we declare, "I acknowledge and affirm from the depth of my heart that I am not willing to do or carry out any commands unless they are from ALLAH! (obedience) and affirm that I place myself under no-ones control, I recognise no authority over me except that of ALLAH! (submission) and I serve no-one except ALLAH and obey what He has ordained (subservience). In other words, I sincerely declare and affirm that the right of sovereignty over me belongs only to ALLAH! And that Muhammad is His Messenger.

This is an oath, an undertaking a promise that we make to God. These are not mere words, the recitation of which is enough to turn us into Muslims. This statement, this declaration actually forms the very basis of the code, direction and the purpose of our life. It is only after adherence to the meaning of every word of this declaration that one becomes a Muslim. Islam is a collective way of life in which every member of society enriches the life of others in the light of Divine values and in this society the right of sovereignty belongs only to ALLAH.
The Kalema is an affirmation, recognition and acknowledgement of this very intrinsic principle (Pillar) on which rests the building of Islam. I will leave it to you to decide as to who or what is the sovereign (ILLA) in the lives of the "Muslims" of today, the mullah, books written by men, tradition, a multitude of man made governments, power crazed politicians, army Generals, wealth, or greed?

Salat : "Allah has promised those amongst you who believe and perform deeds consistent with the Divine Laws that He will of a surety grant them suzerainty in the land, as He granted it to those before them" (Al-Quran 24:55)
Allah is a being who controls the entire universe and moves it on to its final destiny in accordance with His inviolable laws. According to these laws everything in the universe from its initial stage grows, develops and in time attains its full stature, just like the tiny apple seed which gradually grows into a huge tree. Man is no exception. There are Allah's laws that govern man's development and growth also. (Man has not developed fully yet, as he uses only 25% of his brain).

Therefore, the objective of granting this power (suzerainty) in the land is that "they (the Muslims) may establish with authority their "Deen": the one that Allah has chosen for them so that He may change their state of fear in which they lived to one of peace and security". Once the authority has been bestowed, Allah commands the Muslims: "So establish Salat and provide Zakat and obey the Rasool, so that you may undergo development, within the specified pattern." (Al-Quran 24:56). Undergo development, within the specified pattern. It is clearly evident from this ayyat that the Salat and Zakat is a system under which Mankind undergoes development according to the pattern that Allah has designed, to help Man reach his ultimate destiny.
Having commanded the Muslims to establish Salat, Allah then gives Mankind the following undertaking "We are responsible for providing your and your children's subsistence." (Al-Quran 6:152). A question arises. If Allah has given this clear and unambiguous undertaking to provide Mankind with its subsistence (the means of existing, the basic essentials of life), why is there so much hunger and destitution in the world?
The answer is very simple and clear. It is because we (the Muslims) have singularly failed to Establish Salat ! Islam is not a dogma. It is a pragmatic system of Cause and Effect. Since we have failed to satisfy the necessary condition i.e. Cause: Establish Salat and Provide Zakat! We have been denied the Effect i.e. the fulfilment of Allah's promise to us.
[Quote: Establishing Salat entails regular submission to Allah and striving collectively to form a social order where no one in society sleeps hungry (Al-Quran 107:1-7)] In other words Salat is the society working together -not singly- to establish such a social order, a system, the end product of which would be that no-one in society would go hungry. No-one would be in want for anything. All the needs of the individual and of the society would be met as a consequence of this system. Thereby fulfilling the promise of Allah to Mankind and freeing Man to devote his time and energy to developing his personality, his potentialities.

The system that produces such tangible results that enable God's promise to Mankind to be fulfilled, has been given to us by God free of charge. This system, which on the one hand takes away from Man worries, anxieties, and fear and on the other hand gives him shelter, food, clothing, education and health care (basic necessities of life), this precious gift of God to mankind is nothing other than Islam! All we have to do is implement this system.
An Example: Let us for a moment, see how a system, produces the kinds of results that we have discussed above. I have lived in Britain for twenty eight years of which twenty two have been spent in the service of the British Government. The British Government, since 1948 has established a system under which every working person has to pay two separate taxes from his income, Income Tax and National Insurance.
The funds collected from income tax go straight to the Treasury which the Government uses to run the business of state. A percentage of funds collected from National Insurance is handed over to the Department of Health, that runs the Health Services. The rest of the funds collected from National Insurance are given to the Department of Social Security. This Department is charged with the responsibility of paying benefits to people who do not have an income or whose income is not sufficient for their needs.
I apologise for indulging in my private circumstances. But it was deemed necessary to explain how a system produces results. I have been a diabetic for some twenty-one years. I have developed all the complications that diabetes can lead to. The worst of which, is heart disease and end stage kidney failure.

As a result of this, in the last two years I have had four major operations and been hospitalised on no less than eight times and each time my stay varied from four days to two and a half months. For all the treatment received, I have paid from my pocket, not a single penny. In addition, the medical treatment I receive as a diabetic and a kidney patient is also received free of all charges. One may wonder as to how, is this possible? The answer is that the system of National Insurance, which pays a sum to the Department of Health from the contributions made by every worker in the land guarantees that, every citizen will receive free medical and health care. Can you see how this system has produced a result?
Now let us look at the other aspect of National Insurance contributions. For one and a half of the two-year period that I have not gone to work, my employer paid me, my full salary. My salary was then reduced to pension rate which is £600 a month. The mortgage I pay on my house is £500 a month. I could not survive on the remaining £100 a month. Given these facts, had I been living in Pakistan or any other Islamic country for that matter, I would have by now surely lost my property and not only become homeless, but destitute also. That is of course if my wife had not already become a widow and my two young children orphans!
However, in Britain due to the system of tax and National Insurance, I receive a benefit called "Incapacity Benefit", which is paid to people who due to ill health are unable to return to work. This benefit is based on the amount of National Insurance contributions one has paid whilst in work and is payable for as long as one is sick. When added to my pension this benefit brings my total income to just slightly below my monthly salary. The result is that my mortgage is being paid so my property is safe.

In addition all of my and my families needs are being met. Just imagine, I have not gone to work for two whole years and I have no idea as to when I will be fit enough to return to work. But as a consequence of the system of National Insurance which the British Government set up in 1948, all my needs are being taken care of and as a result I am free from all worry, anxiety and fear.(Al-Qur'an 11:6, 29:60) In this non Islamic country can you see how the promise of Allah to mankind is being fulfilled as a direct consequence of a system? This is precisely the concept of Salat. Al-Salat is a system in which all human beings follow the law of Allah, and after retaining that which is necessary for their basic needs (Al-Qur'an 2:219), they keep the remaining material resources open for the nourishment of the needy. It is only by adhering to the system of Salat that it is possible for man to develop his potentialities and have order in his life and then, this development is in accordance with the pattern designed by Allah. Therefore, establishing Salat is collectively understanding, implementing and the continuing of such a system, that on the one hand removes from man all anxiety and fear and restores in its place contentment, which then affords every citizen the opportunity to develop their latent potentialities.
This is the concept of Salat. The pillar on which rests the building of Islam. Please ponder over how we have turned Salat into a mechanical ritual . What consequences or results has our interpretation of Salat produced so far and what results is it ever likely to produce as long as we continue to blindly follow this interpretation. You can also see what we have lost by not establishing the Salat (the benefits of Allah's promise to Mankind) and what gains if any have we accrued through our interpretation of it! For Allah says in the Quran: "Those whose reward is shame and humiliation in this world will have shame and humiliation in the next" (Al-Quran 17:75, 22:11, 24:19). (C)

Zakat: The Holy Quran has declared clearly and unambiguously, that an individual, a society, or a state has no right to claim obedience from any person, since obedience is due to God and God only. The Quran says: "The right to rule belongs to none but Allah. It is commanded that you obey none but Him." [(Al-Quran 9:40, 74:3) further explained by (17:111)] (Dear reader, let us pause here for a while and just remind ourselves of the explanation of Kalema, discussed earlier). But we can neither see, nor hear, nor feel God, so how are we then to obey Him? The answer is simple. Allah says: "Follow the revelation given unto you from your Rabb, and follow not as friends and protectors other than Him." (Al-Quran 7:3). This is further qualified by "We have sent down to thee the Book in truth, that you might establish the rule between men, as guided by Allah." (Al-Quran 4:105). Obedience therefore is not to God personally but to the laws He has revealed in the Holy Quran. For securing obedience to the Law however, we require a properly constituted enforcing agency.
The agency that enforces God's Laws, is the Islamic State and obedience to God in practice, means obedience to the State that enforces His laws. (This was the reason, for which Pakistan was acquired?)

However, the burden of the Islamic State is a heavy one. For God says to the Islamic State: "Since you take obedience from the people in my name, you must give them what I have promised to give them. That is, fulfil the responsibilities that I have assumed in respect of Mankind. ["So establish Salat (the way of life consistent with divine laws) and provide Zakat (provision of nourishment to individual human beings)." (Al-Quran 24:56)] If you fail to fulfil the responsibilities to people, you lose the right to their obedience." (The Governments of the so called Muslim World, please take note). Therefore, in the Quranic social order, the relationship between the individual and the State is a two sided affair. The individual obeys the laws of God through the agency of State and the State honours the promises Allah has made to Man. In order to fulfil Allah's promise to Man it is imperative that the means of production remain in the custody of State and surplus wealth is not regarded as private property.
[Quote: Zakat; The Government and people will keep all their wealth and resources open for the betterment of society and for the fellow human beings. People will give "whatever is more than their needs."] Allah says: "They ask thee, how much they are to keep open for others, Say whatever is more then your needs." (Al-Quran 2:219) Therefore according to this injunction of the Holy Quran, an individual keeps from his income what he requires for his basic needs -without going short of anything- and gives the rest of his wealth to the State or keeps it open in trust for the State. (Since the Holy Messenger (PBUH) simply passed on to Mankind only that which Allah revealed to him and did not add anything of his own, where did the 2.5% zakat tax on wealth spring up from??)
With the materialistic mind set that Man has developed, a question arises as to why should an individual keep all of his surplus wealth open for the betterment of others? The answer is, for his own salvation. For every act of ours that fulfils the needs of others, nourishes our SELF. The Holy Messenger (PBUH) has said: "The best of Mankind are those who benefit humanity." And so the righteous people are those who make their SELF (NAFS) develop by fulfilling the needs of others. And they do so because of EMAN (conviction), for they know that they will be rewarded manifold in both worlds. The Quran says: "Allah has bought from the believers their lives and what they have of material things, so that He may give them Jannah (Heaven)." (Al-Quran 9:111) It is these resources that the Islamic State utilises to fulfil Allah's promises and provide Jannah for the whole of Mankind. This is the concept of Zakat. This is that powerful pillar that the building of Islam rests upon. You can also see how well these concepts of Salat and Zakat fit into one another. Both of these concepts are complementary to each other. For in the Holy Quran, whenever Salat is mentioned, so is Zakat. If Salat is to be translated simply as Namaz (Prayers), what possible connection has Zakat with Namaz, which is prayed and not established as is Salat?
Referring back to my personal case, am I not living in Jannah. Clearly it is not the Junnah that Allah has promised, but never-the-less I am living free of fear and in peace and security, am I not? This is the benefit of a system devised by Man. Can you visualise what splendour and reward of a system designed by Allah would be? Is it not lamentable, the loss that we are incurring?

Saum: It is evident from what has been discussed above as to what kind of society God envisages for mankind. "The believers give preference to the needs of others than their own even when they are themselves needy." (Al-Quran 59:9). A society in which the welfare of others feels like the welfare of ones own. This society comes about first, through the individuals EMAN in Allah and His book. Secondly through the establishment of Salat and provision of Zakat, which frees every member of society from want.

Such a society would require from its members obedience, discipline, courage, endurance, wisdom and magnanimity of the highest order. All of these qualities come about in the individuals of society through their Eman in Allah and His book. And these are then reinforced into their character, through a yearly repeated programme of self discipline and self control. Just as in order to maintain fitness of their soldiers and ensure their battle readiness, all armed forces, in addition to their daily work-outs, conduct yearly battle manoeuvres.
The objective of these exercises is to instil discipline in their soldiers and the officers who lead them. The exercises also ensure that the personnel of the armed forces remain focused and in perfect physical and mental condition to accomplish any task they may be called upon to perform.

Similarly Saum (Fasting) is a training programme for all able bodied to cultivate discipline, good manners and develop steadfastness, courage and endurance in themselves to bear hardship and labour under various conditions. In short, to develop ones personality through self control. For it is said that: "He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty; and he that rules his heart is better than he that takes a city". It is also said that: "He that has conquered his Self, has conquered the world". The objective of this training is to gel an individual, a potential world conqueror into an effective member of a unit, a team (and what a team that would make, where every member was a potential World conqueror).. In short, one Ummah in preparation for establishing one nation under one God. These are the high ideals and purpose of the month of fasting (Ramdhan). This is the pillar on which rests the building of Islam. It is not simply abstaining from food and drink and other material indulgences to get near God.

Hajj: It goes without saying that Allah's authority and sovereignty is not limited by national boundaries.
Allah's sovereignty reins over the whole world and mankind. The Quran has stated that: "mankind is one community." (Al-Quran 2:213) and the Holy Messenger(PBUH) has been addressed as: "O Rasool! The ultimate objective of your mission is to eliminate differences amongst human beings and make them one Ummah as they were at the beginning of human history. But they created differences and were split." (Al-Quran 10:19) Allah's laws are implemented through the Holy Quran. However the Islamic state that implements these laws requires a centre to operate and disseminate Gods laws from. The first house of Allah on earth was built by Abraham and his son, Ismail at Kabbah in the city of Makkah and Allah has called this "The first house which was built undoubtedly (as a centre) for entire mankind." (Al-Quran 3:95) And it was here that the representatives of the Ummah were to gather to receive guidance and instructions on what to do.
It was from here that the guidance and laws of Allah for mankind were to be disseminated, and it is these laws emanating from Kabbah that mankind was supposed to "Revolve Around" (Twaaf) i.e. obey with single minded determination regardless of where they lived on earth. "Revolving around the laws" emanating from Kabbah would have led us all to our objective i.e. one Ummah living in peace, harmony and tranquillity under the rule of Allah. Millions of revolutions around the stone and mortar structure neither have nor are ever likely to produce any tangible, substantive or measurable results.
I would politely ask the reader to remain focused on the objectives of the Islamic State which are to fulfil Allah's promise to Mankind as discussed earlier. Also keep in mind the sheer size of this organisation. The success of any organisation depends on effective and efficient communication and the positive and effective decision making process and then the ability to take prompt action on the decisions made. This is true of any organisation weather it is run by the UN, NASA, a multinational conglomerate or any large organisation. These organisations have a yearly meeting called an AGM-Annual General Meeting- three things happen at these AGM's!

1. All the staff and executives are reminded afresh of the aims and objectives of the organisation.
2. The heads of the different Departments give an account of how well or badly their respective departments have performed-what has hindered or aided their performance so that lessons could be learnt and good practises spread to other Departments. And out of all of this emerges the picture of how well the company has performed in the preceding year.
3. The targets for the following year and the plans to achieve these targets are formally adopted by the organisation and made known to all their members, so that work can begin in earnest to achieve the goals agreed at the AGM.
In case of an emergency arising when the organisation cannot wait for the AGM it can hold what is termed an EGM-Extra-ordinary General Meeting- to discuss the emergency, decide on the action required and then implement the decision. If we develop this concept a bit further, we can see that every nation has a government that sits at it's centre (Capital city). In order to ensure that the rule of the government is enforced throughout the country, the central government devolves its powers to what is termed local governments or provincial governments. Each year the local governments report back to the central government and may present plans they may have for projects to improve the local area or improve the quality of life in their respective areas. The central government after discussions and taking the overall picture of the nation into account then either accede to or modify some of these requests and authorise and allocate funds for them. The representatives of the local governments with the funds in the bank return to their respective areas to put the plans into action.

This is precisely the purpose of Hajj which means "Conference" in Arabic. The city of Makkah has been chosen as the Capital city of the Islamic State that was to rule over the whole world. And Kabbah was to be the Seat of Government of this State. For Allah has called this: "The first house which was built undoubtedly (as a centre) for entire mankind." (Al-Quran 3:95)
It is the job of any good Government to pass and then enforce such Laws that help to nurture and develop a society whose members live in peace, security and contentment, In the Islamic State, under the rule of Allah and Allah alone this job is perfected. Now let us consider the purpose of Hajj which, as has already been stated, means "Conference" in Arabic.
This is the time prescribed for representatives of the Ummah from all over the World to gather at the place of the central government of Islam in Makkah and present their cases and make known the needs of their respective people. It is from here that the needs of the Ummah are then fulfilled by the central government of Islam. Hajj therefore ensures:
1. The central Government at Kabbah is kept in touch with the needs of the people living in far away lands and ensures that all possible aid and assistance is provided to them promptly.
2. The needs of every human being are met so that the Islamic State can discharge its responsibility, which is to honour Allah's promise to Mankind.
(Have you noticed the subtle difference in the Islamic Quranic State where the sovereign is Allah. The purpose of this State is to ensure that not a single individual of entire Mankind is deprived of his basic needs, where as the purpose of the "multitude of So Called Islamic States of the present world"- this has to be a contradiction in terms- is to ensure that no-one escapes the grip of the draconian laws that they have enacted) This is the whole essence of Hajj, an AGM of the entire Mankind.

Ummrah: In case of an emergency arising anywhere in the world, that requires an urgent decision and action from the central Government and can not wait for Hajj, the state can organise an extra-ordinary general meeting (EGM), a special or emergency meeting. This is called Ummrah. (It is surprising that some how, only the concept of the Ummrah being able to be held at any time has been retained by the Muslims of today where as, all other concepts have either been lost or adulterated.)
As stated earlier dear reader, Islam is not a religion created by man's imagination, steeped in dogma and pathetic, pointless and meaningless rituals and traditions. Islam is a practical and a comprehensive system of life, covering all aspects of human life. It is a pragmatic system of cause and effect. You will have noticed that the concepts of the pillars presented here, individually lead to a definitive and tangible objective. And collectively lead to the objective of helping to bind mankind into one community living in peace and security. So that man can create Jannah here on earth.
But we have turned this Precious Gold into Worthless Dust. For centuries we have been following the wrong interpretation of these "Pillars" on which rests the whole building of Islam and consequently find ourselves living in Jahannum (Hell) of our own making. The people Allah created for the leadership of this world are standing in a queue. of beggars. What a sad, sorry and lamentable sight it is. O' Muslims, wake up and take heed of what Allah has said in the Quran "If you fail to follow the path I have revealed to you I will replace you with people who will follow the path. Ignominy, shame and humiliation will then be your just reward." (Al-Quran 11: 57, 47:38, 70:44) (Some may say that perhaps, we have already reached that point of no return.)

Conclusion: For goodness sakes, how long? How long will we continue to follow the paths that have lead us collectively to absolutely nowhere. Except to immobility, stagnation, divisions, fragmentation, fighting amongst ourselves and to the absolute ruin of generations of the people that Allah created to lead Mankind to the promised land.
For God sakes, it is about time, that Muslims took stock of their lot and realised that, there is no such thing as they. For they never change. It is we who will have to change. As the Hakeem-e-ummat Dr. Sir Allama Iqbal has said:" O! Mussalmaan if you desire to live your life as a Momin, you have no choice except to make the Qur'an your guiding light". We will have to cleanse our minds of the Religion (Mazhab) of Islam and return to the Deen-ul-Haq. We will have to follow the revelation given unto us by our Rabb, and follow not as friends and protectors other than Him (Al-Qur'an 7:3). We will therefore, have to disregard all other books written by men and seek guidance only from the Book sent down to us in truth, that we may establish the rule between men, as guided by Allah (Al-Qur'an 4:105).
We will have to demand from our respective States that they fulfil the promise that Allah has made to us. Or as Allah has said, they lose the right to our obedience. We will have to demand what is rightfully ours, the benefits of the system of Rabubiyyat (nourishment and development) which are manifest when the Salat and Zakat is established. Dear friends, the responsibility is ours. May Allah grant us the wisdom, courage and the strength to claim that, which is ours by right.

2006-11-30T12:06:00.000-08:00

The Basis of Legislation in an Islamic State
by G. A. Parwez

INTRODUCTORY
Wherever he be, man likes to act as he pleases and have full freedom of action. Were he by himself, he could do so with equanimity. In society, however, individual freedom has to be circumscribed to avoid conflict with the freedom of action of others. Individuals have, therefore, to abide by certain voluntarily accepted restrictions, the formulation of which pertains to the sphere of legislative action.
Two questions arise at once, namely,
· Who should formulate these restrictions ? and
· Whether the restrictions once formulated will apply for all time to come, or they will be susceptible to change from age to age?
The first question falls within the domain of
"Constitution making" and is outside the scope of the present discussion. We are here concerned with the second question of law-making in a Constitutional State.
The foremost essential which a people must determine and define in law-making is the concept of life. As is the concept of life of a people so will be its law. Broadly speaking. two concepts of life, which have come down to us through history, are prevalent today, and have a direct bearing on the point under discussion.
One concept sees man only as a physical body, endowed somehow with consciousness, living according to certain chemico-physico-biological laws and then dying under the operation of these very laws. With his physical death man, like other animals, ceases to exist. This concept is known as the materialistic concept of life.

Laws or rules of conduct framed under this concept of life are based on expediency and admit of no permanent or unchangeable values. Changes, abrogation’s, or amendments in the laws are also governed exclusively by expediency. Governmental machinery set up by people subscribing to the materialistic concept of life is called the "Secular" form of government, whether its pattern is democratic or dictatorial.
There is another concept of life which is propounded by the Holy Quran. Man, according to the Quranic concept, is a combination of a physical body, which is changing, changeable and liable to death, and a Personality which does not change, but develops and is capable of self-integration and becoming immortal. The aim of life, according to the Holy Quran, is the development of Personality. Human Personality is not static but is potentially capable of developing and expanding. Its development can, however, take place only in a social order called the Islamic State. The Islamic State provides the ways and means for the proper development and progress both of Body and Personality. Since man is according to this concept of life, an integrated composition of permanence and change, laws governing the social order wherein his development takes place, should also be a combination of permanence and change. This point has been elaborated beautifully by Iqbal in his sixth lecture in the series on the Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam. He says:
"The ultimate spiritual basis of all life, as conceived by Islam, is eternal and reveals itself in variety and change. A society based on such a conception of Reality must reconcile, in its life, the categories of permanence and change. It must possess eternal principles to regulate its collective life; for the eternal gives us a foothold in the world of perpetual change. But eternal principles when they are understood to exclude all possibilities of change, which, according to the Quran, is one of the greatest "signs" of God, tend to immobilise what is essentially mobile in its nature".
Man has been endowed with "Intellect" which gives him superiority to other animals. Human intellect functions, however, within the limits of Time and Space and is, consequently, capable of handling only that aspect of man's life which is subject to "change", i.e. the physical aspect of human life. It cannot peep over the boundaries of "change" into the supra-physical, or the realm of "permanence' to which human Personality belongs. In that realm, things reveal themselves to human intellect (to Messengers of God) and are not discovered by it. Revelation is Divine, and Divine Guidance alone provides permanent values or unalterable fundamental principles, otherwise known as "Divine Precepts," or the "way or Practice or Allah". Law or rules devised by human intellect need change with the change in time and space; but permanent values admit of no such change. In the words of the Holy Quran, "There is no changing in the Words of Allah" (10/64) and "you will find no change in the way of Allah" (33/62)
Body and Personality cannot, however, be divided into two mutually exclusive compartments, nor also can the laws pertaining to the realms of permanence and change. A combination of permanence and change. A combination of "permanence and change" can be achieved if in framing laws, human intellect keeps itself within the boundaries of eternal values revealed by God. The laws so framed will be applicable to man as a whole and satisfy the requirement of both Personality and the physical body of man.

THE PRINCIPLE OF DIVINE GUIDANCE.
Man has been the recipient of the Divine Guidance ever since he began living a corporate life. In earliest stages the guidance concerned itself not only with permanent values but also with matters which could be determined by human intellect alone. For instance, about Noah the Holy Quran says. "Then we guided him, saying: Make the ship under our supervision and Guidance". (23/27). This shows that in the age when Noah lived man depended on Revelation for learning processes like those of boat-making. As human intellect began to grow in maturity, the need for the Divine Guidance in respect of the changeable details diminished. The divine Guidance in its final and complete form has now been preserved for all time to come in the Holy Quran. It has been made clear that henceforth the subsidiary laws will be devised by men by mutual consultation among themselves in the light of the given permanent values. Rasoolullah (PBUH) was directed, "to consult the people in the conduct of affairs" (3/159) and after him the believers were also to determine their affairs by mutual consultation (42/38)
This brings out clearly the co-mingling of permanence with change in life and stresses the need for rules of conduct providing both for its permanent aspect as well as for its changeable subsidiary aspect. The basic problem in the matter of legislation in an Islamic State is the demarcation of the sphere of permanent provisions as distinct from the sphere of provisions liable to change according to changes in requirements. Before stating the Quranic position as I understand it, I feel I should explain briefly the views which various schools of thought in Pakistan hold.

One view is that all the laws that an Islamic State requires are already laid down in the corpus of Islamic "Fiqh" which is permanent and unalterable. It is, therefore, unnecessary to embark upon fresh legislation. When ever a fresh situation arises, all that the State has to do is to ascertain from the "Ulema-e-Fiqh" the conclusions already reached on the point at issue and then to enforce it. A representative of this school of thought offered this very view before the Punjab Disturbances Enquiry Commission, whose report (P.211) on the point reads as follow:-
"Since Islam is a perfect religion containing laws, express or derivable by Ijma or Ijtihad, governing the whole field of human activity, there is in it no sanction for what may, in the modern sense, be called legislation. Questioned on this point, Maulana Abul Hasanat, President, Jami'at- ul-Ulema-i-Pakistan, says:-
Q. Is the institution of legislature as distinguished from the institution of a person or body of persons entrusted with the interpretation of law, an integral part of an Islamic State?
A. No. Our law is complete and merely requires interpretation by those who are experts in it. According to my belief, no question can arise the law relating to which cannot be discovered from the Quran or the Hadith.
Q. Who were Sahib-ul-hall-i-wal-aqd? Who were Sahib-ul-hall-i-wal-aqd?
A. They were the distinguished Ulema of the time. These persons attained their status by reason of the knowledge of the law. They were not in any way analogous or similar to the legislature in modern democracy. They were the distinguished Ulema of the time. These persons attained their status by reason of the knowledge of the law. They were not in any way analogous or similar to the legislature in modern democracy.
"The same view was expressed by Amir-i-Shari'at, Sayyed Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari, in one of his speeches reported in the ‘Azad’ of 22nd April, 1947, in the course of which he said that our din is complete and perfect and that it amounts to Kufr to make more laws".
This view is, however, not shared by all those who belong to the "Fiqh" school of thought, and an exponent has characterised it as "soulless religiosity" whereby "the Islamic jurisprudence has been reduced to a fossilised mass of 'Shastras'. For centuries the door of Ijtihad has been securely shut, with the result that Islam, instead of being a live movement, has been relegated to the limbo of a movement in ancient history only".
In regard to Ijtihad, his criticism is that "however erudite a mujtahid may be, he cannot transcend the time-spatial limitations, nor can he have the breadth of vision encompassing the broad canvas of all time and experience. Therefore, his Ijtihad cannot hold good for all ages and circumstances" (Abul Ala Maudoodi).
Iqbal has also commented at length in his sixth Lecture already referred to, on the view that "Fiqh" is unchangeable. Says he: "The theoretical possibility of this degree of Ijtihad is admitted by the Sunnis, but in practice it has always been denied ever since the establishment of the schools, inasmuch as the idea of complete Ijtihad is hedged round by conditions which are well-high impossible of realisation in a single individual. Such an attitude seems exceedingly strange in a system of law based mainly on the ground work provided by the Quran which embodies an essentially dynamic outlook on life".

He goes on to say: "Turning now to the ground work of legal principles in the Quran, it is perfectly clear that far from leaving no scope for human thought and legislative activity the intensive breadth of these principles virtually acts as an awakened of human thought. Our early doctors of law taking their clue mainly from this ground work evolved a number of legal systems: and the student of Muhammadan history knows very well that nearly half the triumphs of Islam as a social and political power were due to the legal acuteness of these doctors. `Next to the Roman', says Von Kremer, `there is no other nation besides the Arabs which could call its own a system of law so carefully worked out'. But with all their comprehensiveness, these systems are after all individual interpretations, and as such cannot claim any finality.
I know the Ulema of Islam claim finality for the popular schools of Muhammadan Law, though they never found it possible to deny the theoretical possibility of a complete Ijtihad. I have tried to explain the causes which in my opinion, determined this attitude of the Ulema: But since things have changed and the world of Islam is today confronted and affected by new forces set free by the extraordinary development of human thought in all its directions, I see no reason why this attitude should be maintained any longer. Did the founders of our schools ever claim finality for their reasoning and interpretations? Never. The claim of the present generation of Muslim liberals to reinterpret the foundational legal principles, in the light of their own experience and altered conditions of modern life is, in my opinion, perfectly justified. The teaching of the Quran that life is a process of progressive creation necessitates that each generation, guided but unhampered by the work of its predecessors, should be permitted to solve its own problems".

TRADITIONALISTS
As against "Ahl-e-Fiqh", there is another school of thought, commonly called the Traditionalists (Ahl-el-Hadith). They maintain that it is not "Fiqh" but the sayings of Rasoolullah (PBUH) which should be enforced as they are, since they contain fundamental and unchangeable law. The school holds that "after due scrutiny Hadith occupies the same position and authority as the Holy Quran does, and a denial of Hadith would affect one's faith and honesty in the same manner as the denial of the Holy Quran itself will do. Notwithstanding differences in interpretation, the Holy Quran is the Word of Allah and an undisputed authority in Shara (Law). Likewise, Hadith, even though it is open to scrutiny, is Revelation from Allah and, next to the Holy Quran, of like authority in religion". (Muhammad Ism’ail Al-Salafi).
The above excerpt acknowledges that the authority ascribed to Hadith is secondary to that of the Holy Quran, but what follows will show that the acceptances of the postulate is in principle only, since in practical application of the principle and in making deductions therefrom, it is held: in our view Hadith is revealed and whatever it says was conveyed to Rasoolullah (PBUH) in the same way as was the Holy Quran......the angel Gabriel came with the Holy Quran as well as the Sunnah and conveyed Sunnah to Rasoolullah(PBUH) in the manner he conveyed to him the Holy Quran. We do not approve of discrimination in Revelations and hold both the Holy Quran and Sunnah as concurrent authority" (Ibid).
In regard to the two anthologies of Hadith, namely Bukhari and Muslim, the school holds that:-
"By consensus of opinion, Muslims acknowledge that the agreed Ahadith in the two anthologies are valid and that their veracity is absolute". (Ibid).
This view also is not shared by all those who consider Hadith as the basis of Shari’at Law, as would appear from the following comment:-
"Ahadith have come down through a chain of narrators, one person passing the information verbally to another. In its very nature the process can at best be viewed as conveying probability and not certainty. It is unthinkable that Allah would leave believers in the matter of faith in a position in which they should determine their course of action on the basis of material passed on by word of mouth". (Maudoodi)
He goes on to say:-
"The material may be useful as a help in ascertaining the practice of Rasoolullah(PBUH) and the doings of his Companions (God may be pleased with them) but it is not a thing which could claim complete reliance".
Further on he says:-
"The claim that the text of all the Ahadith in Bukhari should be accepted as correct without critical appreciation is untenable".
He adds:-
"Regarding Mandatory Laws, the Holy Quran generally mentions the basic principles only and in most matters leaves out the details. Rasoolullah (PBUH) applied the Quranic Laws to the practical affairs of life and provided the requisite details both by word and deed. Some of these details are too definite to admit of fresh interpretation and they must be accepted as they are, as for instance the commands pertaining to worship (Ibadat). There are other details the principles underlying which help in making further deductions, e.g. Civil Laws of the time of Rasoolullah (PBUH)".
In accordance with the above excerpt, the doctrine propounded by the Traditionalist school of thought concedes to the present generation the right to determine subsidiary Civil Laws by Ijtihad in accordance with the principles deducible from the Civil Laws promulgated by Rasoolullah (PBUH).
To quote their own words:-
"It is an incontrovertible truth that for the observance of his directions the law-giver has, with infinite wisdom and knowledge, laid down mostly such conditions as would achieve the purpose in view in all times, all places and all circumstances. In spite of this there are numerous details in which changed circumstances demand corresponding changes. It is not necessary that conditions in every age and country should be what they were in Arabia and the Muslim world during the time of Rasoolullah(PBUH) and his Companions.

Therefore, the enforcement, in all ages and in all situations, of the particular forms of observance of Islamic injunctions exactly as they were at their inception, that is, without modification, will be a sort of conventionalism which is completely alien to the spirit of Islam. It will be incorrect, therefore to follow strictly the very words of the original text without weighing them in the present context, much less their deductions or inferences. The rational method of tackling a problem is that one should keep before the mind's eye the aim of the law-giver and affect changes to accord with changes in circumstances with due regard to his practice and the principles of his jurisprudence (Ibid).
The position advocated in the preceding extract is not an innovation. Imam Abu Hanifa and Shah Waliullah Muhaddith of Delhi held the same view. In the words of Iqbal:-
"For our present purposes, however, we must distinguish traditions of a purely legal import from those which are of a non legal character. With regard to the former, there arises a very important question as to how far they embody the pre-Islamic usage’s of Arabia which were in some cases left intact, and in others modified by the Prophet(PBUH). It is difficult to make this discovery, for our early writers do not always refer to pre-Islamic usage’s. Nor is it possible to discover that the usage’s, left intact by express or tacit approval of the Prophet (PBUH), were intended to be universal in their application. Shah Wali Ullah has a very illuminating discussion on the point. I reproduce here the substance of his view.

The prophetic method of teaching, according to Shah Wali Ullah, is that, generally speaking, the law revealed by a prophet takes especial notice of the habits, ways, and peculiarities of the people to whom he is specifically sent. The prophet who aims at all-embracing principles, however, can neither reveal different principles for different peoples, nor leaves them to work out their own rules of conduct. His method is to train one particular people, and to use them as a nucleus for the building up of a universal Shari'at. In doing so he accentuates the principles underlying the social life of all mankind, and applies them to concrete cases in the light of the specific habits of the people immediately before him. The Shari'at values (Ahkam) resulting from this application (e.g. rules relating to penalties for crimes) are in a sense specific to that people; and since their observance is not an end in itself they cannot be strictly enforced in the case of future generations. It was perhaps in view of this that Abu Hanifa, who had a keen insight into the universal character of Islam, made practically no use of these traditions. The fact that he introduced the principle of Istihsan, i.e. juristic preference, which necessitates a careful study of actual conditions in legal thinking, throws further light on the motives which determined his attitude towards this source of Muhammadan Law.
It is said that Abu Hanifa made no use of traditions because there were no regular collections in his days. In the first place, it is not true to say that there were no collections in his days, as the collections of Abdul Malik and Zuhri were made no less than thirty years before the death of Abu Hanifa. But even if we suppose that these collections never reached him, or that they did not contain traditions of a legal import, Abu Hanifa, like Malik and Ahmed Ibn-e-Hambal after him, could have easily made his own collection if he had deemed such a thing necessary. On the whole, then, the attitude of Abu Hanifa towards the traditions of a purely legal import is to my mind perfectly sound; and if modern Liberalism considers it safer not to make any indiscriminate use of them as a source of law, it will be only following one of the greatest exponents of Muhammadan Law in Sunni Islam".
The foregoing will shoe that while there is a school of thought in Pakistan which holds that whatever has come down to us in the name of Fiqh or the Traditions, is unalterable and should be enforced as such, there is another school of thought also which considers that for meeting the requirements of the present time, we can formulate our own laws in the light of the permanent and the unalterable principles given by the Quran.

QURANIC ARGUMENTS
This view is supported abundantly by the Holy Quran. The Quranic arguments may be summarised below:-
1. In Islam obedience is essentially and basically due only to the Laws of Allah as embodied in the Holy Quran. "Shall I (Rasoolullah, PBUH) look for a judge other than Allah. He who has revealed to you a book defining things clearly"? (6/115).
2. He who does not adjudicate in accordance with the Holy Quran is not a Muslim (5/44).
3. Obedience to Divine Laws is not a thing belonging to the individual plane in the sense that one might, of his own, consult the Holy Quran, interpret it for himself and act according to his individual interpretation. The obedience has to be disciplined and ordered under an organised system (called State in the present day terminology) controlled by a central authority, the first central authority having been Allah's Rasool. Obedience to the central authority is obedience to Allah. Says the Holy Quran: "One who obeys the Rasool obeys Allah" (4/80), the Rasool adjudging everything according to the Holy Book (5/48).
4. Barring a few exceptions, the Holy Quran enunciates generally fundamental principles without touching subsidiary law. About these principles or the basic provisions, the Holy Quran says: "The Kalema (basic principle) revealed by the Nourisher has been made complete in truth and justice. There is none who can change His principles (6/116).
5. The reason for leaving out subsidiary laws from the Holy Quran has been explained thus: "Ask not for things which if revealed would inconvenience you, and if you ask for them while the Quran is being revealed, they will be disclosed to you....Before you a people (the Israelites) did ask for them and then disbelieved (and defied) them". (5/101-2). In elucidation of the above verses, a Hadith is cited which says: "Allah has placed on you certain obligations, do not violate them. Some things have been forbidden, do not go near them. Some limitations have been imposed, do not transgress them. Some things have been left unspoken of without being overlooked, do not probe into them".
6. The question as to how details, which have deliberately been left undetermined in the Holy Quran, will be formulated in the light of the Quranic principles, is answered by the direction given in the Holy Quran to Rasoolullah (PBUH) to "consult them (the believers) in the affairs (of the Society)" (3/158).
There are numerous instances recorded in Traditions showing how Rasoolullah (PBUH) consulted his Companions in the day-today affairs. This process of consultation was not confined to any particular sphere but covered all matters in which details were not given in the Holy Quran. For instance the Holy Quran mentions the "Call for Salaat-ul-jum'a" (62/9), but does not prescribe the manner for making the call. The way this was decided upon has been recorded in Mishkat, as follows, in the chapter on Azaan:-
"Abdulleh b. Zaid b. Abd Rabb states that when Rasoolullah (PBUH) gave the orders for blowing the conch for calling the faithful to Sal’at I saw a man in a dream who had a conch in his hand. In my dream I enquired from this man whether he would sell the conch. He asked me what I would do with the conch. I answered that we would use it for calling people to Sal’at. He said, may I not tell you something which is even better? On my replying in the affirmative, he asked me to repeat Allah-o-Akbar, Allah-o-Akbar etc. and likewise he taught me Takbir. With the dawning of the morn I hastened to Rasoolullah (PBUH) and narrated my dream. Rasoolullah (PBUH) said, `Verily this dream is true and indicative of Divine'. There upon he ordered me to stand along-side Bilal and repeat to him what I had been told in my dream so that he (Bilal) may make the call(Azaan) since he is `loud-throated'. I did as commanded and Bilal called the Azaan. Abdullah further states that when Umar b. Khattab heard the Azaan at his place, he hurried out, dragging his covering, and said to Rasoolullah I swear by Him who has sent you with Truth, that I also have seen a dream similar to that of Abdullah'. Rasoolullah thereupon said, ` All praise is for Allah'. (Abu Dawud, Darmi, Ibn-e-Maja).
7. While he lived, Rasoolullah determined subsidiary laws in consultation with the Ummat. The question is as to what was to be done after his demise. The Holy Quran answers the question by saying, "Muhammad is but a Rasool. there have been several Rasool before him. Will you turn back on your heels if he dies or is slain?" (3/143). It follows that the process of framing laws within the frame-work of the Quranic principles was not to discontinue after the death of Rasoolullah but was to go on as before. Therefore, after his demise, the first thing the Companions did was to elect a Successor so that he could carry on the process of determining subsidiary laws and enforcing Divine Principles as did Rasoolullah himself. "One who obeys the Rasool obeys Allah" now took the form of "One who obeys the Rasool's successor obeys Allah". Rasoolullah himself is reported to have said: "You have to follow my practice and the practice of my mature and rightly guided Successors", (Mishkat chapter on adherence to Book and Sunnah). The Holy Quran directed Rasoolullah to "consult the believers in determining the affairs of the people" (3/158); it guided his successors by saying "and they determine their affairs by mutual consultation" (42/38). "Mutual consultation" within the ambit of the eternal and inviolable Laws given in the Holy Quran is the "way of the believers" (4/115) which should never be given up.
8. There is material available in the record of traditions of Rasoolullah and the doings of his Companions to show how subsidiary laws were formulated under the Khilafat-e-Rashida. The procedure followed was:
a) Where subsidiary law had not already been framed it was formulated by mutual consultation. For example no punishment was prescribed for drunkenness in the time of Rasoolullah. Hazrat Abu Bakr prescribed for it forty stripes, which Hazrat Umar later increased to eighty.
b) If a subsidiary law once enacted needed no amendment or change it was retained intact, just as any constitutional government would continue to enforce the laws of its predecessors until the need for a change arose.
c) Subsidiary enactment’s, which needed amendment in consequence of a change in circumstances, were duly modified. Since they were not prescribed initially by Revelation, it was not necessary that they should undergo changes through Revelation. Here are a few instances:
i) Rasoolullah had fixed the amount of ransom for prisoners of war at one Deenar per head. Hazrat Umar fixed different amounts for different parts of the State.
ii) Rasoolullah (PBUH) did not prescribe rates of Zak’at for different varieties of produce of land. Hazrat Umar did so.
iii) For Taleef-i-Quloob, Rasoolullah used to give financial assistance from the State Exchequer. Hazrat Umar discontinued the practice.
iv) Rasoolullah distributed among the fighters the land acquired in certain conquered areas. Hazrat Umar abrogated this system.
v) Rasoolullah allowed maintenance allowance at uniform rate. Hazrat Abu Bakr continued the practice. But Hazrat Umar re-fixed the rates in proportion to the services rendered by recipients.
vi) Rasoolullah did not realise Zak’at on tradable horses and the produce of the sea. Hazrat Umar did it.
vii) Hazrat Umar decided that the scheduled punishment for offences should be made light for belligerents and that the punishment of manusection for theft should not be inflicted on the famine-stricken.
Instances of this kind can be multiplied if those measures are taken into account which Hazrat Umar introduced initially. Their number, according to historians, ranges between forty and fifty. This number, however, is not the issue. The real issue is that the rightly guided Successors of Rasoolullah accepted and worked according to the principle that the decisions taken during the time of Rasoolullah could be modified, if the changed circumstances so demanded. They extended the principle to the decisions taken among themselves, and a Successor felt no hesitation in amending the decisions of his predecessor.

IMAM ABU HANIFA
The verses of the Holy Quran coupled with the evidence provided by traditions and history, reproduced above, support fully the view that it is the fundamental law of the holy Quran which is unchangeable. In the case of subsidiary laws formulated under it, the Islamic state constituted on the pattern of that of Rasoolullah, can affect changes to suit its current requirements. In the excerpt from his Lectures noted above, Iqbal has pointedly mentioned Imam Abu Hanifa and Shah Waliullah, Muhaddith of Delhi, who also supported the above view. In volume 13, page 390, of his book on history, Khatib Baghdadi states on the strength of Yusuf b. Isbat that Abu Hanifa used to say that "had I been a contemporary of Rasoolullah, I am sanguine that he would have adopted many of my views, since Din (Allah's way of Life) is, after all, but another name for good and sound reasoning". The historian goes on to say that Abu Awana stated that "One day I was sitting by Abu Hanifa when the Sultan's messenger called on him and said that his master would like to know how the case of a man who has stolen a honey-comb should be adjudged. Abu Hanifa replied promptly `if the value of the honey-comb be ten dirhams sever his hand'. After the messenger had departed I said to Abu Hanifa: "Are you not afraid of Allah? It has been reported to me by Yahya b. Said through Muhammad b. Haban and Rafi b. Khudaij, that Rasoolullah had said that for the theft of trifles like fruit and flowers, there can be no manusection. Hasten to help the man lest his hand be severed". Abu Hanifa reiterated calmly that "the view then taken has since lost its force". The thief suffered manusection.

SHAH WALI ULLAH
This incident illustrates the position of Imam-e-Azam. In his book Hujat-ullah-il-Baligha, chapter on types of Revealed Knowledge, Shah Waliullah has quoted a saying of Rasoolullah: "I am a human being. What I tell you about DIN adopt it; when I express my personal opinion, then, I am but a human being". Shah Waliullah says that the matters to which Rasoolullah referred were those unconnected with the propagation of the revealed message, and adds that akin to this type of "matters" were those subsidiary directions which, though related to the Quranic principles, conformed directly to the conditions then prevailing and ceased to operate as and when those conditions changed. The Ummat was not bound to observe them as permanent injunctions. In the same category are included those decisions of Rasoolullah regarding home and social economics, politics, etc., which were couched in general terms and omitted to specify practical details.
In elucidating Shah Sahib's view, Maulana Ubaidullah Sindhi, who is acknowledged as an authority on Waliullah, wrote as follows:-
"It should be understood that the enforcement of the basic law is preceded by the formulation of introductory subsidiary laws bearing directly on the prevailing conditions of the people concerned.
The basic law is unchangeable but introductory laws change with the change in attending circumstances. The introductory laws which Rasoolullah and his three immediate Successors formulated in consultation with the Central Council of advisers , are termed "Sunnah". The system whereby decisions were reached by consultation broke down, however, after Hazrat Othman. The "Sunnah" embraces, according to the Hanafi School of thought, the practice of both Rasoolullah and his rightly guided Successors, a view to which we also subscribe. But the practice of "Sunnah," which the current terminology will call Bye-Laws, must follow the Holy Quran. The basic law, is unchangeable; bye-laws change with the changing circumstances. The old bye-laws undergo changes to suit present requirements and new ones have to be deduced to satisfy fresh developments. This process is called Fiqh". (Al Furqan, Waliullah Number, page 264).

IQBAL
Discussing the Traditionalist and the Fiqh schools of thought, Iqbal observes in his Lectures on the Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, (page 169): "But contrary to the spirit of his own school the modern Hanafi legist has eternalised the interpretations of the founder or his immediate followers much in the same way as the early critics of Abu Hanifa eternalised the decisions given on concrete cases".
My own position in this respect is that I subscribe to the views of the school of Imam Azam, Shah Waliullah, Maulana Sindhi and Iqbal, since their views are in accordance with the principles of Law-making in an Islamic State as enunciated by the Holy Quran.

OPPOSITION
Those who subscribe to views other than these are bound naturally to oppose these views. Iqbal anticipated this opposition and observed, on page 156 of his Lectures:
"And I have no doubt that a deeper study of the enormous legal literature of Islam is sure to rid the modern critic of the superficial opinion that the Law of Islam is stationary and incapable of development. Unfortunately, the conservative Muslim public of this country is not yet quite ready for a critical discussion of "Fiqh" which, if undertaken is likely to displease most people, and raise sectarian controversies; yet I venture to offer a few remarks on the point before us".
The opposition from the orthodox section is understandable. But the tragic part of it is that a difference of opinion is allowed to generate violence in expression and to condemn the opponent as an apostate. Even Imam-e-Azam was not spared. In Vol. XIII of his book on history Khatib Baghdadi gives following details:-
"Imam Malik b. Anas says that the peril of Abu Hanifa to the 'Ummah' is no less than that of Satan (Iblees) both with regard to his doctrine of revocability of divorce and the rejection of Ahadith. Abd-al-Rahman b. Mahdi says that the peril of Abu-Hanifa is more dangerous than the peril of Dajjal. Salman b. Hassan Halbi says that he has often heard Imam Auzai complain that Abu Hanifa has destroyed one by one all the wings of Islam. Fazari relates that both Sufian and Auzai say that a more inauspicious person than Abu Hanifa was never born in Islam. Imam Shafi calls him the worst among the despicable. Abu Ubaid says I was once sitting in the Jami Mosque of Rusafa with Aswad b. Salam. In discussing something I mentioned the view of Abu Hanifa. Aswad reprimanded me severely for mentioning even the name of Abu-Hanifa in the mosque and for this lapse on my part he was so annoyed with me that he never spoke to me thereafter till his death'".
Similar intolerance in opposing views continues unfortunately to plague our society to this day.

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE NOW?
Let us return to our main theme. Historically, the position during Khilafat-Rashida was that whenever a change in circumstances needed a change in subsidiary laws the change was affected by mutual consultation. Had the institution of Khilafat on the pattern set by Rasoolullah continued, the process of legislation evolved by it would have continued to develop normally, making the law of Shari’at a happy blending of permanence and change. It is a pity that the processes came to a halt and with it ended the critical attitude with which subsidiary laws used to be formulated. It is true that for a time the various schools of Fiqh carried on the process, but theirs was an effort on the individual plane which very soon became rigid and fossilised. We need not go into the historical why and wherefore of the change, which Iqbal has already discussed at length in his Lectures. The all important question confronting us now is that since the Khilafat on the pattern of Rasoolullah has long ceased to exist, what lines an Islamic State should follow for legislation. The answer is fairly clear. Revive Khilafat on Rasoolullah's pattern and adopt the system which he and his associates had established. But, is such a revival possible? Some say, No, since personalities like Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar are no longer available to do the job. This No is cry of frustration and is based on a serious misconception.

If the cry were listened to, it would be tantamount to admitting that the Holy Quran offered a code of life for a particular period of history only. This would be preposterous. The Holy Book has been preserved so as to provide mankind with a code for practical living from age to age and from place to place. On the basis of the Quranic principles an organisation (Islamic State) was set up once. A similar organisation can be set up again now. The way to do it is this: The State should first take firm decision that it shall remodel the society on the basis of the inviolable principles preserved in the Holy Quran. Then it should take stock of the literature dealing with Islamic laws with a view to (a) adopting, in its original form, what would with due regard to the Quranic Principles, meet present requirements; (b) amending what needs a change; and (c) formulating new provisions to satisfy fresh situations, the whole thing being processed with the help of the representatives of the Ummat by mutual consultation. This is how an organisation based on the Quranic Fundamentals can be brought into being. But a change - over from the present to an ideal Islamic State cannot be brought about overnight. The organisation will, by stages, proceed towards its ultimate goal by the normal process of evolution, ridding itself of initial short comings at every step. This is the Sabil-ul-Momineen, the way of the Believers, which the Holy Quran has stressed. An important point to note is that until an Islamic State has been established, the Ummat should continue its present course without any change, since the right to introduce changes belongs to the social order (the Islamic State) and not to individuals whatever their mental development may be.

ITS IMPORTANCE
The foregoing explains the broad principles and the basic way for the exercise of legislative effort in an Islamic State, the way to which Iqbal referred in his Lectures. He indicated the way in 1928, but the question had already swayed his imagination so much that in a letter written long before he said: "My conviction is that whoever undertakes a critical appreciation of modern jurisprudence in the light of the Quran and establishes the inviolability of its principles, will be the arch revivalist (Mujadid) in Islam, and the greatest benefactor of humanity....It is a pity that the contemporary doctors of Islamic jurisprudence should be either completely ignorant of modern trends or else be steeped in rack orthodoxy.......It seems to me that Islam is, as it were, being tested at the moment on the touchstone of Time, a situation which perhaps never before arose in the history of Islam". (Iqbalnama-volume I, page,50).
Referring to what had happened in Turkey, Iqbal said in his Lectures (on page 154): "The question which confronts him (the Turk) to-day, and which is likely to confront other Muslim countries in the near future, is whether the law of Islam is capable of evolution, a question which will require great intellectual effort, and is sure to be answered in the affirmative; provided the world of Islam approaches it in the spirit of Omar, the first critical and independent mind in Islam who, at the last moments of the Prophet , had the moral courage to utter these remarkable words; "The Book of God is sufficient for us". He concludes his Lectures with these words (pages 170):-
"In view of the basic idea of Islam that there can be no further revelation binding on man we ought to be spiritually one of the most emancipated peoples on earth. Early Muslims emerging out of the spiritual slavery of pre-Islamic Asia were not in a position to realise the true significance of this basic idea. Let the Muslim of to-day appreciate his position, reconstruct his social life in the light of ultimate principles, and evolve, out of the hitherto partially revealed purpose of Islam, that spiritual democracy which is the ultimate aim of Islam".
If the Islamic world succeeds in re-establishing the Universal Democracy of Islam by recasting Islamic jurisprudence on the basis of the Quranic Fundamentals, the leadership of the world of political thought will be theirs. If, however, they fail in the discharge of this delicate but vital duty, the other nations will regard their failure as the failure of Islam and on the evidence of that failure would declare that Islam was successful only in a particular period of history but that thereafter it exhausted its dynamism and is no longer capable of keeping pace with the growing needs of the times. It should then be extremely painful for them to be adjudged guilty at the bar of humanity of a crime of such immense magnitude and severity.
CONCLUSION
It will follow from what has been said above that within the circumscribed limits of the permanent fundamental principles of the Holy Quran, the Islamic society is free to formulate its subsidiary laws in accordance with the need of times. While the subsidiary laws will be susceptible to change in accordance with the changing needs of times, the Quranic fundamentals shall remain unchangeable. This happy blending of permanence and change will enable the Millat to attain its ultimate destiny in life.

2006-11-23T12:41:00.000-08:00

Language Barrier

By Dr.Ayman

[posted edited for this blog]

26:224. And the poets are followed by the deceived/unreasonable.

INTRODUCTION
43:3. We have made it as an Arabic reading, so that perhaps you will be logical.
12:2. We have sent it down as an Arabic reading, so that perhaps you will be logical.

How is it that the great reading[=Quran. Throughout this article, the author uses 'great reading' for Quran, and 'the god' for Allah, which are the literal translations.] being in Arabic contributes to logical and reasonable as opposed to unreasonable understanding?
What is special about a text being in Arabic or non-Arabic? Or more precisely, at the time that the great reading was descended, what was special about a text being in Arabic or non-Arabic?

WHAT IS SPECIAL ABOUT ARABIC?
A possible answer may be found in the sign in 16:103.
16:103. And indeed We know that they say: "It is but a human that is teaching him." The language of the one they falsely attribute to is non-Arabic, while this is a clarifying Arabic language.
The sign in verse 16:103 refutes the statement "It is but a human that is teaching him" by saying that the language of such human religious teachings is non-Arabic, while the great reading is in Arabic. The sign in 16:103 indicates that at the time the great reading was revealed there was another non-Arabic language that was used for "religious" teachings and that Arabic was not used for "religious" matters.
Looking back at archeological evidence from the period before the great reading was descended, we see a very interesting phenomenon. We see plenty of inscriptions in Arabic. However, those inscriptions are mostly informal writings that do not talk about formal religious or political affairs. They are like graffiti written by average people. They talk about average people's issues such as hunting, finding water, tribes and families, the caring for livestock, love, grief, and other normal everyday aspects of desert life.
On the other hand, in the same areas of Arabia where those informal Arabic graffiti are found, thousands of Nabataean inscriptions can be found. Nabataean is a close cousin of Aramaic and comes from the same branch of Western Semitic languages. Arabic, on the other hand, comes from the Southern Semitic branch. All the Nabataean inscriptions are very formal and talk exclusively about religious and royal affairs and there are no Nabataean inscriptions talking about the average Nabataean citizen life. Hence, the life of the average Nabataean citizen has remained a mystery.

Until recently, archeologists thought that there were two unrelated people using two different languages that lived in that area, the Nabataeans and the Arab nomads. An inscription found near the Negev region changed all that. The inscription talks about a Nabataean king and dedicates the setting up of a statue to him in the Nabataean language. Added to the Nabataean text there is an explanation in Arabic of why the people made the dedication. Here is a translation of the Arabic portion:
"For (king) Obodas works without rewards or favor, and when death tried to claim us, when a wound of ours festered, he did not let us perish."
When the subject of the inscription changed from formal religious/royal matters to the common people's explanation of why they loved their king, so did the language. It shifted from Nabataean to Arabic. The conclusion that can be drawn from this is that there weren't two people living in the same region who were using two different languages. They were one people all along who simply used two languages for different purposes. They used Arabic as an informal language for common everyday matters and Nabataean as a language for religious and formal affairs. Most commoners would not have understood the religious language of the elite and this helped the religious and political elite to monopolize power.

More importantly, this archeological evidence is confirmed by the sign in 16:103 that clearly points out to Arabic not being the language of religious teachings. So here we have agreement between the evidence from the great reading and archeological evidence.
At the time of the prophet, if a Jew wanted to learn religious matters, they would be taught in Hebrew, which like Nabataean, is also a Western Semitic language. If a Christian wanted to learn religious matters, they would be taught in Aramaic or Greek. If a pagan wanted to learn about his Nabataean idols, he would be taught in Nabataean Aramaic.
Throughout history, one of the ways that the religious clergy maintained control over the common people has been to erect a language barrier. For example, until the 14th century, the language of religion in England was Latin. Change was brought about by the death of over half of the Latin-speaking clergy during the plague of 1348-54 because they lived in close quarters at monasteries. English speaking commoners replaced these clergy and English services became widespread. Shortly thereafter, English translations of the Bible started to appear and not long afterwards, reformers, such as Protestants, began to challenge the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. The event of the plague had a significant impact on the English language and how it is used. English words and expressions that had no religious connotation started to take a strong religious meaning. For example, expressions such as "your worship", which used to simply be a respectful way to address someone, might now denote a religious ritual.

The sign in 16:103 has significant implications on how we can properly understand the great reading and on demolishing the "after-the-fact" dogmatic religious corruptions and the myths surrounding the story of the prophet. In this article an attempt will be made to construct a coherent theory on "pre-quranic" Arabia. The theory will be validated based on evidence from the great reading and archeological evidence. Also, unlike all existing theories we will avoid relying on hearsay or using it to fill in the blanks.

JAHILIYA SOCIETY
Based on 16:103, we found out that Arabic was not a language of religion but was a language of the common people. This would explain how the term "ummi" which comes from "ummat"/people came to mean "illiterate". This would also explain verses such as 62:2 and 3:75 where the meaning of "illiterate" doesn't make any sense because certainly not all the people of the prophet were illiterate and neither was he. With the interpretation of 16:103 and as confirmed by the archeological evidence, the following meanings of "ummi" converge:
1. Is illiterate in the religious language of the elite, which is the language of the previous books.
2. Is from the common people ("ummat").
It can then be seen that the great reading addresses two audiences:
3:20. So if they debate with you say: "I submitted my direction to The God and so did those who followed me" and say to those who were given the book and the "ummiyin"/common people who don't know the religious language of the elite: "Did you submit?" So if they submit then they are guided and if they turn away, then only delivery of the message is upon you and The God is seer of the servants.
According to the traditionally accepted theory, "those who were given the book" refers to Christians and the descendants of Israel while "al-ummiyin" refers to the illiterate pagans. There are many problems with the traditional theory as can be seen from verses such as 2:78, which describes the descendants of Israel:
2:78. And from them are "ummiyin"/common people who don't know the religious language of the elite who don't know the book except recitation without knowing the meaning and they are but assuming.

Verse 2:78 talks about the descendants of Israel. So here we have the term "umiyun" encompassing the descendants of Israel who were either Jews or Christians. This again confirms that "ummi" versus "those given the book" is not a religious or literate versus illiterate division but is a social division of religious elite versus common people. Interestingly, according to Lisan Al-Arab, "not knowing the book except "amany"" means "except recitation". Lisan Al-Arab further explains that Arabs used the expression "someone who "yatamana"" to mean "when someone said what he doesn't know".
منهم أُمِّيُّونَ لا يَعْلَمُون الكتاب إِلا أَمانيَّ قال أَبو إِسحق : معناه الكتاب إِلا تِلاوة نُسِب إِلى أَنْ القائل إِذا قال ما لا يعلمه فكأَنه إِنما يَتَمَنَّاه ، وهذا مستَعمل في كلام الناس
According to 2:78, much like the many sectarians today who don't know Arabic and instead of using a translation recite the Arabic reading behind their religious elite like a parrot without understanding what they are saying, Jewish and Christian Arabs recited their books in a foreign language without understanding what it means. Those Arabs probably recited the book in a foreign language and not in their own language because they thought that this foreign language was somehow sacred. Because they didn't understand the religious texts, in all likelihood they blindly followed the religious elite.
Thus "pre-quranic" Arabia was divided into two major groups. The first group is the religious/political elite of "those who were given the book" and the second group is the common people/"al-ummiyin". According to 59:2, "ahl al kitab" lived in fortified castles so this further confirms that they were not average people but political/religious elite. The advent of the great reading eliminated the differences between those two groups and empowered the common people by bridging the language barrier.

43:31. And they said: "if only this reading had been descended on a great man from the two towns."
Verse 43:31 is inconsistent with the sectarian stories about the prophet prior to receiving the message where he is portrayed as someone who is held in high regards and judges between people in matters such as the placement of the three broken black stone idols that are tied together with a strap (which the Sunnis mistakenly call "the Black Stone"). This again confirms that the prophet was not from a prestigious family.
Now we can understand why despite the fierce resistance to the message by the religious elite, it spread so quickly. It was in the language of the common people that everybody could understand. The fact that the great reading was not only critical of the established religious dogma but was also in the language of the common people, must have added insult to injury as far as the religious and political elite were concerned. This is because the elite religious and political establishment would have looked down at Arabic as a "common people" language and not a "scholarly" one.

JIHILIYA POETRY
According to traditions, alleged Jahiliya Arabic poets were respected and their poems were highly sought after. Traditions contend that powerful political rulers, such as the Ghassanid kings, invited the alleged pagan Arabic poets to court. The Ghassanid courts, such as those of King Nu'man, were supposed to be the venues for the recitation of panegyrics, which are considered in the front rank of Arabic Jahiliya poetry. However, as we saw earlier, the religious and political elite would have looked down on Arabic as a common people language and not a literary and scholarly one. So it is very unlikely that they courted such alleged Arab poets.
If one tries to reconstruct the true history without considering the traditional hearsay reports, what is noticeable from physical archeological evidence is that, despite being Arabs, the Ghassanids did not use Arabic in their religious and formal political communications. For example, here is what an archeologist specializing in Byzantine and Arab 6th century archeology recently said about an important Ghassanid church excavation and the religious inscriptions found [I. Shahid, The Sixth-Century Church Complex At Nitl, Jordan. The Ghassanid Dimension]:
"Remarkable is the fact that the inscriptions are not in Arabic but in Greek, in spite of the strong Arab sense of identity, that the Ghassanids possessed"

Interestingly, some Arabic inscriptions were found on recycled rocks reused to build a church at Umm Al-Rasas in Northern Arabia. The rocks are inscribed in Arabic graffiti with Arab people names. This suggests that the church was built in an area where Arabs lived and that it was catering to Arab parishioners. Despite the parishioners being Arab, as we saw earlier the religious inscriptions were foreign.
So here we see a clear contradiction noticed by archeologists. How come the religious inscriptions are not in Arabic despite the very strong Arabic identity of the Ghassanids? Also, if the Ghassanids held Arabic poetry in such high regard, then how come amongst the multitude of Arabic inscriptions there are no inscriptions of any alleged Jahiliya Arabic poem or even of a single verse of one?

Again, the sign in 16:103 neatly resolves this contradiction. Arabic was simply not a language of religious or literary teaching. That is why the traditionalists cannot produce even one "pre-quranic" manuscript or one inscription of even one verse of one alleged Jahiliya poem. It is not as if Arabs didn't write as some traditionalists claim. There are thousands of pre-quranic Arabic inscriptions talking about much less important things than this alleged Jahiliya poetry and yet there is absolutely zero "pre-quranic" evidence of this all important Jahiliya poetry. All the Arabic inscriptions are informal in nature.
Poets exist in all cultures so there were "pre-quranic" Arabic poets. Even primitive cultures with no advanced literature have poets because they have songs. Singing is the basic form of poetry. However, singing folk songs and "Mary had a little lamb" is different to the supposed Jahiliya poems allegedly uttered by and for the kings of the Arabs and which gave prestige to whoever has the ability to mechanically utter verses that rhyme.

The most prominent alleged "pre-quranic" poet is Imru' Al-Qays. The following is an example of his poetry:
The mere fact that a modern Arabic reader is able to read the above poem without any difficulty raises suspicion about its authenticity. Many of the alleged poets were supposedly from Southern Arab tribes. For example, Imru' Al-Qays was alleged to be from the Southern Arab tribe of Kinda and thus would have spoken and produced poems in an Old Southern Arabic (OSA) dialect such as Sabaic that would have been difficult to understand and not the familiar Northern Arabic dialect of the great reading that we see above.
Anyone who has carefully studied alleged Jahiliya poetry knows that Jahiliya poems, including the above, are amongst the least artful works of literature. All one has to do to utter Jahiliya poetry is to follow the rhyme. That is why you can easily take a Jahiliya poem and insert verses in between or rearrange the order of the verses without losing any of the non-existent author personality.

Even more shocking is that the passages marked with a red box occur almost word for word in the great reading (54:1, 54:29, 54:31, 54:46, 93:1-2, 21:96, 37:61) and this has given ammunition to detractors of the great reading. Detractors of the great reading claim that the prophet copied from Imru' Al-Qays. They refer to the above alleged Jahilya poem verses and to dubious traditions such as the following:
"Fatima (the daughter of the prophet) was repeating a verse and was overheard by the daughter of Imru' Al-Qays, who said: 'O that's what your father has taken from one of my father's poems, and calls it something that has come down to him out of heaven.'"
Despite this, traditionalists have not tried to refute that Imru' Al-Qays said such poems and have continued to trust the authenticity of alleged Jahiliya poems.
It is time for people to stop trusting alleged Jahiliya poems because there is categorical physical archeological evidence that the most prominent Jahiliya poet, Imru' Al-Qays is a fictional character based on a much earlier real Arab king.
This evidence is provided by a famous inscription called the Namara inscription. Here is a translation of the Namara inscription:
"This is the funerary monument of Imru al-Qays, son of ‘Amr, king of the Arabs; and[?] his title of honor was Master of Asad and Madhhij. And he subdued the Asad-s, and they were overwhelmed together with their kings, and he put to flight Ma(dh)hij thereafter, and came driving them into the gates of Najran, the city of Shammar, and he subdued Ma‘add, and he dealt gently with the nobles of the tribes, and appointed them viceroys, and they became phylarchs for the Romans. And no king has equaled his achievements. Thereafter he died in the year 223 on the 7th day of Kaslul. Oh the good fortune of those who were his friends."
[Source: Bellamy, J. (1985). "A New Reading of the Namarah Inscription," Journal of the American Oriental Society 105.1, 34.]

The inscription talks about a powerful king named Imru' al-Qays who had great achievements and must have been liked by his people.
The Nabatean year 223 corresponds to the year 328AD. The alleged Jahiliya poet Imru' al Qays, is reported to have died over 200 years later in the year 540AD.
We seemingly have two personalities by the same exact name: Imru' al Qays, and both are famous figures. This is how traditionalists explained away the vast discrepancy in the dates.
However, the traditionalist explanation is not possible because the astonishing similarities between the alleged poet and the person described by the inscription do not stop there. The 328 AD real Imru' al Qays (since we have archeological evidence to back up his existence) shares other striking similarities with the fictional 540 AD Imru' al Qays, the alleged pre-quranic Arabic poet.
For instance, both are royals, the 328AD Imru' al-Qays is called the "king of the Arabs" in the inscription and traditionalists allege that the other Imru' al-Qays was the son of the last king of Kinda, an ancient Arabian tribe. When his father was murdered, he too became king.
The 328AD Imru' al-Qays fought a tribe called Asad. The other Imru' al-Qays was banished by his father king because of his passionate poetry then his tribe went to war with a rival tribe called: Bani Asad! Who murdered his father!

Both Imru' al Qays 1 and 2 defeated their Asad enemies.
Both the 328AD Imru' al Qays and the 540AD Imru' al Qays tried to unite the tribes of Arabia.
Both the 328AD Imru' al Qays and the 540AD Imru' al Qays made alliances with the Romans to defeat their tribe's enemies.
We know that the 328AD Imru' al Qays existed because of the physical archeological evidence of the Namara inscription. We only know about the 540AD Imru' al Qays through stories and poems that were reported in the 8th-9th century AD.
Those striking similarities cannot be a coincidence but is exactly what one would expect from the storytellers as the real story of the real Imru' Al-Qays is turned across generations into the legend of Imru' Al-Qays and sprinkled with poetry and embellished to make it more entertaining. This completely demolishes the historicity of the 540AD Imru' Al-Qays and the entire traditional account of the Jahilya period and its poetry.
The fictitious Imru' al Qays of 540AD is regarded as the inventor of the "qasida" or classical ode. His poems are considered to be the most prominent, famous, and reliable. He is also considered the greatest poet of the Mu'allaqat, the poems that are worthy of hanging on the alleged Kaaba. Hence, if his historicity turns out to be problematic, this would have far reaching consequences for the historicity of all Jahiliya poetry and even the alleged proper name Kaaba, since Jahiliya poetry is the only supposed "pre-quranic" source for it.

Traditionalists have countered the doubts in the authenticity of Jahiliya poetry by arguing that the oral transmission of Jahiliya poetry was like the transmission of the great reading and hence both are preserved in the same way.
Fortunately, those traditionalist arguments are not grounded in reality. Unlike alleged Jahiliya poetry where there is a complete absence of manuscripts and inscriptions, there are many early manuscripts of the great reading that can be dated to the first century of the new era. Some of those manuscripts even show faded text where the same words have been re-written over. Thus, the original text of the great reading can be dated to an even earlier period. Given that there is only a slim probability of survival of such manuscripts, the fact that we have so many indicates that they came from a very large population. Moreover, there are many rock inscriptions of parts of the great reading that are dated to the first century of the new era. More importantly, the great reading itself tells us that it is a "kitab". The word "kitab" means a "written document".
Traditionalists have also contended that a vast conspiracy was needed for the fabrication of Jahiliya poetry on such a scale. However, in reality there is no need for a conspiracy. The natural law of supply and demand negates the need for a conspiracy.
Hollywood produces movies because there is demand for them not because of any sinister conspiracy. A few hundred years from now some naïve folks that lack common sense may watch such movies and think that they are home movies depicting the lives of actual people.
Poetry was told by storytellers for the purpose of entertainment. Hence, unlike later poets, all alleged Jahiliya poets have very interesting and amazing life stories. The poems are weaved into the stories and advance the plot line in such a way so that a poem is always uttered at the opportune moment. Hence, like in a Bollywood movie where the hero and a chorus of singers and dancers is always ready at the right moment in the story to spontaneously delight the audience with a song, alleged Jahiliya poets entertain us with their poems in the exact perfect time in their melodramatic stories. Those are all classical features of fiction and legends and not actual historic accounts.

It is amazing that some people still believe that poets such as Imru' Al-Qays (the Hamlet of Arabia), Antara (the Achilles of Arabia), and Qays Ibn Al-Mulawah and Layla (the Romeo and Juliet of Arabia) really existed and they are not a figment of the imagination of Umayyad and Abbasid era storytellers. This is no different than believing that Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet really existed and are not the figment of the imagination of Shakespeare. Traditionalists even accept as Jahiliya poetry poems alleged to be from the time of Ibrahim (a different millennia) or uttered by Adam in the obituary of his son, all said in easy to understand Arabic I might add! Of course, anyone with common sense should doubt that people at the time of Ibrahim even heard of this Arabic, let alone composed poetry in it.
If traditionalists want to compare the supposed preservation of so-called Jahiliya poetry to something, then they can compare it to Hadiths. There is evidence from those bodies of literature themselves that they were spread by the Qasassin (the storytellers). Those are entertainers who went from one town to the next telling their stories. Of course, the storytellers had to give the audience what they wanted to hear. Hence, for liberal audiences, they would tell the story of Imru-Al-Qays and his romantic endeavors or Qays Ibn Al-Mulawah and Layla. In more conservative towns, the storytellers would tell the stories of the monotheist poets and tales of courage and valor. Later, the same storytellers propagated Hadiths as the Abbasid theocracy took over and demand for religious programming increased. There is evidence from Bukhari's bibliography that he started out as one of those storytellers himself, traveling from town to town and gathering audiences like the circus.

The following extract from Imam Bukhari's biography, recounts one of his performances while traveling to Baghdad:
"People had heard about the Imam Bukhari’s extraordinary memory. They decided to test him to see if the Imam was worthy of the attributes that were being issued to him. One hundred different ahaadeeth were chosen that had their testimonials and text altered. These altered ahaadeeth were to be recited to Imam Bukhari by ten people. By now, a crowd had gathered to witness the outcome of this deliberate test. One by one, each altered tradition was recited. The Imam remarked at the end of each recital: “Not of my knowledge.”
After all the traditions had been presented, the Imam demonstrated the power of his memory by correcting the testimonial and text of each tradition in order."
Of course, the above tale sounds more like circus entertainment and not the scientific endeavor that traditionalists paint. This unfortunate situation was described here:
31.6. Among the people, there are those who buy distracting sayings, to divert from the path of The God without knowledge, and take it in vain. These have incurred a shameful retribution.
In summary, so-called Jahiliya poetry has been proven to be a product of Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties' entertainers and political propagandists, the same social forces that produced Hadiths. The natural law of supply and demand and the storytellers spreading their tales from town to town explains the widespread dissemination of such fabrications without the need for a systematic conspiracy.

JAHILIYA HISTORY
Unfortunately, historians often rely on Jahiliya poetry to reconstruct the history of the "pre-quranic" period in Arabia. They also rely on "post-quranic" stories such as those produced by Ibn Is-haq. The most well known turning point in the history of "pre-quranic" Arabia seems to be the alleged Year of the Elephant. This is the year when an Abyssinian expedition under the leadership of Abraha was supposedly defeated while allegedly invading Maka(t). This is also the year when the prophet was supposed to be born. This year is given by traditional historians as the year 570AD.
Fortunately, we can objectively investigate the history of Abraha because in this case we have physical archeological evidence in the form of a very detailed inscription written to commemorate his expedition. This large inscription is depicted on a rock near a well in southern Arabia.
The Abraha inscription is an example of the kind of archeological evidence that provides information that totally contradicts the official view of Jahiliya history.
Transliteration:
"bi khayl Rahmanan wa masyha malikan Abraha Zybman malik Saba' wa Zuraydan wa Hadramut wa Yement wa r'a rab hamw twadam wa thamat satro zn satran k'ghazow ma'ndam ghazwatn rab'atan b'warkhan Zthbatan Kafa saadu kl bani amrm wa zaki malikn abjabar b ainam kadat wain w basharm bin hasahanm bainm san dam wa mardam wa hadaru qadami jayshan alia bani yamram kadat wail bi wad samrakh wa mardam wa sadam bi wad bi manhaj tarban wa zabahow wa sarw wa ghanamw zaisam wa makhdah malakin bi Halban wa dawn ka zalam maidam wrahanw wa badanahaw nwa sa'aham mw Amram Bin Mazran wa rahanamw bin haw wa sata khalafw ala ma'dam wa qafalw bin hal ( bi)n bi akhayal Rahmanan wa rakhaw zalan salthany w sathya ws."

Translation:
"With the power of the Almighty, and His Messiah King Abraha Zeebman, the King of Saba'a, Zuridan, and Hadrmaut and Yemen and the tribes (on) the mountains and the coast wrote these lines on his battle against the tribe of Ma'ad (in) the battle of al-Rabiya in the month of "Dhu al Thabithan" and fought all of Bani A'amir and appointed the King Abi Jabar with Kinda and Al, Bishar bin Hasan with Sa'ad, Murad, and Hadarmaut in front of the army against Bani Amir of Kinda. and Al in Zu Markh valley and Murad and Sa'ad in Manha valley on the way to Turban and killed and captured and took the booty in large quantities and the King and fought at Halban and reached Ma'ad and took booty and prisoners, and after that, conquered Omro bin al-Munzir.
(Abrha) appointed the son (of Omro) as the ruler and returned from Hal Ban (Halban) with the power of the Almighty in the month of Zu A'allan in the year sixty-two and six hundred."
The above inscription describes in detail the expedition of Abraha until his return. As one can clearly see, contrary to the fairy tales that we hear from traditionalists there is absolutely no mention of anything related to elephants, Kaaba(t), or Maka(t). According to the inscription it is Abraha who defeated and returned after conquering the Arab tribes and not the other way around as traditionalists contend.
It is not surprising that the inscription doesn't mention elephants. It would have been highly impractical to bring elephants into the desert and carry their weight in water. Moreover, elephants had fallen out of use as battle gear approximately seven centuries earlier. This is for the simple reason that elephants' feet are very sensitive and it is very easy to defeat elephants in battle by placing thorns or any sharp objects in their path. Elephants would have suffered greatly in the scorching sands of the desert without giving an invading army any advantage. Thus, it is very unlikely that Abraha used elephants.

Chapter 105 of the great reading doesn't say anything about Kaaba(t), Maka(t), or Abraha. In light of verses such as 11:82 and 15:74 that talk about the punishment of the people of Lot as being hit by "7ijarat min sijjil", the same exact Arabic term in chapter 105, the chapter is more likely to be referring to the people of Lot and not Abraha.
Another interesting fact that is confirmed by the great reading is that the southern Arabs at the time of the prophet used to call The God "Al-Rahman" (Rahmanan in Sabiac where the definite article is post-posed as "nan"). We don't find inscriptions in Northern Arabia with the name Rahman while we find it in Southern Arabian inscriptions so this name was used by Southern Arabs. The sign in 17:110 is in perfect agreement with the archeological evidence. We can now see that the opening of "Bism Allah Al-Rahman Al-Rahim" and the whole honorable reading was addressing both Northern and Southern Arabs and not just one tribe or the other.
In addition, there are also other interesting linguistic implications to how people living during "pre-quranic" times understood the language of the great reading. The term Al-Rahman is often interpreted in classical Arabic dictionaries to mean "Gracious" or "Beneficent". This is not in line with how the attribute is used in the great reading, where for example, in 19:45 we hear prophet Ibrahim say to his father, a rejecting idol-worshipper, "I fear you would be struck with the wrath of Al-Rahman." The word Al-Rahman in 19:45 is more likely to invoke fear of retribution as opposed to hope of benefit or grace. The Abraha inscription confirms the meaning of Al-Rahman as used in the great reading to mean an attribute that conveys power: The Almighty. Both physical archeological evidence (as opposed to hearsay) and the great reading are in perfect match on how people at the time of the prophet must have understood the meaning of Al-Rahman. Notice also in the inscription the use of "zaki" to mean "promote" and not "give charity".
Joseph Couq "L'Eglise d'Afrique du Nord du IIe au XIIe siecle" (1984) p. 120-1 shows examples of the Bismallah on coins rendered in Latin (76AH/695CE - 98AH/716CE) as "in nomine Dei misericordis" (in the name of God the Merciful). So it seems that only Al-Rahim was translated and the early post-quranic Arabs totally neglected to translate Al-Rahman. We see the same phenomena on bilingual North Arabian papyri, for example in early Arabic-Greek texts the word "Rahman" is not translated [See: H. I. Bell, "The Arabic Bilingual Entagion", Proceedings Of The American Philosophical Society, 1945, Volume 89, pp. 538-539; and Alan Jones, "The Dotting Of A Script And The Dating Of An Era: The Strange Neglect Of PERF 558", in Islamic Culture, 1998, Volume LXXII, No. 4, pp. 95-103]. This proves that even after the revelation of 17:110 the people of Northern Arabia were still confused about the meaning of Al-Rahman and hence didn't translate it.
As we have seen, the story of Abraha as told in the inscription is kind of dull and with no happy ending for the Arabs. On the other hand, the hearsay tales from sectarians are filled with amazing details, suspense, and drama. They capture people's imagination with the amazing detail of the character of an old frail man (the fictitious Abd Al-Mutilib) standing in the path of the Army of Abraha. The stories have special effects of amazing creatures (the elephants) and gore (the flesh and blood flowed like water and the skin of Abraha and his soldiers falling off and exposing the bones, etc.). These hearsay stories that the Arabs concocted long after the fact have very high entertainment value and appeal to the masses much as Hollywood flicks often do. However, they have no value for those interested in the truth. The Arabs were very proud of their forefathers as evident from the many inscriptions bearing family lineage and tribal affiliation. Thus, when they became in the seat of power, they rewrote history to turn their forefathers' humiliating defeat at the hands of Abraha into a legendary victory.
As a side note, the date on the inscription converts to 552AD. According to traditionalists, the prophet was born in the year of Abraha's expedition and they say that he was born in 570AD. So this pushes back the date of birth of the prophet by about 20 years. This creates a big problem for traditionalists. They now either have to revise the entire story of the prophet or they have to give up all their "Sahih" Hadiths. This is for the simple reason that all the chains of transmission of their Hadiths will now be broken as a result of pushing back the dates by 20 years.
As we see, even the most famous and well-known turning point in the history of Arabia, including the date of birth of the prophet, as recounted by traditionalists turned out to be problematic.

JAHILIYA LANGUAGE
As we saw earlier, Arabic was a common people language and not a scholarly or religious one. Thus, any religious meaning attached to an Arabic word is suspect and should be investigated thoroughly before it is accepted. In the great reading, we find an interesting phenomenon. Words with religious connotation in modern English such as "prayer" and "worship" do not occur at all in the great reading.
For example, the word "dua'a", which is traditionally understood as "prayer", doesn't have a religious connotation and is used many times in the great reading in mundane usages that have nothing to do with "prayer" (for example, see 28:25). Hence, it is best translated as "calling upon" and not as "prayer".
Similarly, the word "'abad", which is traditionally understood as "worship", is better understood as "serve" (for example, see 16:75, 2:221).
The term "deen" is traditionally understood as "religion". However, one can see that it is used in many instances to mean "obligation" (for example, see 56:86, 2:282, 4:11-12). The common non-religious Arabic meaning of "obligation" actually fits better in all the occurrence of "deen" in the great reading (see: What's in the name?).
The term "hajj" is traditionally understood as "religious pilgrimage". However, a closer study of the great reading reveals that the term has nothing to do with organized clergy-based religious pilgrimages.

For example, we hear in 22:27:
22:27. And announce amongst people with the debate. They will come on foot and on every kind of lean transportation. They will come through every unobstructed passage.

In 22:27 that Ibrahim invited people with/"bi" the debate/"al-7ajj" and not to/"li" the debate/"al-7ajj" to witness benefits. Thus, the debate/"hajj" is a tool to attract different people from all over. One could only invite all people with something beneficial and non-discriminatory.
We are told in 28:27 that Moses was hired to work for eight debates/"7ijaj". What was hired to do? Clearly, he was hired to work and tend for sheep (28:23-24) and not for any religious pilgrimage. What does working and tending sheep has to do with the debate/"7ajj"? Naturally, people work and produce so that they can bargain with their products. Bargaining is a kind of debate and it results in witnessing benefits by the seller and the buyer. Thus, the debate/"al-7ajj" is like the annual fair where people work all year and then go to sell and/or buy products. Mid summer - early fall is the natural time for such markets because produce and livestock are plentiful. The large gathering of the debate/"7ajj" provides a good opportunity to remind as many people as possible of The God. It is also an opportunity for the advantaged to donate and provide for the disadvantaged. This is confirmed by 22:28-29 where we are told about the purpose of the debate/"7ajj":
22:28-29. So that they may witness benefits for themselves and remember The God’s name in a few days over what He Has provided for them of the animal livestock. So eat from it and feed the needy and the poor. Then they would complete their duties and fulfill their vows, and would pass by the freeing house.

The restriction house is simply the place where people safely assemble to communicate and conduct the debate without fear of oppression. This restriction house helps spread freedom because oppressed people who come there and freely debate experience an environment free of oppression and they take that experience with them to induce freedom in their own communities. Debate is an essential process for accountability and dissemination of the best ideas in any free society. Thus, the concept of debate/"7ajj" has nothing to do with any special holy pilgrimage. It is an entirely common concept.

CONCLUSION
In summary, the sign in 16:103 has significant implications on how we can properly understand the great reading. Archeological evidence confirms the information we found by studying the great reading. Thus, a coherent picture of "pre-quranic" Arabia is starting to emerge.
Interestingly, while writing this article, a possible solution for an age old puzzle was inadvertently discovered. Many people have wondered about the initials at the beginning of some chapters of the great reading.
A closer look at those alleged initials reveals that they are not initials at all but are words. For example, here is how 2:1 is written now as a word: الم
Had it been not a word but three initials as some people contend then it would have been written as follows: ا ل م
Clearly, there is a big difference.
Also, from Chapter 42 it is clear that the words at the beginning are words and not initials and we can't haphazardly separate them as initials because of the deliberate separation between "حم" and "عسق" when they could have been joined and written as:
حمسعق
Thus, The God deliberately separated the "حم" and "عسق" while He didn't separate الم into ا ل م in Chapter 2. Thus, this is more confirmation that الم should be considered a word and not three initials.
Even chapters that start with single letters should be read out as words and not spelled as initials. Spelling them out would be like spelling the single letter "وَ" at the beginning of Chapter 103 as "waw", for example, instead of reading it as "wa". The God gave us the great reading not the great spelling.
As we found out, Arabic is a common people language and not a formal religious one. So what do those words mean?
In all informal languages of the common people there are words that are either jargon abbreviation of other words or are slang words that people commonly use. As a language of the common people, Arabic would have been no exception. An example in colloquial American English would be words like "OK" and "yo".
Interestingly, chapter 20 starts with the word "taha". Here is what the Classical Arabic dictionaries say about the meaning of طه:
معناهُ يا رجُلُ بالحَبْشِيَّةِ
طَهْ مجزومة : إِنها بالحبشية يا رجل
It means "hey man" or the equivalent of "yo" in colloquial American English. The dictionaries attribute this word to the Southern Semitic language of Ethiopic, which is related to Southern Arabic dialects such as Hadramatic and Sabaic. So this slang word could have been borrowed into those Southern Arabic dialects.
In light of this information, let's fully translate 20:1-2:
20:1-2. Hey man, We didn't descend on you the reading to make you suffer.
As one can see, the meaning perfectly fits in the context of 20:2. Even though scholars and clergy would be shocked at hearing such an informal way of expression in a translation of the great reading, one must keep in mind that the real Classical Arabic at the time of the great reading was a common people informal language and not the formalized language that it is made out to be today. Hence, it is likely that when the clergy at the time of the prophet heard the great reading for the first time in Arabic, they had the same reaction as the present day clergy hearing the above translation.
Another example is in chapter 27 where the word "tas"/ طسappears. According to Classical Arabic dictionaries, the word means "delve/sink deep into something", amongst other meanings. Thus, 27:1 could be translated as follows:
27:1. Sink deep into these signs of the reading and a clarifying book.
Another example that appears at the beginning of multiple chapters is the word "tasam"/طسم. It appears in chapters 26 and 28. According to Classical Arabic dictionaries, "tasam" used by common people to mean "sharpen" and "study", among other meanings.
والعامَّة تقول طسَّم الموسى. أي استحدَّها على الطسمة
يَطْسِمُ طُسُوماً دَرَسَ
Thus, 26:1-2 and 28:1-2 could be translated as follows:
26:1-2. Sharpen/study these signs of the clarifying book.
The Arabic word "ham"/ حم, which appears in chapters 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46 also has a meaning. According to Classical Arabic dictionaries the meaning is something that is "intended" or "destined":
حَمَّهُ: قصد قصده.- اللّه كذا: قضاه وقدّ ره
حُمَّ يُحَمُّ حَمّا :- الأَمرُ: قُضي؛
(حُمَّ): الأمْرُ بالضم (حَمّاً) قُضِيَ وله ذلك قُدِّرَ
وحَمَّ حَمَّهُ) قَصَدَ قَصْدَهُ)
Thus, 40:1-2 can be translated as follows:
40:1-2. It is intended/destined revelation of the book from The God, the Powerful, the Knower.
Similarly, 41:1-2, 45:1-2 and 46:1-2 can be translated as follows:
41:1-2. It is intended/destined revelation from the Almighty, the Merciful.
45:1-2. It is intended/destined revelation of the book from The God, the Powerful, the Wise.
46:1-2. It is intended/destined revelation of the book from The God, the Powerful, the Wise.
44:1-3 can be translated as follows:
44:1-3. It is intended/destined and a clarifying book. We descended it in a blessed night for We were warning.
In chapter 42, we have two words that have been traditionally considered as initials. We already found out what "ham"/ حمmeans. According to Classical Arabic dictionaries, the other word "'asaq"/ عسق means "following closely" and "pollinate/pollination". Thus, 42:1-3 can be translated as follows:
42:1-3. It is intended/destined pollination, like that is how you and those before you are inspired by The God the Powerful, the Wise.
Finally, 43:1-3 can be translated as follows:
43:1-3. It is intended/destined and a clarifying book. We have made it an Arabic reading so that perhaps you will be logical.
Interestingly, we started this study with 43:3 and now we came a full circle and ended up with a possible solution for the age-old mystery of what the word in 43:1 means in the context of 43:1-3.
Given that Arabic at the time of the great reading was an informal common people language with many slang words, it is not surprising that the first scholars to codify the language were not Arabs but were Persians. No scholar who is a native speaker would codify what they consider to be informal "street talk". Scholars only codify formal languages. Later as the Arabs interacted with other nations and tyrannical leaders and the religious elites revived their symbiotic existence, Arabic was transformed into a formal "religious" language that the common people need the clergy to understand for them. The slang words at the beginning of the chapters defied codification by their very nature because slang by definition doesn’t follow any rules. However, they serve as a sign for us that The God can take inconsistent man-made human communication and use it to compose a consistent and powerful message. They also serve as a reminder that The God is addressing the people directly and that the self-styled religious elite do not have any role in our obligation to The God.

To refute the traditionalist theories about the alleged initials, all that had to be done is prove one set of the alleged initials to be a word that has meaning and fits in the context. In this article, not just one but eleven of the sets of initials were proven to be words that have meanings that fit in the context. This leaves us with 18 that are not yet deciphered and for which further research is needed. As our understanding and that of our children improves, we would be able to decipher them with The God's help, unless He wills otherwise.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
2:2. This is the book no doubt in it, a guidance for the forethoughtful.
This article reflects my personal interpretation of the verses of the reading as of February 3, 2005. I will try to improve my understanding of the great reading and the universe, except if The God wills and perhaps my Lord guides me to what is nearer in rationality. Please verify all information within for yourself as commanded in 17:36, and remember that simply "none" is the forethoughtful answer to 45:6. If The God willed, the outcome of this article will be beneficial.

2006-11-23T12:37:00.000-08:00

Theft Punishment

By Brother Joe (e-mail: Joe28@iname.com)

12:1-3, "A.L.R. These are signs of the profound scripture. We have sent it down, an Arabic Quran that you may understand. We narrate to you the best stories through Our revelation to you of this Quran. Before this, you were totally unaware."

What is theft punishment in Quran? This article will show, God willing (Gw), that is to give the chance to the thieves to come forward, acknowledge their crime, and give back what they have stolen to the victim. They might even get a reward. If they do not come forward, prove should be found who are the thieves. Then they should work to pay the fees involved for the whole thing. What was stolen, if found, should be restituted to their owners. Otherwise, thieves should work for them until what they have stolen is repaid. First, the article will explore the two literal understandings related to this issue and show their shortcomings. Then, it will conclude with the third non-literal and the closest to Quran’s spirit understanding just stated.

So far, two punishments for theft were proposed as an understanding of aya 5:38.
5:38, "The male thief, and the female thief, you shall as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Almighty, Wise."
5:39, "If one repents after committing this crime, and reforms, God redeems him. God is Forgiver, Merciful."
The Arabic word means "cut" while refers to "the (three or more) hands of the male and female thief". Thus the expression , in aya 5:38 above, stands literally for "cut their (three or more) hands." Therefore, 5:38 reads literally:
5:38, "The male thief, and the female thief, you shall cut their (three or more) hands as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Almighty, Wise."

First Literal Understanding
The first understanding says that 5:38 means to cut off the thief's hand. I do not agree with this understanding for the following reasons. First, the Arabic word is the plural (three or more) of (hand) used in dual form. As we know, each one of us has normally only two hands, including thieves. How can we possibly cut off the hands (three or more) of a thief? Even if we accept that the hands in this aya refer to the hands of both thieves, should we then cut off both hands of a thief?
Second, what will benefit the one who lost their stolen goods in case they would not recovered them? And what would happen if someone were accused mistakenly or maliciously of theft and their hands were cut off? What if someone does not have hands and uses only his brain to plan thefts for their accomplices? This is not a fiction; it happened.

Third, how could the above aya 5:39 be applied if someone has his or her hands cut off and repents later on and reforms? On other words, if cutting the hands in aya 5:38 is translated literally to mean cutting off the hands, then aya 5:39 can not stand logic and common sense. Let’s assume that someone steals something and pays the heavy price of his or her hands being cutting off. Then he or she repents and reforms. What does it mean in his or her case that,
"God redeems him. God is Forgiver, Merciful"? (5:39).
How will he or she be redeemed once he or she has lost his or her hands? How could he or she deserve a second chance without his or her hands? Indeed, understanding cutting hands as cutting off hands literally does not stand logic and common sense in the context of these two ayat 5:38-39 in particular, and in the context of Quran in general.

Second Literal Understanding
The second understanding that was proposed for aya 5:38 is to only mark the thief's hand. This understanding runs against the same problems as the first one. Besides the same above problems, we have a specific one to this case. With all esthetic surgery advances, someone could manage to steal millions and spend a few thousands to offer themselves an esthetic surgery to hide their hands’ markings. Criminals nowadays do go thru facial surgery in order to hide from justice and people.
Furthermore, Ayat 12:31 and 12:50 were used to convey this meaning of marking the hands to 5:38.
12:31, "..When they (the women) saw him (Joseph), they exalted him and they cut their hands..."
However, 12:31 and 12:50 do not use the exact wording as 5:38. They use the Arabic variation of "cut" used in 5:38. Even though if someone agrees that both have the same meaning, the same word is used in 5:33, 7:124, 20:71, 26:49 as to mean cut off or amputate.
5:33, "The retribution for those who fight God and His messenger, and commit corruption in the land, is to be killed, or crucified, or to cut off/amputate their hands and feet on alternate sides, or to be banished from the land..."
Therefore why should someone use 12:31 and 12:50 to convey the meaning "to mark" and not 5:33, 7:124, 20:71, 26:49 to convey the meaning "to cut off/amputate"?

Non-Literal Understanding
Let’s consider now the third meaning and the closest to Quran’s spirit. The punishment is to cut off from the thieves’ resources and power. Here you are three reasons supporting this non-literal understanding.
1. First, the Arabic word (in dual plural in 5:38 above) or "hand" is used in Quran in its literal and figurative meanings. For instance, 27:12 uses it in its literal meaning while 5:64 uses it in its figurative one to refer to wealth and resources.
27:12, "Put your hand (O Moses) in your pocket; it will come out white, without a blemish. These are among nine signs to Pharaoh and his people, for they are wicked people."
5:64, "The Jews even said, "God's hand is tied down!" It is their hands that are tied down. They are condemned for uttering such a blasphemy. Instead, His both hands are wide open, spending as He wills..."
Another example for the non-literal meaning is 38:45. It uses in plural (three or more) form. It conveys the meaning of power and possession of resources.
38:45, "Remember also our servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were resourceful (with many hands), and possessed vision/They possessed power and vision."
is also used to infer someone's actions and doings (2:195, 22:10). It is used too to mean possession of a responsibility or a contract (2:237).
Therefore, in the above aya 5:38 means to cut off from the thieves’ resources and power.
5:38, "The male thief, and the female thief, you shall cut off from their resources and power as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Almighty, Wise."
Aya 5:39 that follows 5:38 makes complete sense.
5:39, "If one repents after committing this crime, and reforms, God redeems him. God is Forgiver, Merciful."

2. Second, let's consider the case of murder in Quran which is a worse crime than stealing. There are two earthly punishments. 4:92 deals with a believer's accidental killing. Neither capital punishment nor jail are involved. 2:178 deals with the second case when someone meant the killing. This aya gives the option of sparing the murderer's life. In both cases, there is ransom involved if possible. It is the case maybe because when someone is killed, a source of income is cut from their family and therefore should be compensated. In either case, punishment does not tall the cutting or marking of hands if it was the case in 5:38.
3. Last but not least, sura 12 gives us a good example of how to punish the thieves.
12:70, "When he provided them with their provisions, he placed the drinking cup in his brother's bag, then an announcer announced: "The owners of this caravan are thieves."'
12:71, "They said, as they came towards them, "What did you lose?"'
12:72, "They said, "We lost the king's cup. Anyone who returns it will receive an extra camel-load; I personally guarantee this."'
12:73, "They said, "By God, you know full well that we did not come here to commit evil, nor are we thieves."'
12:74, "They said, "What is the punishment for the thief, if you are liars?"'
12:75, "They said, "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. We thus punish the guilty."'
12:76, "He then started by inspecting their containers, before getting to his brother's container, and he extracted it out of his brother's container. We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law/religion. But that was the will of God. We exalt whomever we choose to higher ranks. Above every knowledgeable one, there is one who is even more knowledgeable."
12:77, "They said, "If he stole, so did a brother of his in the past." Joseph concealed his feelings in himself, and did not give them any clue. He said (to himself), "You are really bad. God is fully aware of your accusations."'

12:78, "They said, "O you noble one, he has a father who is elderly; would you take one of us in his place? We see that you are a kind man."'
12:79, "He said, "God forbid that we should take other than the one in whose possession we found our goods. Otherwise, we would be unjust."'
The way I understand the above ayat is this is God's law for theft in application.
12:7, "In Joseph and his brothers there are lessons for the seekers."
Joseph and his brothers were submitters and children of Jacob and Abraham's great great-children.
12:38, "And I (Joseph) followed instead the religion of my forefathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. We have no right to commit shirk (associating partners) with God. Such is the blessing from God upon us and upon the people, but most people are unappreciative."
It is very clear from the above ayat that they were not following the king’s law to punish the thieves but rather God’s law.

12:76, "...We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law/religion. But that was the will of God..."
First the presumed thieves were given the chance to come forward, acknowledge their wrongdoing, and then give back what they have stolen. They might even get a reward.
Second, if they do not do so, they must be proven as thieves. Then, what was stolen, if found, should be restituted to their owners. Thieves should work to repay the fees involved in the whole process. They should also work to repay what was stolen in case they do not give it or the whole of it back.
Besides, aya 5:38 refers to THE thief. If someone steals for the first time, comes forward and acknowledges his or her wrongdoing, he or she is not called THE thief. Aya 5:38 does not apply to those ones.
This process put in application the theft punishment stated in 5:38 that is to cut off from the thieves’ resources and power. It leaves also the door open for thieves to repent and reform as God states in 5:39. This whole process is what is applied to thieves in some Muslim rural areas.
These ayat give us also an example of someone who was set up for theft, for a good reason of course. But, what would happen to someone who was set up maliciously and has to face marking or cutting of his or her both hands?
Had Joseph known that God's punishment for theft is marking or cutting hands (which his brothers would have apply), he would not scheme that way in order to keep his brother with him.

Someone would argue that was God's theft law for previous communities and we are not bound by it. Well, when God wants to change something, He specifies it (2:187). Furthermore, Quran specifies when some laws do apply only for some communities (16:118) and therefore we are not bound to apply them.
The cutting or marking hands as a punishment of thieves run into contradictions within Quran. However, meaning of "cutting hands" in 5:38 as cutting from the thieves’ resources and power, the case of murder’s punishment in Quran, and the example of God’s law in application in 12:70-79 are the three arguments, put forward in this article, to propose the third and closest to Quran’s spirit punishment for theft. It goes as follow. Chance should be given to the thieves to come forward, acknowledge their crime, and give back what they have stolen to the victims. They might even get a reward. If they do not come forward, prove should be found who are the thieves. Thieves should then work to pay the fees involved for the whole thing. What was stolen, if found, should be restituted to their owners. Otherwise, thieves should work for them until what they have stolen is repaid.
We started this article with the first ayat of sura 12 that tells us that God narrates to us the best stories. We have seen how, indeed, we could apply the theft story from this sura to deduce the meaning of theft punishment and its application as stated in 5:38-39. We conclude this article with the last aya of the same sura 12.
12:111, "In their stories, there is a lesson for those who possess intelligence. This is not a fabricated narration ; this (Quran) authenticates what it is between its hands, and provides the details of everything. It is a beacon and a mercy for those who believe."

God bless you all, peace,

2006-11-23T12:34:00.000-08:00

SCIENTIFIC REVELATION

(C) Copyright 1997
Muhammed Asadi

"Say: What thing is greatest in testimony? Say: God is witness between you and I, and that this Koran has been inspired in me that I many warn with it you and whomsoever it be conveyed to... (Koran 6:19)"

Religion throughout the history of humankind has had a tremendous hold on humanity. According to Emile Durkheim, the French Sociologist, the first organized institutions of mankind were religious in character. Even today, religion is of primary importance to millions of individuals who try to live by it and give it a special place in their lives. Therefore, any issue involving religion in today's world is worthy of discussion. Science, in its popular usage, is generally defined as the systematic observation of natural phenomena and their workings. Since the industrial revolution in the eighteenth century it is seen as the thing in control of human destiny and its future survival. Those who fail to utilize science and modern discovery are kept at the lowest strata of society in today's highly competitive world.

As today, both science and religion are widespread, each having dogmatic believers, antagonism has resulted. The common notion being that science and religion are opposites; i.e. they repel each other as like poles of a magnet. According to the sociologist Max Weber, in his article, Science as a vocation, science has resulted in the "disenchantment" of the world. The enchantment of the world was due to, according to him, people relying on religion and giving magical explanations to perfectly logical, natural phenomena.

This article attempts to use the Koran to examine Max Weber's claims about religion. The source of Islam is a book, just one book, the Koran. Modern Islam however has added other sources, which the Koran doesn't validate. The Koran, is historically the earliest written text we possess in the the Arabic language and as such is the only valid authority on Islam as conveyed by the prophet Muhammed. The other sources Hadith and Fiqh date from over 200 years after Muhammed's death. I will therefore not deal with these other sources as they do not historically represent the "original" Islam.

Within its text, the Koran names itself many times as a book revealed directly by God, in which God is speaking in the first person. The Koran says that true believers "reason about the origin of the heavens and the earth (Koran 3:190-191)." This itself is science by definition when done in a systematic way. According to the Koran, by applying science in this way a person gets to the truth by discovering the "nature of God [His Sunna- in Arabic]," as reflected by his creation and brought to mind by the Koran that claims to be his revelation. In constrast to the concept of a "supernatural", the Koran talks about nature and creation being an expression of God's attributes. We can therefore look inside the "Mind of God" so to speak by studying his creation.

The scientific system of inquiry is emphasized time and again by the Koran. The linking of science and rationality with the verses of the Koran is not only legitimized but also encouraged by God in the Koran. The Koran tells the reader that if he/she does not know something or are unsure they should ask"those who are informed (Koran 25:59)." In the case of all the scientific and natural phenomena discussed in the Koran, the people having knowledge and information would most definitely be the scientists. Thus the Koran discourages unreasoned belief.

Why I came to be interested in the scientific analysis of the Koran, is a long story that traverses my entire life after thirteen. It was at that age, while going through my father's closet, in the process of moving to a different city in Pakistan, that I discovered several English translations of the Koran. I was curious about this book. I had heard its name being raised in a so called "Islamic environment," yet no one ever told me what the book was about. In the society in which I grew up, most people claim to be Muslims, but they never read the Koran in a language they understand. They merely chant it in Arabic, which they have learned to read mechanically, but whose meaning they don't know. It would sound very unusual here, to the American culture, to be able to read in English but not understand a word of it. No one asked me to read the book, I read it because its daily reading made sense to me. It motivated me to question and I could confirm it with the little knowledge that I had from school at that time.

As time progressed, discussions with the people I met raised many questions regarding religion and its relation to science and reason. A human mind can never rest on uncertainty and so till I succeeded in my attempts to find answers to questions that arose in my mind, I was always restless. The results were amazing: Muslim tradition, i.e. fiqh and hadith, that have broken up Islam into sects, do not stand the test of science, but the Koran does indeed. The attitude that I carry with me even today, after over thirteen years of extensive research is that the day I find a confirmed scientific error in the Koran, I'll stop believing in it. Objectivity and concern for value-free truth demands that. I have yet to find one though, so I consider myself a Muslim at present. This attitude is encouraged by the Koran itself when it challenges people to find errors in it. In my daily life, whenever I read the Koran, I read it critically, trying to analyse it objectively; by doing so I'm following Koran 4:82:

"Do they not carefully consider the Koran. If it had been from anyone other than God, they would have found in it many contradictions."

If the Koran is indeed the word of the Creator, as it claims to be (Koran 4:166), then it must be error-free when it discusses details about proven facts of science, like description of stages in embryology. The Koran claims, to originate from the one who has "knowledge of everything" (Koran 20:98). Thus it implies complete inerrency.

The Koran encourages verifying its claims when it presents information. For example, the details about embryology in the Koran are presented in a fashion that would facilitate belief only after those verses have been checked by known findings. They are presented as a challenge: "If you are in doubt then (consider this).... (22:5 etc)"

The same is also witnessed throughout the Koran when the book makes statements like, "Do you not know.... (Or) Have you not seen and considered etc." Also consider all the falsification tests contained in the Koran, like the one which challenges people to produce a chapter comparable to the Book (Koran 2:23). All these legitimize and encourage a rational/scientific inquiry into the truthfulness of the Koran.

Maurice Bucaille, one of the first to popularize the linking of the Koran and Science, in his best selling books, The Bible, the Koran and Science, and What is the Origin of Man, concluded that given the history of the origin of the Koran, it could not have been the work of a man or group of men living in Arabia or anywhere else at that time, considering the nature of the scientific information in the Koran. Lecturing at the French Academy of Medicine, he concluded on the subject:

"It makes us deem it quite unthinkable for a man of Muhammed's time to have been the author of such statements on account of the state of knowledge in his day. Such considerations are what give the Koranic revelation its unique place and forces the impartial scientist to admit his inability to provide an explanation which calls solely on materialistic reasoning."(Bucaille 1985)

Keith Moore, head of the department of anatomy, at the University of Toronto, was shown verses of the Koran dealing with the microscopic stages of the human embryo. He was so surprised at what he found that he went back and revised the history of embryology in his standard texts on the subject. The books that Keith Moore authored are used at prestigious institutions like Yale and at universities all around the world. He stated, after being unable to provide an explanation on how microscopic details of the embryo could be accurately described in a book written before the discovery of the microscope:

"It is clear to me that these statements (in the Koran on embryology) must have come to Muhammad from God. This proves to me that Muhammed must have been the messenger of God or Allah." (Rehaili 1995)

Consider yourself an inhabitant of 7th Century Arabia. Society has very little scientific knowledge. Myth and magic control people's thoughts. How far would you go if you wanted to discover the true origin or the universe? How much progress would you make if you wanted to uncover the origin of life? We can move away from Arabia and scan the world scene at that period in history. Nothing in the literature of the world comes even remotely close to the scientific accuracy of statements about the natural world contained in the Koran. In fact some of the information that we come across in the Koran wasn't known till about 40 years back and some of it wasn't known until the day it was read in the Koran by scientists just a few years ago.

Since the Koran claims to originate with the one (God) who originated everything (Koran 55:2), and has knowledge of everything (Koran 20:98), we have every right to logically inquire if the originator of the earth and the heavens, in the knowledge that he gives us about them knows what we have discovered about their origin through modern science. The Koran can thus be scientifically tested in order to verify its claims.

The Koran exists in the world today. Therefore, if we do not accept the book's claim of being a revelation, then we must come up with an explanation as to its origin. The existence of the Koran cannot be denied. If we choose to deny it then we need to at least present a sound explanation to justify denial.

People who reject the Koran's claim throughout the ages have come up with explanations and theories as to the origin of the Koran. No matter what the details of the particular theory might be, they all reduce to basically two hypothesis:

i) Muhammad was a liar. He got his information from the outside and presented it to people as a revelation from God. The proponents of this hypothesis claim that the Koran was composed by Muhammad who "borrowed" information from other sources. Some even suggest that Muhammad was helped by a "group" of people to compose the Koran.

ii) The second hypothesis suggests that Muhammed was deceived or deluded in that he believed that he was a prophet when in fact he was not. To the people who offer this hypothesis, the Koran is the product of the "deluded" mind of Muhammed. Muhammad's hallucinations.

It may sound surprising but the book that is being attacked, the Koran, is also well aware of these two hypothesis that people have been presenting throughout the ages in trying to reject it:

Hypothesis 1 suggests that Muhammad was a liar. The Koran states:

"They (the rejecters) say: 'These are tales of the ancients, which he has caused to be written down so that they are dictated to him morning and evening (Koran 5:25)."

Hypothesis 2 suggests that Muhammed was self-deceived. The Koran states:

"The ones who reject almost trip you up by glaring at you when they hear The Reminder (Koran), and they say,' He is indeed deranged (Koran 68:51)."

Most people who present these hypotheses are forced to take them together in conjunction. Logically speaking however, both these hypothesis are mutually exclusive and cannot be taken together. They can stand on their own, if facts support them, but taken together they collapse. As an example: If a man is a liar (Hypothesis 1) then when someone asks the man a question, he has to search for the answer. He looks either within himself for the answer or asks his friends in secrecy so that he can give the inquirer a satisfactory response. He knows that he is not a prophet so he has to lie to convince the questioner. On the other hand, if the man is deluded (Hypothesis 2) then when someone asks the man a question, he does not search for the answer, if he doesn't know it. He is deluded, self-deceived, he believes he is a prophet and the answer will be given to him by revelation.

To repeat the above, if the man is a liar, he knows he is not a prophet and investigation can provide evidence as to where the material came from, but if he is deluded, even though the material presented is his own hallucinations, still he cannot be termed a liar for he believes he is a prophet. If a man is a liar then he is not self-deceived, if he is self- deceived then he is not a liar. Therefore Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 cannot be mixed up in explaining the Koran. However, what we see is that people need both excuses to explain certain things in the Koran. They often start by presenting Hypothesis 1 (Muhammed was a liar) and end up with Hypothesis 2 (Muhammed was self-deceived), i.e. Muhammed was a liar and self-deceived. This cannot be, logically speaking as we have seen above.

It may again surprise you but the Koran is also aware of this illogical stand that people take by terming Muhammad both a liar and self deluded. The Koran states:

" And they have turned away and said, 'One taught (by others), and a madman (44:14)." ).

The Koran can be Hypothesis (1) i.e. the product of a liar, or Hypothesis (2) i.e. the product of a deceived mind, or it can be what it claims to be, i.e. God's revelation; but it can never be both Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 at the same time.

Hypothesis 1 and its implications: If the Koran is the product of a man's mind who is a "liar", who got his information from the outside and then presented it to the world as a revelation then:

1. We have to explain the confidence portrayed by the various statements in the Koran. A confidence that shows that whosoever is presenting this is convinced that he indeed has the truth. As examples: a) The Koran challenges people to find a mistake in the book by its claim that if God was not the author many mistakes would be found in it (Koran4:82) Now only a person who is convinced about what he has can make such a claim. Do you know of any book that makes a claim that it doesn't contain any errors and that if it had a human origin it would contain many. The Bible never makes such a claim.

b) Another example would be the invitation given to Christians who dispute with Muslims about the nature of Jesus as presented in the Koran. The verse says:

"Come let us call our sons and your sons...our families and your families and let us ask God to curse the ones who are lying (about the true information on Jesus) (Koran 3:61)."

This shows that whoever is presenting this is confident and sure that he has the truth on which the challenge is based.

c) Another example of this confidence that a liar is incapable of portraying, is the account of when the Meccans who wanted to kill Muhammad came unto the mouth of the cave in which he and his friend Abu-Bakr were hiding. Abu-Bakr was afraid, Muhammed told him to "relax", "God will save us," he told him. Now if the man is a liar, one who lies to convince people that he is a prophet, you might expect him to say, "Go and look for a back way out," or "lie low and be quiet." But what he actually said shows that he had no doubt that he was a prophet and that God would save them.Hypothesis 1 cannot explain these in the Koran.

2. If the Koran is a lie, the product of a man's lying mind, how do you account for the following: The Koran claims that it contains information that was "new" to the people it was being read to. Now the Meccans hated Muhammad, if this statement in the Koran was not true and the information was not "new" they would have loved to point out the source. Yet they never answered this challenge to produce similar "knowledge" as the Koran (chapter 46: verse 4)

As proof of the above, I'll give two examples:

1. The Koran mentions the wall of "Zulqarnain," the two-horned one. It gives a complete description of this wall and how it was built to protect a people from outside invaders (Koran 18:96-98). The Arabs had never heard of it, or what it looked like, neither had the Arab Jews or the Arab Christians. Now, after the death of the prophet, they were curious about this wall mentioned in the Koran. Omar the Khalif sent out travelers to verify the existence of this wall. It is in Durbent in the former Soviet Union. It is referred to as Alexander's wall however modern historians dispute on whether Alexander had anything to do with it.

Compare what the Koran said over fourteen centuries back, before any Arab had set foot on Derbent to what the Columbia Encyclopaedia says:

"Derbent was founded (A.D 438) by the Persians as a strategic fortress at the Iron Gates. There are remains of the Caucasian Wall (also called Alexander's Wall), built by the Persians in the 6th century. as a bulwark against northern invaders. (6th Edition, 2000)."

If Muhammed was a liar, who told him about this wall thousands of miles to the east, about which no one in his area knew anything?

2. The Koran mentions a city by the name of Iram where a prosperous people the AAD lived. It was a city of "tall pillars":

"Have you seen how your sustainer (God) dealt with the Aad people? Iram, of the lofty pillars (Koran 89:8-8)"

Until very recently no historic or non-historic record existed about Iram. However in 1973, the ancient city of Ebla was excavated in Syria. While going through the tablet library of Ebla archaeologists came across a list of cities that Ebla traded with and on that list was a city named Iram. When reporting it in the National Geographic of December 1978, the only reference to Iram they could cite other than the tablets was the Koran, chapter 89.

In 1992 using SIR-C imaging [Synthetic Aperture Radar] using the Space Shuttle, GPR [Ground Penetrating Radar] and GMT [Geophysical Diffraction Tomography], scientists discovered Iram [also called Ubar] in southern Oman, buried under 12 meters of sand. The city contained evidence of "tall pillars" exactly as mentioned in the Koran chapter 89. The Koran described this fact, over fourteen centuries back at a time when no one in the world could have had access to this city. Now, if Muhammad was a liar where did he get this information?

Hypothesis 2 and its implications:

Hypothesis 2 suggests that the Koran is the product of a man's deluded mind. If the Koran is a product of a man's hallucinations then what comes out as a result are things that are in his mind. What do you think went on in Muhammed's mind? He didn't have an easy life. He was an orphan to start with, then his grandfather who looked after him died, then his uncle who adopted him died as well. After that, his life companion, his wife of 24 years Khatija died. All his children except for one daughter died in his lifetime. Does the Koran reflect any of this? It doesn't even mention these things at all. Yet these were the things that surely bothered him and caused him pain through his whole life, but they never show up in a book, which is said to be the product of his deluded mind!

In fact, the information contained in the Koran is such that no man living anywhere in the 7th century could have known it. I'll give some examples, which should make the point clear:

1. THE ORIGIN OF LIFE

The Koran mentions that all life originated from water (Koran 21:30) and that man himself is "created" of water and so are all the animals on earth (Koran 25:54, and 24:45). Now these statements to an Arab would have sounded atrocious in that day and age. Even today such statements in the Koran might cause you to wonder if scientific facts about them are unknown. The fact that all life originated in water is well established by the scientific community today. They have evidence to support the fact that the first living beings were algae, and they existed in water. The fact that human beings and animals are created of water is also well established since cytoplasm the basic component of "life" in any animal cell is over 80% water.

2. MATURITY

The Koran mentions that a human being reaches full maturity at age forty (Koran 46:15). This is a very unusual statement. Even today most people accept that full maturity is reached at puberty and laws usually put it between 18 to 21. However, the Koran is scientifically correct where even modern laws are inaccurate. If we analyze the statement based on psychological tests conducted by scientisits, what we find is that the "overall quantity of stored knowledge in the mind of an individual reaches a peak at age thirty-nine and after that it gradually declines." Arthur C. Guyton, in his standard textbook on physiology, Physiology of the Human Body( 6th ed, pg.207), states this. Guyton's book is used as a standard text in at many pre-medical schools around the world.

3. THE FEMALE BEE

The Koran mentions the bee, which leaves its home in search for food, in the verses that discusses honey (Koran 16:68,69). It uses the female verb in describing the bee, in Arabic faslukee. This, to the Arab, suggests that the bee, which leaves its home in search for food, is female.

Does anyone except an expert know how to differentiate between a male and a female bee? Even today, let alone Muhammad's time, 1400 plus years back, we need a specialist to differentiate between a male and a female bee. The Koran is accurate when it mentions that the female bee leaves its home in search for food; the males never leave their homes for food, it is the females who have to feed them.

4. EMBRYO SEX DETERMINATION

The Koran says that the "ejaculated drop" determines the sex of a human baby (Koran 53:45). It is common knowledge that semen is the fluid that is ejaculated by males during sexual acts. Females do not possess such "ejaculated semen."

The sex of the baby, whether it be male or female, will indeed be determined by the 'ejaculated drop', i.e. the father's sperm, as mentioned by the Koran. It has been scientifically established only recently that the female ovum contains only X-chromosomes. If the ejaculated drop, the father's sperm bears the Y chromosome, the offspring will be male, and otherwise the offspring will be female. No one living at the time of Muhammed or even Darwin for that matter had any knowledge of such genetics foretold centuries earlier in the Koran.

5. THE INVISIBLE BARRIER

The Koran states that there are two seas that meet but don't intermingle because of a barrier between them (Koran 55:19-20).

It is a necessity that seas intermingle through straits between them. The Koran however is aware of a very unusual phenomenon, which scientists discovered only recently. The Mediterranean and Atlantic oceans differ in their chemical and biological constitution. The French scientist Jacques Yves Cousteau conducted various undersea investigations at the Strait of Gibraltar and explaining these phenomena concluded:

"Unexpected fresh water springs issue from the southern and northern coasts of Gibraltar. These mammoth springs gush towards each other at angles of 45 degrees forming a reciprocal dam. Due to this fact the Mediterranean and the Atlantic Oceans cannot intermingle (as quoted by Nurbaki)."

Did Muhammed do research on the chemical and biological components of seawater to discover this unusual phenomena?

6. THE GASEOUS ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE

The Koran mentions that the universe originated, at a stage, from a "gaseous material." (Koran 41:11). It uses the Arabic word Dukhan, which stands for smoke. A perfect analogy for gas and particles in suspension and the gasses being hot.

Scientists have only very recently confirmed that the universe did indeed originate from a gaseous mass composed of hydrogen and helium, a big mass of hot gasses, a mass over 300,000 times that of the earth. That mass then fragmented to form galaxies. Muhammad, who had no schooling of any kind and was illiterate before the revelation of the Koran, could not have possibly known this.

7. THE BIG BANG

The Koran gives an accurate visual description of the Big Bang theory of the creation of the universe. In the 21st chapter, verse 30 (21:30), the Koran states:

"Do not the rejecters see that the heavens and earth were a unit joined together then we split them apart (21:30)."

This is exactly how the 'rejecter' scientists envision the creation of the universe, from one singularity, which then exploded, termed the 'big bang'. Thus the Koran told us about the "common origin" of everything in the universe much before scientists described it in the 20th century. How do we explain this information in the Koran if it is not what it claims to be, the words of an all-knowing ?

Professor Alfred Kroner, chairman of the Department of Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenburg University, Mainz, Germany stated about this verse in the Koran:

"Somebody who did not know something about nuclear physics 1400 years ago could not, I think, be in a position to find out from his own mind for instance that the earth and the heavens had the same origin, or many others of the questions that we have discussed here.(Rehaili 1995)"

8. THE EXPANDING UNIVERSE

The Koran talks about a universe that is continually "expanding" (Koran 51:47).

The concept of an expanding universe is very popular with scientists today, however no one knew of it until recently. Do you know that the universe is expanding? Can you feel or see it expanding? No, the verification of this requires specialized knowledge and instruments, which no one at the time of Muhammad had access to. The Koran states:

"And the sky we built it with might and We cause the 'expansion' of it (Koran 51:47)."

9. THE DEATH OF STARS

The Koran mentions the 'death of stars' (Koran 77:7-8). Astronomers including Dr. Patterson of Southwest Missouri State are surprised at finding this information in the Koran. They know that at the time of Muhammad, people believed that once a thing was formed, it was permanent. The Koran is very accurate when it mentions dying stars. Our own sun is a dying star.

10. PHASES OF THE MOON

The Koran talks about the phases of the moon (Koran 36:38-39). There is no book, to my knowledge, that predates the Koran that mentions the modern term "phase" in connection with the moon. Dr. Patterson confirms this. The Arabic word used for "phase" in the Koran is Manazil.

11. MOVEMENT OF THE SUN

. The sun's movement is not something that is evident to our eyes or experience but requires specialized equipment. The Koran states in chapter 36, verse 39:

"And the sun constantly journeys towards a homing place for it and for the moon, We have determined phases (36:39)."

Modern science has found out that the sun rotates around its axis every 26 days . The Koran mentions the movement of the sun, with its own motion, signified by the verb Yasbahoon in Arabic. Thus according to the Koran the sun is not just flying through space but moving on its own, i.e. rotating. The sun is also continually on a journey in space towards its homing place, the solar apex, just like mentioned in the Koran (36:39). How could Muhammed have known these facts if the Koran is the product of his mind?

12. ISOSTACY AND MOUNTAIN ROOTS

The Koran states that mountains are like "tent-pegs", i.e. they have a root extending down into the earth like "anchors" and this gives stability and balance to the earth.

"Have we not expanded the earth and made the mountains as tent pegs" (Koran 78:6-7)
" We have cast into the earth anchors lest it shake with you" (Koran 31:10 etc.)

This fact was discovered less than 150 years ago by scientists and now accepted as a fundamental law in geology, the concept of isostacy. M. J Selby in a standard-text on the subject entitled "Earth's Changing Surface (Clarendon Press, Oxford 1985) states:

"G.B Airy in 1855 suggested that the crust of the earth could be likened to rafts of timber floating on water. Thick pieces of timber float higher above the water surface than thin pieces and similarly thick sections of the earth's crust will float on a liquid or plastic substratum of greater density. Airy was suggesting that mountains have a deep root of lower density rock, which the plains lack. Four years after Airy published his work, J.H Pratt offered an alternative hypothesis...By this hypothesis, rock columns below mountains must have a lower density, because of their greater length, than shorter rock columns beneath plains. Both Airy and Pratt's hypothesis imply that surface irregularities are balanced by differences in density of rocks below the major features (mountains and plains) of the crust. This state of BALANCE is described as the concept of ISOSTACY (Selby1985:32) ."

13. HUMAN EMBRYOLOGY

The Koran is known to be the first book to give microscopic details of human embryology(Koran 23:13-14 etc.), hundreds of years before the discovery of the microscope! The Koran contains information on embryology, which was not discovered till about 30 years back and certain details were new even to modern scientists but were immediately confirmed as being accurate.

The Koran mentions that at a certain stage, the developing human is like "allaqa", a leech-like clot. If you take a microscopic picture of a human embryo of days 7-12 and place it next to a picture of a leech, they both look identical. Not only do they look the same but they function in the same way too. Just like a leech derives nourishment from its host's blood, the embryo derives nourishment from the decidua or the pregnant endometrium. These facts about the Koran are well documented and listed by Keith L. Moore in his standard textbooks on embryology, books used in such prestigious institutions as the Yale Medical School.

14.RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD

"Nay! I swear by the day of resurrection.
Nay! I swear by the reproachful self (Super Ego?).
Does man think that We shall not gather his bones?
Yea! We are able to make complete his very fingertips….
…..What, does humankind think that they will be left to roam at will?
Was he not a drop ejaculated?
Then he was a leech-like structure.
And He (God) created and formed.
And made of him a pair, the male and the female
. What, is He (God) then not able to quicken the dead?"
Koran 75:1-40

The above verse of the Koran questions those who reject the notion of the resurrection of the dead. What is the more difficult task: That you were created from an insignificant drop, which was so small that it couldn't be seen except through a microscope, or that one day you will be formed from your remnants?

Russian scientists recently discussed reproducing an extinct species of elephant by use of a microscopic unit of long-dead gene material. No one in the scientific community said that that was unreasonable. The point is that the resurrection of the dead might be an unusual think but it certainly is not unreasonable. The use of cloning techniques throws further light on the amazing nature of the Koranic verse which compares the resurrection of the dead with human development from an insignificant zygote to the fetus. Cloning provides theoretic and empirical evidence for the resurrection of the dead.

15. CIRCULATION OF BLOOD AND FOOD

"And surely in the cattle, there is a lesson for you. We give you to drink of what is inside their bodies, from between digested food and blood, pure milk, pleasant to those who drink it (Koran 16:6)."

The above verse of the Koran calls our attention to the food distribution function of blood. It should be kept in mind however that a Muslim scientist formally discovered the circulation of blood 600 years after Muhammed's death and it was made known to the west by William Harvey, 1000 years after Muhammed had died. If Muhammed was the author of the Koran how would he have known, at the time that he lived that digested food is transported via blood and then becomes the constituent of milk secreted by the mammary glands?

16.THE "CONSTANTS" AND THE INITIAL CONDITIONS

"Do they [the disbelievers] not see that God has subjected for them whatsoever is in the heavens and on earth (Koran 31:20)? " Indeed We have created everything with a set measure (Koran 54:49)

Compare these statements in the Koran to what the physicist Paul Davies writes in his book, The Accidental Universe (1982):

"The numerical values that nature has assigned to the fundamental constants, such as the charge on the electron, the mass of the proton, and the Newtonian Gravitational constant, may be mysterious, but they are critically relevant to the structure of the universe that we perceive. As more and more physical systems from nuclei to galaxies have become better understood, scientists have begun to realize that many characteristics of these systems are remarkably sensitive to the precise value of the fundamental constants. Had nature opted for a slightly different set of numbers, the world would have been a very different place and we would not be here to see it." (Davies 1982)

At around 300,000 years after the big bang, all parts of the universe, even separated by more than 20 times the horizon distance, and expanding in opposite directions, in causally disconnected regions (i.e.. no cause or physical effect could pass from one region to the other), began to expand with the same expansion rate and temperature.

No natural explanation exists to explain how a chaotic explosion, the big bang resulted in a uniform expansion pattern among causally disconnected regions, expanding in opposite directions. Calculations indicate that when the universe was less than a trillionth of a second old, it consisted of 10 to the power 80 causally disconnected regions, and no physical effect could have traveled from one region to another and yet 300,000 years after, cosmic background radiation proves that they all started expanding with the same expansion rate and the same temperature. It was as if they acted upon uniformly communicated intelligent direction. Consider what the Koran says:

"... And He (God) inspired in all the heavens their affair (Koran 41:12)."

The "Flatness" or "smoothness" of the universe is established by modern science and leads scientists to wonder as to how a uniform distribution of matter resulted from the big bang. The Koran is aware of this and presents the "smoothness" of the universe as a challenge to unbelievers:

"[It is God] who has created the multiple skies, one separate from the other (as layers). You cannot see any flaw in the Merciful (God's) creation. Look again, can you make out any rifts?"(Koran 67:3)

If we deny the Koran's claim of being God's revelation, we have to account for the above information, and how it made its way into the Koran, always without error, and always accurate. Justice and truth demand that or we are fooling ourselves alone.

(B)FALSIFICATION TESTS

The Koran offers what is not offered by religions, generally speaking. It offers what the scientific community demands before they even listen to any new theory, falsification tests. The Koran presents itself with tests to disprove it, if it is false.

¨ The Koran in 4:82 challenges people to find a mistake or contradiction in the book and hence disqualify it, if it is indeed a lie.

¨ The Koran talks about people and how they will behave. If they were to act contrary to how the Koran pre-told their behavior, it would be disqualified.

Muhammad had an uncle by the name of Abu-Lahab. This man hated Muhammad and was always strong in opposing him. Many years before the man died, the small chapter in the Koran documented his behavior, saying that he will be condemned and will never change< color="blue"> (Koran 111:1-5). All he had to do to prove the Koran wrong was say: "I am a Muslim, I change my behavior, your book is wrong." Yet he never did do it, never thought of it even though he would have loved to.

¨ The Koran claims that in a pluralistic society, the Christians would always treat the Muslims better than the Jews and Idolaters (Koran 5:85,86).

Scan the world scene where Jews, Christians and Muslims live together. Are the Jews closer to the Muslims or the Christians? The only thing the Jews have to do to disprove the Koran is to band together and treat the Muslims better than the Christians do for a little while and the Koran is disproved. However this has not happened yet.

¨ The Koran says that if it is not what it claims to be then people should produce a document comparable to it (Koran 2:23 etc).

Comparison criteria would be what I have discussed earlier: i) It should contain information, which no one knows today, but will be found out tomorrow as scientifically accurate. ii) It should contain falsification tests as the Koran. iii) It should stand the test of "forgery" and "hallucination" as the Koran does. iv) It should give "sound" scientifically testable social advice as the Koran. v) Equal the Koran on literary merits. vi) Should have God speaking in the first person as the Koran does and then pass the test of inerrancy.

In the face of all the facts that the Koran provides, it is evident that it challenges human intellect and explanation and presents itself as a challenge to traditional religion and skeptical scientists. In the light of this, let us consider this claim that it makes:

If all of humankind and the other intelligent life were to band together to produce the like of this Koran, they would not be able to, even if they backed up each other with help and support (Koran 17:89).

REFERENCES

1. Miller, Gary. The Amazing Quran. (Video Recording, transcribed, Sept 1990, Asadi, Muhammed. Lahore, Pakistan).

2. Asadi, Muhammed A. 1992. Koran: A Scientific Analysis. Lahore. Pakistan.

3. Asadi, Muhammed A. 1995. The Message of Qur'an and Islam. Lahore, Pakistan: Ferozsons' Ltd.

4. Asadi, Muhammed A. 2000. The Unifying Theory of Everything: Koran & Nature's Testimony.Writer's Club Press. New York.

5. Koran. Translated from the Arabic.

6. Maurice. What is the Origin of Man? 1987. Seghers, Paris.

7. Bucaille, Maurice. The Bible, the Qur'an and Science. 1985. Seghers. Paris.

8. Rehaili. Abdullah. M. This is the Truth. 1995. Riyadh. Saudi Arabia.

SIR, YOU SAID IT! by Shabbir Ahmed M.D.

2006-11-20T11:27:00.000-08:00

SIR, YOU SAID IT!
by Shabbir Ahmed M.D.

INTRODUCTION
With the Name of God the Instant and Sustaining Source of all Mercy and Kindness.
Billions of people in the last millennium have loved, revered and honored Islam. Conversely, billions have hated, criticized and defamed it. As a matter of fact, the situation applies equally to any other major religion.
Although Islam in its original form is not a religion, the Muslim clergy have indeed reduced it to a set of dogmas, rituals, superstitions, myths, legends, and means of attaining ‘salvation’, the essential hallmarks of a “religion”.
Through the centuries, we come across brilliant minds that have been able to see the diamond in the rough. They have scratched the surface and let the reality shine forth in all splendor. Then they have immediately realized that Islam is not a religion per se although it has been made to appear so. In fact, Islam being the most pragmatic System of Life is a massive challenge to religion.

ABOUT THE TITLE: Let not the title of this booklet be misunderstood as primarily addressing men. It has been chosen for simplicity and for the fact that an overwhelming majority of the quotes given in this booklet have come from men.
A reader may wonder, “Well, I never said it, so why this title?” With the possibility of rare disagreement, the answer is quite simple. The renowned intellectuals, writers, thinkers, theologians, poets, artists and intelligentsia become the voice of a society. Their very popularity hinges upon, and attests to, their ability to echo the silent voice of the masses. How many lines from Aristotle, Plato, William Shakespeare, Benjamin Franklin and Abraham Lincoln have blended with the intellectual and social fabric of civilizations!
The question may be raised that other greats have said things contrary to what the author has compiled in this booklet. Quite a valid objection, isn’t it? But every writer must do his best to drive home the point he or she is trying to make. Being consciously aware of this fact, and for the sake of intellectual honesty, I have selected quotes from the best of the best and overwhelmingly non-controversial figures.
It is quite natural for the casual observer to judge an ideology by the results it achieves. To paraphrase from the Bible, a tree is known by its fruit.
Mathew 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

To paraphrase from the Qur’an, a good land brings forth decent vegetation.
The Qur’an 7:58 A good soil brings forth decent produce by the leave of its Lord, while the bad one yields that which is of poor quality ——.
This point has been extensively elaborated in my new book, Islam: The True History And False Beliefs. The parables of the tree and soil apply well to the spoiled fruit of today’s counterfeit Islam.
Now let us see what greatness the true Qur’an-based Islam has achieved in the past and how wonderful are its prospects to regain its lost glory.
The central themes of the pristine Islam are service of humanity and benefiting God’s creation. As soon as the dust of myth is wiped off, Islam will once again become the Beacon of Light for all humanity. And surely it will be the front-line force in making this planet a better place to live.
Let me stop here and let us all listen to the great non-Muslim minds, predominantly Western. These greats might very well be echoing the inherent voice of truth within our inner selves.
SOME OUTSTANDING INTELLECTUALS
EXTOLLING ISLAM
• Thomas Carlyle, Heroes and Hero Worship and the Heroic in History
• A. S. Tritton, Islam
• De Lacy O’Leary, Islam at the Crossroads
• Edward Gibbon, History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
• Stanley Lane-Poole, Speeches and Table Talk of the Prophet Muhammad
• Annie Besant, The Life and Teachings of Mohammad
• W. C. Taylor, The History of Muhammadanism and its Sects
• Reverend Bosworth Smith, Muhammad and Muhammadanism
• Simon Ockley, History of the Saracen Empire
• Edward Montet, La Propagande Chretienne et ses Adversaries Musulmans, 1890.
• Dr. Gustav Weil, History of the Islamic Peoples
• Alphonse de LaMartaine, Historie de la Turquie, 1854.
• “Mahatma” Gandhi, Statement published in Young India, 1924.
• Sir George Bernard Shaw, The Genuine Islam, 1936.
• Michael Hart, The 100, A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons In History
• Dr. William Draper, History of Intellectual Development of Europe
• J. W. H. Stab, Islam and its Founder
• Washington Irving, Life of Muhammad
• Arthur Glyn Leonard, Islam, Her Moral and Spiritual Values
• Charles Stuart Mills, History of Mohammadanism
• Philip K. Hitti, History of the Arabs
• Stanley Lane-Poole, Studies in a Mosque
• J. M. Rodwell, Preface to his translation of the Holy Qur’an
• W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Mecca
• D. G. Hogarth, Arabia
• Washington Irving, Mahomet and His Successors
• James Michener, Islam: The Misunderstood Religion
• Lawrence E. Browne, The Prospects of Islam
• K. S. Ramakrishna Rao, Mohammed: The Prophet of Islam
• Jules Masserman, Who Were History’s Great Leaders? TIME Magazine July 15, 1974

In the quotations given below, the Western writers have sometimes used the term Muhammadanism for Islam. They were perhaps unaware that, for a Muslim, Muhammadanism conveys the erroneous impression that Islam was founded by Prophet Muhammad, or that the Muslims might be worshiping him.
Muslims accept no deity other than the God of Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Prophet Muhammad obeyed and propagated the Message of the One and Only God (in Arabic, Allah), the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe. Hence, his Mission was essentially the same as that of the earlier Prophets of God. He was the last Prophet Messenger and sent for the entire humanity for all times to come.
Let us begin with the greatest social philosopher of Victorian England, Thomas Carlyle.
Thomas Carlyle - Heroes, Hero Worship, and the Heroic in History London 1841:
…. As there is no danger of our becoming, any of us, Mahometans, I mean to say all the good of him I justly can....
When Pococke inquired of Grotius, where the proof was of that story of the pigeon, trained to pick peas from Mahomet’s ear, and pass for an angel dictating to him? Grotius answered that there was no proof! ....
A greater number of God’s creatures believe in Mahomet’s word at this hour than in any other word whatever. Are we to suppose that it was a miserable piece of spiritual legerdemain [trick], this which so many creatures of the almighty have lived by and died by? ....
A poor, hard-toiling, ill-provided man; careless of what vulgar men toil for. Not a bad man, I should say; Something better in him than hunger of any sort, — or these wild Arab men, fighting and jostling three-and-twenty years at his hand, in close contact with him always, would not revere him so! They were wild men bursting ever and anon into quarrel, into all kinds of fierce sincerity; without right worth and manhood, no man could have commanded them. They called him prophet you say? Why he stood there face to face with them; bare, not enshrined in any mystery; visibly clouting his own cloak, cobbling his own shoes; fighting,
counseling, ordering in the midst of them: they must have seen what kind of man he was, let him be called what you like! No emperor with his tiaras was obeyed as this man in a cloak of his own clouting. During three-and-twenty years of rough actual trial, I find something of a veritable Hero necessary for that, of itself...
These Arabs, the man Mahomet, and that one century, - is it not as if a spark had fallen, one spark, on a world of what proves explosive powder, blazes heaven-high from Delhi to Granada! I said the Great man was always as lightning out of Heaven; the rest of men waited for him like fuel, and then they too would flame...
The lies [Western slander] which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man [Muhammad] are disgraceful to ourselves only. He was a great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world; the world’s Maker had ordered so …. A man of truth and fidelity, true in what he did, in what he spake and thought—this is the only sort of speech worth speaking.
A. S. Tritton - Islam 1951:
The picture of the Muslim soldier advancing with a sword in one hand and the Qur’an in the other is quite false.

De Lacy O’Leary - Islam at the Crossroads London 1923:
History makes it clear, however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.
Edward Gibbon - History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire London 1788:
The good sense of Muhammad despised the pomp of royalty. The Apostle of God submitted to the menial offices of the family; he kindled the fire; swept the floor; milked the ewes; and mended with his own hands his shoes and garments. Disdaining the penance and merit of a hermit, he observed without effort of vanity the abstemious diet of an Arab …. The creed of Mohammad is free from ambiguity and the Qur’an is a glorious testimony to the unity of God …. The greatest crime, the greatest “sin” of Mohammad in the eyes of the Christian West is that he did not allow himself to be slaughtered, to be “crucified” by his enemies. He only defended himself, his family and his followers; and finally vanquished his enemies. Mohammad’s success is the Christians’ gall of disappointment …. He did not believe in any vicarious sacrifices for the sins of others.
George Rivorie - Visages de L’ Islam:
He laid the foundation of a universal government. His law was one for all. Equal justice and love for everyone.
Stanley Lane-Poole - Speeches and Table Talk of the
Prophet Muhammad:
He was the most faithful protector of those he protected, the sweetest and most agreeable in conversation. Those who saw him were suddenly filled with reverence; those who came near him loved him; they who described him would say, “I have never seen his like either before or after.” He was of great taciturnity, but when he spoke it was with emphasis and deliberation, and no one could forget what he said....
Sir William Muir - Life of Mohammad, India 1860:
Mohammad brought an end to idol worship. He preached monotheism and infinite Mercy of God, human brotherhood, care of the orphan, emancipation of slaves, forbidding of wine—No religion achieved as much success as Islam did.
Simon Ockley - History of the Saracen Empire 1823:
A rugged, strife-torn and mountaineering people...were suddenly turned into an indomitable Arab force, which achieved a series of splendid victories unparalleled in the history of nations, for in the short space of ninety years that mighty range of Saracenic [Nomad Arabs] conquest embraced a wider extent of territory than Rome had mastered in the course of eight hundred.
The greatest success of Mohammad’s life was affected by sheer moral force. It is not the propagation but the permanency of his religion that deserves our wonder, the same pure and perfect impression which he engraved at Mecca and Medina is preserved after the revolutions of twelve centuries by the Indian, the African and the Turkish proselytes of the Koran.... The Mahometans have uniformly withstood the temptation of reducing the object of their faith and devotion to a level with the senses and imagination of man. ‘I believe in One God and Mahomet the Apostle of God’ is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honors of the prophet have never transgressed the measure of human virtue, and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion.

M. H. Hyndman - The Awakening of Asia:
Mohammad never assigned himself a status more than a common man and a messenger of God. People had faith in him when he was surrounded by poverty and adversity and trusted him while he was the ruler of a great Empire …. A man of spotless character who always had confidence in himself and in God’s help …. No aspect of his life remained hidden nor was his death a mysterious event.
Annie Besant - The Life and Teachings of Mohammad, Madras, 1932:
It is impossible for anyone who studies the life and character of the great Prophet of Arabia, who knew how he taught and how he lived, to feel anything but reverence for that mighty Prophet, one of the great messengers of the Supreme. And although in what I put to you I shall say many things which may be familiar to many, yet I myself feel, whenever I reread them, a new way of admiration, a new sense of reverence for that mighty Arabian teacher.
Pringle Kennedy - Arabian Society at the Time of Mohammad:
The height of human achievement and glory was Mohammad.
W. C. Taylor - The History of Muhammadanism and its Sects:
So great was his liberality to the poor that he often left his household unprovided, nor did he content himself with relieving their wants, he entered into conversation with them, and expressed a warm sympathy for their sufferings. He was a firm friend and a faithful ally.
Reverend Bosworth Smith - Muhammad and Muhammadanism, London, 1874:
Head of the State as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but he was Pope without the Pope’s pretensions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a police force, without a fixed revenue. If ever a man ruled by a right divine, it was Muhammad, for he had all the powers without their supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life.
In Mohammadanism every thing is different here. Instead of the shadowy and the mysterious, we have history.... We know of the external history of Muhammad.... While for his internal history after his mission had been proclaimed, we have a book absolutely unique in its origin, in its preservation, on the Substantial authority of which no one has ever been able to cast a serious doubt.... Absolutely unique in history, Muhammad is a three-fold founder of a nation, of an empire and of a religion. The unlettered one bestowed upon the world the Book which is a miracle, the eternal miracle and the true miracle.

Rev E. Stephenson - My Reflections:
The message of Mohammad, Islam, is nothing but a blessing for mankind—The usher from darkness to light and from Satan to God.
Edward Montet - La Propagande Chretienne et ses Adversaries Musulmans, Paris 1890: [Also in T.W. Arnold in ‘The Preaching of Islam,’ London 1913]
Islam is a religion that is essentially rationalistic in the widest sense of this term considered etymologically and historically.... The teachings of the Prophet, the Quran has invariably kept its place as the fundamental starting point, and the dogma of unity of God has always been proclaimed therein with a grandeur a majesty, an invariable purity and with a note of sure conviction, which it is hard to find surpassed outside the pale of Islam.... A creed so precise, so stripped of all theological complexities and consequently so accessible to the ordinary understanding might be expected to possess and does indeed possess a marvelous power of winning its way into the consciences of men.
Mohammad never assigned himself a status more than a common man and a messenger of God. People had faith in him when he was surrounded by poverty and adversity and trusted him while he was the ruler of a great Empire…. A man of spotless character who always had confidence in himself and in God’s help …. No aspect of his life remained hidden nor was his death a mysterious event. (M. H. Hyndman, The Awakening of Asia).

Dr. Gustav Weil - History of the Islamic Peoples:
Muhammad was a shining example to his people. His character was pure and stainless. His house, his dress, his food - they were characterized by a rare simplicity. So unpretentious was he that he would receive from his companions no special mark of reverence, nor would he accept any service from his servant which he could do for himself. He was accessible to all and at all times. He visited the sick and was full of sympathy for all. Unlimited was his benevolence and generosity as also was his anxious care for the welfare of the community.
Tor Andre - Muhammad, the Man and His Faith:
Islam is a forceful spiritual energy. Its true meaning will manifest itself when it will be implemented on large scale.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - Letter to Eckermann 1830, Sir Henry Elliott’s collection, 1865:
The teachings of Islam can fail under no circumstances. With all our systems of culture and civilization, we cannot go beyond Islam and, as a matter of fact, no human mind can go beyond the Koran.

Alphonse de LaMartaine - Historie de la Turquie, Paris, 1854:
Never has a man set for himself, voluntarily or involuntarily, a more sublime aim, since this aim was superhuman; to subvert superstitions which had been imposed between man and his Creator, to render God unto man and man unto God; to restore the rational and sacred idea of divinity amidst the chaos of the material and disfigured gods of idolatry, then existing. Never has a man undertaken a work so far beyond human power with so feeble means, for he [Muhammad] had in the conception as well as in the execution of such a great design, no other instrument than himself and no other aid except a handful of men living in a corner of the desert. Finally, never has a man accomplished such a huge and lasting revolution in the world….
If greatness of purpose, smallness of means, and astonishing results are the three criteria of a human genius, who could dare compare any great man in history with Muhammad? The most famous men created arms, laws, and empires only. They founded, if anything at all, no more than material powers which often crumbled away before their eyes. This man moved not only armies, legislations, empires, peoples, dynasties, but millions of men in one-third of the then inhabited world; and more than that, he moved the altars, the gods, the religions, the ideas, the beliefs and the souls.
On the basis of a Book, every letter of which has become law, he created a spiritual nationality which blends together peoples of every tongue and race. He
has left the indelible characteristic of this Muslim nationality the hatred of false gods and the passion for the One and Immaterial God. This avenging patriotism against the profanation of Heaven formed the virtue of the followers of Muhammad; the conquest of one-third of the earth to the dogma was his miracle; or rather it was not the miracle of man but that of reason.
The idea of the unity of God, proclaimed amidst the exhaustion of the fabulous theogonies [accounts of the origin and descent of the gods], was in itself such a miracle that upon its utterance from his lips it destroyed all the ancient temples of idols and set on fire one-third of the world. His life, his meditations, his heroic revelings [rebellion] against the superstitions of his country, and his boldness in defying the furies of idolatry, his firmness in enduring them for fifteen years in Mecca, his acceptance of the role of public scorn and almost of being a victim of his fellow countrymen: all these and finally, his flight, his incessant preaching, his wars against odds, his faith in his success and his superhuman security in misfortune, his forbearance in victory, his ambition, which was entirely devoted to one idea and in no manner striving for an empire; his endless prayers, his mystic conversations with God, his death and his triumph after death; all these attest not to an imposture but to a firm conviction which gave him the power to restore a dogma. This dogma was twofold the unity of God and the immateriality of God: the former telling what God is, the latter telling what God is not; the one overthrowing false gods with the sword, the other starting an idea with words.
Philosopher, Orator, Apostle, Legislator, Conqueror of Ideas, Restorer of Rational beliefs.... The founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire-that is Muhammad. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he?

J. H. Denison - Emotions as the Basis of Civilization:
Muhammad saved the human civilization from extinction. Ponder! Which person is it who taught mankind the way to establish the greatest society; the society in which blessings descend upon every individual.
Mahatma Gandhi - Young India, 1924:
The more I study, the more I discover that the strength of Islam does not lie in the sword. The more I desired to know the best of the life of one who holds today an undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind.... I became more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the second volume of the Prophet’s biography, I was sorry there was not more for me to read more of that great life.
The verified sayings of Muhammad are a treasure of wisdom not only for Muslims but for all mankind - (M. K. Gandhi’s Preface to “The Sayings of Muhammad” by Sohrawardi).
Sir George Bernard Shaw - The Genuine Islam, Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936:
If any religion had the chance of ruling over England, nay Europe within the next hundred years, it could be Islam.
…. I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Savior of Humanity.
…. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today.
Dr. Mawde Royden - The Problem of Palestine:
Mohammad introduced the concept of such Glorious and Omnipotent God in Whose eyes all worldly systems were pieces of straw. Islamic equality of mankind is no fiction as it is in Christianity. No human mind has ever thought of such total freedom as established by Mohammad.

F. J. C Hearushaw - The Science of History:
The Christian World came to wage crusades against Muslims but eventually knelt before them to gain knowledge. They were spellbound to see that Muslims were owners of a culture that was far superior to their own. The Dark Ages of Europe were illuminated by nothing but the beacon of Muslim civilization.
Michael Hart - The 100 A Ranking Of The Most Influential Persons In History, New York, 1978:
My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the secular and religious level.... It is probable that the relative influence of Muhammad on Islam has been larger than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity.... It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history.
Dr. William Draper - History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, London 1875:
Four years after the death of Justinian, A.D. 569, was born in Mecca, in Arabia, the man who, of all men, has exercised the greatest influence upon the human race.... To be the religious head of many empires, to guide the daily life of one-third of the human race, may justify the title of a Messenger of God…. The towering personality of Muhammad has left bright and indelible imprints on all mankind…. The man who of all men exercised the greatest influence upon the human race…. During the period of the Caliphs the learned men of the Christians and the Jews were not only held in great esteem but were appointed to posts of great responsibility, and were promoted to the high ranking job in the
government.... He (Caliph Haroon Rasheed) never considered to which country a learned person belonged nor his faith and belief, but only his excellence in the field of learning.
H. N. Spalding - Civilization in the East and West:
Mohammad was the greatest Executive Officer for implementation of the Divine Will. Like other prophets he knew that time will come when all mankind will become one community …. In Islam the believer is a worshiper and a soldier ever ready to go to the battlefield but only for that battle which is waged to eradicate the evil.

Robert Briffault - The Making of Humanity:
The Renaissance of Europe did not take place in the 15th century. Rather it began when Europe learned from the culture of the Arabs. The cradle of European awakening is NOT Italy. It is the Muslim Spain.
J. W. H. Stab - Islam and its Founder:
Judged by the smallness of the means at his disposal, and the extent and permanence of the work that he accomplished, his name in world’s history shines with a more specious luster than that of the Prophet of Mecca. To the impulse which he gave numberless dynasties have owed their existence, fair cities and stately palaces and temples have arisen, and wide provinces became obedient to the Faith. And beyond all this, his words have governed the belief of generations, been accepted as their rule of life, and their certain guide to the world to come. At a thousand shrines the voices of the faithful invoke blessings on him, whom they esteem the very Prophet of God, the seal of the Apostles.... Judged by the standards to human renown, the glory of what mortal can compare with his?
Arthur Glyn Leonard - Islam, Her Moral and Spiritual Values:
It was the genius of Muhammad, the spirit that he breathed into the Arabs through the soul of Islam that exalted them. That raised them out of the lethargy and low level of tribal stagnation up to the high watermark of national unity and empire. It was in the sublimity of Muhammad’s deism, the simplicity, the sobriety and purity it inculcated the fidelity of its founder to his own tenets that acted on their moral and intellectual fiber with all the magnetism of true inspiration.
Charles Stuart Mills - History of Mohammadanism:
Deeply read in the volume of nature, though extremely ignorant of letters, his mind could expand into controversy with the wisest of his enemies or contract itself to the apprehension of meanest of his disciples. His simple eloquence was rendered impressive by a manner of mixed dignity and elegance, by the expression of a countenance where the awfulness of his majesty was so well tempered by an amiable sweetness, that it exerted emotions of veneration and love. He was gifted with that authoritative air of genius which alike influences the learned and commands the illiterate.

Philip K. Hitti - History of the Arabs:
Within a brief span of mortal life, Muhammad called forth of unpromising material, a nation, never welded before; in a country that was hitherto but a geographical expression he established a religion which in vast areas suppressed Christianity and Judaism, and laid the basis of an empire that was soon to embrace within its far flung boundaries the fairest provinces of the then civilized world …. Kingdom of God on Earth: God’s messenger serving as the greatest proponent of human brotherhood, His viceroy on earth in the form of Muhammad.
Islam does not set impossible goals. There are no mythological intricacies in this message. No hidden meanings or secrets and absolutely no priesthood.
Encyclopedia Britannica, 4th & 11th editions:
Muhammad was the most successful of all religious personalities.
Stanley Lane-Poole - Studies in a Mosque:
He was one of those happy few who have attained the supreme joy of making one great truth their very life spring. He was the messenger of One God, and never to his life’s end did he forget who he was or the message which was the marrow of his being. He brought his tidings to his people with a grand dignity sprung from the consciousness of his high office, together with a most sweet humility…. Mohammad was an enthusiast in the noblest sense.
Rev. J. M. Rodwell - The Preface to Translation of the Holy Quran:
Mohammad’s career is a wonderful instance of the force and life that resides in him who possesses an intense faith in God and in the unseen world. He will always be regarded as one of those who have had that influence over the faith, morals and whole earthly life of their fellow men, which none but a really great man ever did, or can exercise; and whose efforts to propagate a great verity will prosper.

W. Montgomery Watt - Muhammad at Mecca, Oxford, 1953:
His readiness to undergo persecution for his beliefs, the high moral character of the men who believed in him and looked up to him as a leader, and the greatness of his ultimate achievement - all argue his fundamental integrity. To suppose Muhammad an impostor raises more problems than it solves. Moreover, none of the great figures of history is so poorly appreciated in the West as Muhammad.... Thus, not merely must we credit Muhammad with essential honesty and integrity of purpose, if we are to understand him at all; if we are to correct the errors we have inherited from the past, we must not forget the conclusive proof is a much stricter requirement than a show of plausibility, and in a matter such as this only to be attained with difficulty.
D. G. Hogarth - Arabia:
Serious or trivial, his daily behavior has instituted a canon which millions observe this day with conscious memory. No one regarded by any section of the human race as Perfect Man has ever been imitated so minutely. The conduct of the founder of Christianity has not governed the ordinary life of his followers. Moreover, no founder of a religion has left on so solitary an eminence as the Muslim Apostle.

Washington Irving - Mahomet and His Successors:
He was sober and abstemious in his diet and a rigorous observer of fasts. He indulged in no magnificence of apparel, the ostentation of a petty mind; neither was his simplicity in dress affected but a result of real disregard for distinction from so trivial a source.
In his private dealings he was just. He treated friends and strangers, the rich and poor, the powerful and weak, with equity, and was beloved by the common people for the affability with which he received them, and listened to their complaints.
His military triumphs awakened no pride nor vain glory, as they would have done had they been effected for selfish purposes. In the time of his greatest power he maintained the same simplicity of manners and appearance as in the days of his adversity. So far from affecting a regal state, he was displeased if, on entering a room, any unusual testimonials of respect were shown to him. If he aimed at a universal dominion, it was the dominion of faith; as to the temporal rule which grew up in his hands, as he used it without ostentation, so he took no step to perpetuate it in his family.

Ramsey Clark, Former U.S. Attorney General, Our Planet 1994, Lecture:
Islam is the only religion that gives dignity to the poor.
James Michener - Islam: The Misunderstood Religion, Reader’s Digest, May 1955, pp. 68-70:
No other religion in history spread so rapidly as Islam. The West has widely believed that this surge of religion was made possible by the sword. But no wise modern scholar accepts this idea, and the Koran is explicit in the support of the freedom of conscience.
Muhammad, the inspired man who founded Islam, was born about A.D. 570 into an Arabian tribe that worshiped idols. Orphaned at birth, he was always particularly solicitous of the poor and needy, the widow and the orphan, the slave and the downtrodden. At twenty he was already a successful businessman, and soon became director of camel caravans for a wealthy widow. When he reached twenty-five his employer recognizing his merit proposed marriage. Even though she was fifteen years older, he married her and as long as she lived remained a devoted husband.
Like almost every major prophet before him, Muhammad fought shy of serving as the transmitter of God’s word sensing his own inadequacy. But the Angel commanded ‘Read’. So far as we know, Muhammad was unable to read or write, but he began to dictate those inspired words which would soon revolutionize a large segment of the earth: “There is one God.”
In all things Muhammad was profoundly practical. When his beloved son Ibrahim died, an eclipse occurred and rumors of God’s personal condolence quickly arose. Whereupon Muhammad is said to have announced, “An eclipse is a phenomenon of nature. It is foolish to attribute such things to the death or birth of a human being.”
At Muhammad’s own death an attempt was made to deify him, but the man who was to become his administrative successor killed the hysteria with one of the noblest speeches in religious history: “If there are any among you who worshiped Muhammad, he is dead. But if it is God you worshiped, He lives for ever.”

Lawrence E. Browne - The Prospects of Islam, 1944:
…. Incidentally these well-established facts dispose of the idea so widely fostered in Christian writings that the Muslims, wherever they went, forced people to accept Islam at the point of the sword.
Under his influence people became united in one bond which they knew not, the bond of true monotheism. (The Eclipse of Christianity in Islam)
K. S. Ramakrishna Rao - Mohammed: The Prophet of Islam, 1989:
My problem to write this monograph is easier, because we are not generally fed now on that (distorted) kind of history and much time need not be spent on pointing out our misrepresentations of Islam. The theory of Islam and sword, for instance, is not heard now in any quarter worth the name. The principle of Islam that “there is no compulsion in religion” is well known …. In the person of the prophet of Islam we see the rarest phenomenon on earth walking in flesh and blood i.e. the union of the theorist, the organizer and the leader in one man.
P. D. Ouspensky - Tertium organum:
Any science that collides with the Koran will turn out to be false.
Jules Masserman - Who Were History’s Great Leaders? TIME Magazine, July 15, 1974:
The greatest leader of all times was Mohammad, who combined all the three functions; religious, political and moral. To a lesser extent, Moses did the same.

Napoleon Bonaparte as Quoted in Cherfils, Bonaparte et Islam, Paris, France:
Moses has revealed the existence of God to his nation. Jesus Christ to the Roman world, Muhammad to the old continent....
Arabia was idolatrous when, six centuries after Jesus, Muhammad introduced the worship of the God of Abraham, of Ishmael, of Moses, and Jesus. The Ariyans [The Unitarian followers of Father Arius] and some other sects had disturbed the tranquility of the east by agitating the question of the nature of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Muhammad declared that there was none but one God who had no father, no son and that the trinity imported the idea of idolatry....
I hope the time is not far off when I shall be able to unite all the wise and educated men of all the countries and establish a uniform regime based on the principles of Koran which alone are true and which alone can lead men to happiness.
Bertrand Russell - History of Western Philosophy, London, 1948:
Our use of phrase ‘The Dark ages’ to cover the period from 699 to 1,000 marks our undue concentration on Western Europe.... From India to Spain, the brilliant civilization of Islam flourished. What was lost to Christendom at this time was not lost to civilization, but quite the contrary.... To us it seems that West-European civilization is civilization, but this is a narrow view.

Herbert George Wells - Happiness of Mankind, Kent, 1938:
The Islamic teachings have left great traditions for equitable and gentle dealings and behavior, and inspire people with nobility and tolerance. These are human teachings of the highest order and at the same time practicable. These teachings brought into existence a society in which hard-heartedness and collective oppression and injustice were the least as compared with all other societies preceding it.... Islam is replete with gentleness, courtesy, and fraternity.
Diwan Chand Sharma - The Prophets of the East, 1935:
Mohammad was the soul of kindness, and his influence was felt and never forgotten by those around him.
Raymond Lerouge - Life de Mohamet:
The Arabian Prophet Mohammad is the founder of a revolution unparalleled in history. He founded a political state that will ultimately embrace the entire planet.
The law of that Government would rest on justice and kindness. His teachings revolve around human equality, mutual cooperation and universal brotherhood.
Dr. Marcus Dods - Mohammad, Buddha and Christ:
Mohammad’s religion reformed all existing dogmas and brought the Arabs ahead of the super powers of the time.

Phillip Hitti - Short History of the Arabs:
During all the first part of the Middle Ages, no other people made as important a contribution to human progress as did the Arabs, if we take this term to mean all those whose mother-tongue was Arabic, and not merely those living in the Arabian peninsula. For centuries, Arabic was the language of learning, culture and intellectual progress for the whole of the civilized world with the exception of the Far East. From the 9th to the 12th century there were more philosophical, medical, historical, religious, astronomical and geographical works written in Arabic than in any other human tongue.
Carra de Vaux - The Philosophers of Islam, Paris, 1921:
Finally how can one forget that at the same time the Mogul Empire of India (1526-1857 CE) was giving the world the Taj-Mahal (completed in 1648 CE) the architectural beauty of which has never been surpassed, and the ‘Akbar Nameh’ of Abul Fazl: That extraordinary work full of life ideas and learning where every aspect of life is examined, listed and classified, and where progress continually dazzles the eye, is a document of which Oriental civilization may justly be proud. The men whose genius finds its expression in this book were far in advance of their age in the practical art of government, and they were perhaps in advance of it in their speculations about religious philosophy. Those poets those philosophers knew how to deal with the world or matter. They observe, classify, calculate and experiment. All the ideas that occur to them are tested against facts. They express them with eloquence but they also support them with statistics.... the principles of tolerance, justice and humanity which prevailed during the long reign of Akbar.

Marcel Clerget - La Turquie, Passe et Pressent, Paris, 1938:
Many proofs of high cultural level of the Ottoman Empire during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent are to be found in the development of science and law; in the flowering of literary works in Arabic, Persian and Turkish; in the contemporary monuments in Istanbul, Bursa, and Edirne; in the boom in luxury industries; in the sumptuous life of the court and high dignitaries, and last but not least, in its religious tolerance. All the various influences - notably Turkish, Byzantine and Italian mingle together and help to make this the most brilliant epoch of the Ottomans.
Thomas Arnold - The Call to Islam:
We have never heard about any attempt to compel Non-Muslim parties to adopt Islam or about any organized persecution aiming at exterminating Christianity. If the Caliphs had chosen one of these plans, they would have wiped out Christianity as easily as what happened to Islam during the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella in Spain; by the same method which Louis XIV followed to make Protestantism a creed whose followers were to be sentenced to death; or with the same ease of keeping the Jews away from Britain for a period of three hundred fifty years.
Michael the Elder (Great) as Quoted in Michael the Elder, Chronique de Michael Syrien, Patriarche Jacobite d’ Antioche, J. B. Chabot, Editor, Vol. II, Paris, 1901:
This is why the God of vengeance, who alone is all-powerful, and changes the empire of mortals as He will, giving it to whomsoever He will, and uplifting the humble beholding the wickedness of the Romans who throughout their dominions, cruelly plundered our churches and our monasteries and condemned us without pity, brought from the region of the south the sons of Ishmael, to deliver us through them from the hands of the Romans. And if in truth we have suffered some loss, because the Catholic churches, that had been taken away from us and given to the Chalcedonians, remained in their possession; for when the cities submitted to the Arabs, they assigned to each denomination the churches which they found it to be in possession of (and at that time the great churches of Emessa and that of Harran had been taken away from us); nevertheless it was no slight advantage for us to be delivered from the cruelty of the Romans, their wickedness, their wrath and cruel zeal against us, and to find ourselves at people.
[Michael the Elder, Jacobite Patriarch of Antioch wrote this text in the latter part of the twelfth century, after five centuries of Muslim rule in that region.]

James Addison - The Christian Approach to the Moslem:
Despite the growth of antagonism, Moslem rulers seldom made their Christian subjects suffer for the Crusades. When the Saracens finally resumed the full control of Palestine the Christians were given their former status as citizens. The Coptic Church, too had little cause for complaint under Saladin’s strong government, and during the time of the earlier Mameluke sultans who succeeded him, the Copts experienced more enlightened justice than they had hitherto known. The only effect of the Crusaders upon Egyptian Christians was to keep them for a while from pilgrimage to Jerusalem, for as long as the Frank were in charge heretics were forbidden access to the shrines. Not until the Moslem victories could they enjoy their rights as Christians.

Marmaduke Pickthall - Tolerance in Islam, Lecture, 1927, Madras, India:
In the eyes of history, religious toleration is the highest evidence of culture in a people.... It was not until the Western nations broke away from their religious law that they became more tolerant, and it was only when the Muslims fell away from their religious law that they declined in tolerance and other evidences of the highest culture. Before the coming of Islam tolerance had never been preached as an essential part of religion....
If Europe had known as much of Islam, as Muslims knew of Christendom, in those days, those mad, adventurous, occasionally chivalrous and heroic, but utterly fanatical outbreaks known as the Crusades could not have taken place, for they were based on a complete misapprehension....
Innumerable monasteries, with a wealth of treasure of which the worth has been calculated at no less than a hundred millions sterling, enjoyed the benefit of the Holy Prophet’s Charter to the monks of Sinai and were religiously respected by the Muslims. The various sects of Christians were represented in the Council of the Empire by their patriarchs, on the provincial and district council by their bishops, in the village council by their priests, whose word was always taken without question on things which were the sole concern of their community....

The tolerance within the body of Islam was, and is, something without parallel in history; class and race and color ceasing altogether to be barriers.
Sir John Bagot Glubb - Reflections on a Great ERA:
The Abbasid Khalifa [Caliph] Al-Ma’mun’s period of rule (813 - 833 CE) may be considered the ‘golden age’ of science and learning. He had always been devoted to books and to learned pursuits. His brilliant mind was interested in every form of intellectual activity. Not only poetry but also philosophy, theology, astronomy, medicine and law all occupied his time.
By Mamun’s time, medical schools were extremely active in Baghdad. The first free public hospital was opened in Baghdad during the Caliphate of Haroon-ar-Rashid. As the system developed, physicians and surgeons were appointed who gave lectures to medical students and issued diplomas to those who were considered qualified to practice. The first hospital in Egypt was opened in 872 AD and thereafter public hospitals sprang up all over the empire from Spain and the Maghrib [Morocco] to Persia.
On the Holocaust of Baghdad (1258 CE) Perpetrated by Hulagu: The city of Haroon and Mamun was systematically looted, destroyed and burnt. Eight hundred thousand persons are said to have been killed. The Khalifa Mustasim was sewn up in a sack and trampled to death under the feet of Mongol horses. For five hundred years, Baghdad had been a city of palaces, mosques, libraries and colleges. Its universities and hospitals were the most up-to-date in the world. Nothing now remained but heaps of rubble and a stench of decaying human flesh.

R. V. C. Bodley - The Messenger, London, 1946:
No man whose external conditions changed so much ever changed himself less to meet them.
James Gavin - Dialogue with a U.S. General:
Among leaders who have made the greatest impact through ages, I would consider Muhammad before Jesus Christ.
Giyani Balbir Singh - Navan Hindustan, 1947:
Those who believe Islam was spread by force are fools who neither know the ways of Islam nor the ways of the world.
W. A. R. Gibb - Whither Islam:
The Message of Mohammad is not a set of metaphysical phenomena. It is a complete civilization.
Rev. B. Margoliouth - Biographies of Mohammad:
The Book revealed to Mohammad is one and unique of its kind. It has left indelible impression on the hearts of humanity. Nothing can overcome its majesty. The Quran has given new dimensions to human thinking. Surprising reforms, stunning success! …. The power that created in Muslims ravenous appetite for knowledge sprung from the Quran.
Sir Richard Gregory - Religion in Science and Civilization:
The Book revealed to Muhammad defines an unalterable guide to individual and collective life of people.
Lewis Mumford - Transformation of Man:
Fellow inhabitants of the planet! Search for the ideal Prophet, who in the 7th century, has shown you the way to total success.

Respected readers,
We have seen a glimpse of the illumination issuing forth from some brilliant minds, mostly Western. Isn’t it time that we listened to these sincere voices and did some of our own reflection instead of getting carried away by the false propaganda?
Why Should We Know Muhammad?
We must, because he was by far the most remarkable and the most influential man that ever set foot on this earth. If we do not know him, we will remain oblivious to what phenomenal potential we as humans are endowed with and how this potential can be actualized.
He preached a most glorious System of Life, founded a state, built a nation, set up a moral code, initiated countless social and political reforms, set forth a dynamic and powerful society, and revolutionized human thought and behavior for all times to come. And he accomplished all these wonders in an astonishingly short span of 22 years!

When Muhammad died in 632 CE, the whole Arabia had changed from paganism and idol worship to the devotion of One True God, from tribal quarrels and wars to national solidarity and cohesion, from drunkenness and debauchery to sobriety and piety, from violence to tranquility, from lawlessness and anarchy to orderly living, from moral bankruptcy to the highest standards of moral excellence. History has never known such a complete transformation of a people or a place before or since.
He was a most versatile personality, a social reformer, a moral guide, a political thinker, a military genius, a superb administrator, a faithful friend, an honest and successful merchant, an ideal neighbor, a wonderful companion, a devoted husband, a loving father, and a farsighted, inspiring leader. And he was a model of perfection in each of these areas.

Yes, there have been other great leaders in the world. But none combines so many qualities to such an amazing level of perfection as did Muhammad. The lives and teachings of other great figures in history are shrouded in the mist of time and legend. There is so much speculation about the time and place of their birth, the mode and style of their lives, the nature and detail of their teachings that it is impossible for humanity today to reconstruct accurately and precisely the personalities and teachings of those great figures. Not so with this man, Muhammad. Not only was he born in the fullest blaze of recorded history, but every detail of his private and public life, of his actions and utterances, has been accurately documented and preserved to our day in one simple Book, the Qur’an.
Muhammad not only preached the most wonderful ideas, but also successfully translated each one of them into action. At the time of his death his teachings were not mere precepts and ideas straining for fulfillment. They had become the very core of life of tens of thousands of perfectly trained individuals. In a few decades, his followers had established the greatest empire in history. Such was the prosperity and peace in this empire that it was almost impossible to find a single person worthy of receiving alms and charity. A young woman could travel alone hundreds of miles without any fear but the fear of God. At what other time or place and in relation to what other political, social, religious system, philosophy or ideology - did the world ever witness such a perfectly astounding phenomenon? The answer is, NEVER AND NOWHERE!

In spite of the phenomenal success that crowned his success, he did not for a moment claim to be anything but only a human being who was chosen and ordained by the Creator to be a teacher of truth to mankind and be a complete model and pattern for their actions. He was a man with a noble and exalted Mission - and his unique Mission was to unite humanity under One God and to teach them the way to honest and upright living in accordance with the Command of God.
Today, after the lapse of some 1,400 years, the life and teachings of Muhammad have survived without the slightest loss, alteration or interpolation. Today they offer the same undying hope for treating mankind’s many ills as they did when Prophet Muhammad was alive. This is our honest claim and this is the inescapable conclusion forced upon us by the critical and unbiased study of the dynamics of human history.

As thinking, sensitive, concerned human beings, we owe it to ourselves to stop for one brief moment and ask, “Could it be that these statements, extraordinary as they sound, are really true? Supposing they are really true and we did not know this man, Muhammad or hear about his teachings - Or did not know him well enough to be able to benefit from his guidance and example. Is it not time we responded to this tremendous challenge and made some effort to know this man?” It will cost us nothing but it may well prove to be the beginning of a brand new vibrant era in our lives.
Come! Let us make a new discovery, know this wonderful man Muhammad, the like of whom never walked this earth, whose example can change our lives and our world for the better.
The reader may ask for a free booklet, “The Ideal Prophet”, by calling 954-746-2115 just for the mailing cost.

THERE IS YET ANOTHER FACET HONORING THE TRUTH OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD:
Authorship of the Qur'an
Who wrote the Qur'an? The non-Muslim's answer to this important question usually sounds like this:
"The Qur'an was authored by a human being; it is not a literal revelation from God. It is a book created by human intelligence, like any other book. It was, as a matter of historical fact, written by Muhammad, in the seventh century A.D."
If this is your view, rest assured that you have plenty of company!
You should also know, though, that this point of view is not without its difficulties. To believe it, you must also believe that Muhammad, peace be upon him:
- Knew that the Earth and heavenly bodies were once a single point, and were separated violently (21:30)
What's more...
- If you don't believe that he had access to special knowledge that made possible this prefiguring of the modern Big Bang theory -- a theory entirely unknown to the Arabs of the seventh century -- you must conclude that 21:30 of the Qur'an is merely an intriguing coincidence, a matter of getting something right by chance.
Perhaps this passage is simply an intriguing coincidence. If it is, however, it is not the only one.
This man, the supposed "author" of the Qur'an, would also have to have:
- Known about the relativity of time (22:47; 23:112-114; 70:4), a subject similarly unknown to Arab tribes of this period.
Either he possessed some extraordinary source of knowledge allowing discussion of this subject thirteen and a half centuries before Einstein, or we are looking at another intriguing coincidence.
Which is it?
- Most non-Muslims will instinctively answer along these lines: "Even if it means granting the text of the Qur'an a second striking coincidental feature, the likeliest explanation is that both passages are merely examples of happenstance."
And yet:
Consider that the same author would also have to have:
- Known that the universe is continuously expanding (51:47).
- Known that matter is created in pairs (36:36). (By the way, this discovery earned the scientist Paul Dirac the Nobel Prize in 1933.)
- Known what modern biological science knows about the foundation of life on Earth, namely that it is water-based (21:30).
- Known that iron is not native to the Earth, coming instead from an extraterrestrial source (57:25).
- Known that the planet Earth travels in an orbit (27:88; 21:33).
- Known that the sun, too, moves in an orbit (37:38), as indeed modern astronomy proves that it does.
- Known that the Earth's atmosphere acts like a protective shield for living creatures (21:32).
- Known that the stages of human development in the womb unfold in a specific, describable sequence (23:14) that has been confirmed by modern experts in human embryology.
- Known that the roots of mountains extend deep into the earth and serve the function of preventing shocks (21:31).
- Known details of how the Earth's rain cycle functions that were mysteries to scientists until the twentieth century (30:48).
- Known what modern oceanographers have now learned, namely that bordering seas meet but do not mingle with one another (55:19-20).
- Known that oceans have complex subsurface wave patterns (24:40).
- Known that, in communities of honeybees, only the females are workers (16:68-69). (The Arabic verb forms can connect only to female beings).
- Known, seven years ahead of time, that the humiliated Byzantine Army of his day would rejuvenate itself and secure a major victory, which in fact it eventually did against the Persians (30:1-4).
Known, two years before he did so, that he would enter Mecca in triumph (48:27).
- Known that the body of the Pharoah who had opposed Moses would be preserved for future generations (10:91-92) -- it is today on display in the Royal Mummies Chamber of the Egyptian Museum.
- Known to refer (12:54) to the Egyptian head of state of Joseph's, peace be upon him, era as king (Aziz-Malik) and not as Pharoah, the word that appears erroneously in the book of Genesis.
- Known that the fabled Arabian lost city of Iram (89:6-8) whose historical existence was confirmed by archaeologists only in 1990, was a historical reality.
- Known that the ancient flood that had beset the southern Arabian people of Saba from their dam system (34:15-17), similarly confirmed by modern archeology, was a historical reality.
- Known the name of Haman (28:38), a historical figure close to the Pharoah of the era of Moses, peace be upon him ... despite the problems that a) the name Haman does not appear in the Torah's version of the story, and b) the ability to translate the hieroglyphic language system of the Egyptians had been utterly lost for centuries at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an, and indeed would remain lost until the year 1799. After the discovery in that year of the Rosetta Stone, scholars were able to unlock the mystery of the hieroglyphs and, eventually, to confirm that there was indeed a Haman, unmentioned in the Hebrew scriptures, who was close to this Pharoah in this period, and who was involved in construction (especially of towers and of temples), just as the Qur'an says. If we believe that human authorship is the only possible explanation for the origin of the Qur'an, we must assume either that Muhammad (S), somehow had access to this information, or we must believe that this passage is yet another in a remarkably long series of intriguing coincidences.

How many coincidences do we need to get the message?
The message is simple: no human intelligence could have produced this book in the seventh century.
Please know that there are many, many more such coincidences in the Qur'an.
I have listed here only those that do not require advanced knowledge in such topics as Arabic, mathematics, Islamic history, or classical poetic forms.
Even with the brief list I have provided, there comes, I think, a point at which one is obliged to evaluate the Qur'an's Message carefully, closely, and respectfully. These supposed coincidences are, I believe, clear signs to humankind that the Qur'an's Message is of a special quality, and must not be ignored.
Only the repeated exposure of the individual human heart to the Qur'an's Message can settle such a momentous question, "Who wrote the Qur'an?"
If you are a person who believes that there is no such thing as a divinely inspired revelation, the question is: how many coincidences does it take for you to consider that such a revelation to humanity may be possible?

If you are a person who believes that there is such a thing as a divinely inspired revelation, the question is, how many coincidences are you willing to ignore before considering the possibility that a particular text presents such revelation?
Please know that I am NOT interested in any debate about the possibility that any ONE of these verses I have cited is just a coincidence, or is for some other reason unpersuasive to you.
The truly remarkable thing is that ALL of these features should present themselves in a text supposedly composed by human intelligence -- and the profound unlikelihood of that is the intriguing coincidence I wish to discuss.
Knowing what you now know about these supposed coincidences, do you honestly believe that the Qur'an is simply the product of human intelligence, a book like any other book? Or does it seem more likely to you that its Message is of a special quality?
May God bless you!
Gratefully,
Shabbir Ahmed, M.D.

Koran and the Liberation of Women by Muhammed Asadi

2006-11-20T11:08:00.000-08:00

Rewriting the History of Women's Rights
Koran and the Liberation of Women
Copyright © 2000 Muhammed Asadi

"O Humankind! We have created you male and female and have divided you into nations and tribes that you recognize each other. The best of you in the sight of God is the one most socially aware (taqwa- literally - "extremely careful")." Koran 49:13

The Liberated Woman:
We see some common characteristics in modern urban culture concerning what is required of men and women: Open chest shirts for the female, a necktie for the male. Belly exposed shirts for the female, tucked-in shirts for the male. Men's dress patronizes opaque clothing where as feminine clothes are transparent. Modern society labels a man as improperly dressed when not in full suit but women are celebrated if they keep their legs uncovered, even on a cold winter night.
The society that condemns the exhibition of male physical curves and labels them as "perversion" provides "artificial aides" to under developed areas of the female. Everyone has heard the term, 'unwed mother' but you hardly ever hear about the 'unwed father'. The fashion world usually controlled by males, aims to create instability in the female mind. She is taught that "wearing the least" is something that builds "status" and taking it all off is "liberation".
She is taught to hate her own body. The form of her eyelashes and brows, the style of her walking and speech, the color of her lips, nails and cheek are all given an artificial look. She also hates the natural trend of her hair. In such a society, "hair fashion designers" and cosmetic manufacturers make big money.

Whereas men balance themselves on a three-inch base heel of the shoes, the woman is expected to balance herself on a half a centimeter heel. This creates an abnormality called Lordosis in medical terminology. Males make big money, displaying female nakedness through their respectable trades like cabarets, strip bars, fashion shows, and especially commercial advertising (Do I want the Mustang or the sexy blonde in the advertisement?), nude paintings and magazines and now Internet web pages.
The modern urban culture does not only show the above but it also shows: Alarming statistics with manifold percentage increase through time of single parents, children with no fathers, broken families, sex crimes, divorce, suicide and drug use among teens, asylums for unclaimed children, homes for unwanted parents, clinics for delinquent youth and neurotic adults.
Recent estimates suggest that up to 80% of US society displays some form of psychological symptoms, and that up to 22% have psychological problems serious enough to interfere with their day to day living which are diagnosable (Chicago Tribune 12/1999).

Data in the United States also shows that 25 to 35 percent of girls are sexually abused, usually by men well known to them (Kilbourne 1999:253). A high percentage of women so assaulted suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (the same disorder that a large number of Vietnam veterans suffer from) which leads to addiction and substance abuse and eventually to poverty and homelessness. Thus women in America live in a "war zone" in thier own homes. If they survive childhood, their boyfriends or husbands eventually get them!
In such societies "liberation" of women has been reduced to a slogan to sell products. Such sellers of "liberation", mostly men, offer women "liberation" via smoking, alcohol, food and their natural longing for stable relationships [which have dwindled in such a society]. This commercial "liberation" comes at a great cost to women and serves to isolate them through addiction. As addicts make great consumers, the sellers of such "liberation" want to keep it that way (Kilbourne 1999).

When such sellers of "liberation" are faced with true demands for gender equality, like the ERA [Equal Rights Amendment in the United States], they reject them outright and a government funded and controlled by them makes it fail [ERA failed to pass in 1982]. Such powers that be in these societies not only attack any genuine efforts towards liberation of women in their own society [as they are commercially disadvantageous to them], but also attack all other ideas presented as truly liberating to women, by other societies [to which they export their commercial culture] by labeling them, "harsh, barbaric, primitive". They do this through their control of the media, which in most cases is not only owned by them but depends on them, through their advertising dollars, for its very survival .

This paper is an attempt to rewrite the History of Women's Rights, taking note of things that have been widely ignored in popular presentation of the subject. The paper also serves to clarify the position of a book, the Koran that has been distorted and misrepresented through the ages, by those having vested interests.

WOMEN IN WESTERN RELIGION:
Christianity, the major religion that shaped western thought, presents women as subordinate to men. Men according to the Bible are the owners of women, just like an animal is owned. Exodus 20:17 which states the famous tenth commandment, lumps a wife together with his servants, animals and house. A man could sell his daughter as a slave (Exodus 21:7-11) or give her in marriage to whomsoever he chose.
This subordination of women to men in the Bible, which shaped western thought on the issue, is made clear in Leviticus 12:1-8: After the birth of a male child, a woman is ritually impure for seven days, however after the birth of a female child she is ritually impure for fourteen days according to the law of the Bible.
1 Corinthians 14:34-35 of the New Testament of the Bible states:
"As in all Churches of the saints, the woman should be subordinate as even the law says...for it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."
1 Timothy 2:11 states:
"Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men. She is to keep silent, for Adam was formed first then Eve, and Adam was not deceived but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor."
1 Corinthians 11:6 says:
" For if a woman will not veil herself then she should cut off her hair, but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil...for man was not created from woman but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman but woman for man."

Jesus' track record, based on the New Testament isn't much better in his treatment of women, even his own mother. According to the Gospel of John, he is openly rude to his mother. Having become famous among the people, according to John or whoever wrote the Gospel of John, he addresses his mother in this rude manner:
"Woman! What have I to do with you. My time is not yet (John 2:4)."
Imagine, if you're a woman [I am a man so correct me if I'm wrong] and your son or daughter said, "Woman! What have I to do with you" [and to top it off, it was said in public and not private], how you would feel? Considering a mother's sacrifice and discomfort in bearing and delivering a child, such behavior is unacceptable. Hardly an exemplary character that Christian evangelists depict the "Prince of peace" had. The Koran states:
"Be careful of God and be careful of the wombs that bore you (Koran 4:1).
"We have enjoined on humankind, kindness to their parents. In discomfort did his/her mother bear them and in discomfort did she give them birth (Koran 46:15)"
The Koran disputes the authenticity of the Gospels as being a genuine account of the words of Jesus, as does the Jesus Seminar, based on modern findings. Contrary to what the Gospels present Jesus as saying to his mother, the Koran quotes him as saying:
"And God has made me [Jesus] kind and dutiful towards my mother and not arrogant or overbearing (Koran 19:32)."

Helen Ellerbe, in her book, The Dark Side of Christian History (1995) elaborates on the Church's[both Catholic and Protestant] treatment of women:
The second century St. Clement of Alexandria wrote: "Every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman." The Church father Tertullian explained why women deserve their status as despised and inferior human beings:
You are the devil's gateway: you are the unsealer of the tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law. You destroyed so easily God's image, man. On account of your desert-that is, death- even the Son of God had to die [Joan Smith, Misogynies: Reflections on Myths and Malice (N.Y Fawcett Columbine, 1989:66)].

Others expressed the view more bluntly. The sixth century Christian philosopher, Boethius, wrote in The Consolation of Philosophy, "Woman is a temple built upon a sewer." Bishops in the sixth century council of Macon voted as to whether women had souls. In the tenth century, Odo of Cluny declared, " To embrace a woman is to embrace a sack of manure."The thirteenth century St. Thomas Aquinas suggested that God had made a mistake in creating woman: "Nothing deficient [or defective] should have been produced in the first establishment of things; so women ought not to have been produced then." And Lutherans at Wittenberg debated whether women were really human beings at all. Orthodox Christians held women responsible for all sin. As the [Roman Catholic] Bible Apocrypha states, "Of woman came the beginning of sin/ And thanks to her we all must die (Ecclesiasticus 25:13-26)." As 1 Corinthians 7:1 states, "It is a good thing for man to have nothing to do with a woman."

The 1500s marked the beginning of "witchcraft persecutions." By the 1700s over 100,000 people, 80-90 percent of them women, had been put to death in Europe usually by burning at the stake (Chicago Tribune Dec 29, 1999- A profile of women's history). This amounted to be a self-fulfilling prophecy as the religious King James I estimated that the ratio of women to men who "succumbed" to witchcraft was twenty to one (Ellerby 1995:116).
Witch persecution has its roots in the Bible as well:
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Whoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death. He that sacrificeth unto any god, save to the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed." (Exodus 22:18-20)
Keeping a woman silent according to what St. Paul had said was widely practiced in Europe and the Christian world. In 1833 when the first coeducational college in The U.S, Oberlin College was established, women were not allowed to speak in many classes. In 1623 in England, a woman sentenced by a court to be "too frank" was publicly displayed in a "scold bridle", i.e. a metal cage around her head with a spiked plate which cut her tongue if she dared speak.
Contrary to this God, in the Koran, not only encourages women to speak, but says that they are listened to and admonishes men to be fair and just with them.
Consider this statement in the Koran and compare it to what the Bible said:
"God hears the saying of her who argues with you concerning her husband, and complains to God. God hears your mutual complaints(Koran 57:1)"

HINDUISM AND WOMEN:
In Hindu religious literature by far, the most effective weapon used by the Gods to corrupt virtuous mortals is a woman. Usually a seductive celestial nymph but sometimes, just woman, the root of all evil in the ascetic oriented view of the orthodox Hindu (Baldick, Radice, and Jones :36).
The Mahabharata states, " I will tell you my son, how Brahma created wanton women and for what purpose, for there is nothing more evil than women... The Lord Grandfather, learning what was in the hearts of the Gods, created wanton women by a magic ritual in order to delude mankind.." (13.40.3-10)
The complete subservience of wives to their husbands in Hindu custom shows up in the practice of Sati, where the wife burns herself alive on her dead husbands pyre. In 1780 when the Raja of Marwar died in India, his 64 wives burned themselves alive on his funeral pyre. Even though the secular government of India made this practice illegal it still continues to be practiced because of religion.

CHINESE RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS AND WOMEN:
The Yin and the Yang is a concept quite familiar even in the west especially in merchandise. In their mythical theory of how the universe operates, Chinese philosophers invented the concept of the Yin and Yang. The universe they concluded is understood to be a balance of the Yin (evil or negative) and the Yang (good or positive).When asked to further describe Yin (evil), the explanation comes:
" The Yin is the negative force in nature. It is seen in darkness, coolness, FEMALENESS, dampness, the earth, moon and the shadows. The Yang (good) is the positive force in nature. It is seen in lightness, warmness, MALENESS, dryness and the sun (Hopfe :207)."
Max Weber, the German sociologist, recognized as the leading person in the entire field of sociology and known for his work on the Sociology of Religion, writes in his work on Confusianism and Taoism:
The doctrine held in common by ALL schools of philosophy [in Chinese Religion] summarised the "good" spirits as the [heavenly and masculine] Yang principle, the "evil" ones as the [earthly and feminine] Yin principle, explaining the origin of the world from their fusion ( Ed. Gerth 1951:29)
Until 1901, the Chinese practiced "foot binding" for girls which deformed girl's feet. It had been practiced for around a thousand years, based on tradition, till it was banned in 1901. Even after being banned, it was widely practiced until 1949. Marie Vento (1998), in her paper, One Thousand Years of Chinese Footbinding: Its Origins, Popularity and Demise, writes:
In its most extreme form, footbinding was the act of wrapping a three- to five-year old girl's feet with binding so as to bend the toes under, break the bones and force the back of the foot together. Its purpose was to produce a tiny foot, the "golden lotus", which was three inches long and thought to be both lovely and alluring...

One notable personality who aided in the spread of footbinding was the famed writer and scholar Zhu Xi (1130-1200 A.D), whose commentaries on the Confucian classics would form the canon of Neo-Confucianism that would dominate Chinese intellectual and philosophical life for six subsequent centuries. An ardent advocate of footbinding, he introduced the practice into southern Fuijan in order to spread Chinese culture and teach proper relations between men and women, greatly influencing other writers who mention the practice as if it were normal...
For men footbinding is troubling because it suggests not only that men are capable of perceiving a gruesomely crippled foot as an object of seductive pleasure, but that they are further capable of using their superior social position to coerce women to conform to a standard of beauty that is both deformed and grotesque. For women, footbinding is unsettling because it reveals a willingness to cripple their own daughters to meet an aesthetic and criterion of social behavior defined by men (retreived from the internet 01/15/'00)

FEMALE INFANTICIDE AND HINDU AND CHINESE TRADITION:
Not only did the Koran outlaw female infanticide, which was widely practiced in Arabia at the time of the prophet Muhammed, it made it an issue to be especially addressed on Judgment Day:
"And when the girl-child buried alive is asked for what sin she was killed(Koran 81:8-9)"
The Koran places extreme importance on every human life, be it male or female, of whatever color or nationality. The statement of the Koran reproduced below on the dignity of even one individual life is unsurpassed in world literature. The Koran states, without differentiating between male and female:
"Whosoever kills even one human being, other than for man slaughter or tyranny on earth, it would be as if they had killed all of humanity. And whosoever saves even one human life, it will be as if they have saved all of humankind (Koran 5:32)"
Not only is female infanticide widely practiced in India based on the traditional Hindu preference for male children compared to females [resulting in over 10,000 confirmed cases every year- non reported cases are many more], modern technology is being used to abort female fetuses (Naft & Levine 1997:304-307).
Naft and Levine (1997) write in their International Report on the Status of Women:
Yet since the mid 1970s, when parents found that modern medical techniques could determine the sex of a fetus and enable them to identify and abort female fetuses, the practice has become commonplaceGovernment officials even suspect that the disproportionate abortion of female fetuses may be a major underlying cause of the recent decline in the nation's sex ratio (Naft & Levine 1997:304-305)
There is a strong preference among traditional Chinese for boys instead of girls. Until 1992 there was no law in China that outlawed female infanticide. Give the "one child law" and the traditional preference for male children, female infanticide was commonly practiced and resulted in the famous "missing girl" problem (Naft & Levine 1997).

THE KORAN AND WOMEN:

"And among God's signs is this: He created for you mates from amongst yourselves (males as mates for females and vice versa) that you might find tranquillity and peace in them. And he has put love and kindness among you. Herein surely are signs for those who reflect (Koran 30:21)."

Surprisingly egalitarian in its approach, the Koran doesn't agree with the Bible's claim of men being owners of women, neither does it agree with women being created for or from men [as the Bible claims], nor does it say that women cannot teach nor have authority over men. The Koran also dispels the common myth among other religions in general that; a woman is evil by nature and has been created to deceive mankind. The purpose, says that Koran, of mates is that tranquillity and peace emerges through the natural instinct of love and kindness among mates.
People who analyze the Koran however sometimes feel different about many of its verses, which to them suggest that the Koran is in some way putting down women. These verses are a handful and given the nature of this paper we can go in detail with them.
The verse in the Koran that causes trouble to most liberals and is misused by evangelical Christians is:
"Men are the protectors (Qawamoon) of women, because God has given preference to some over others. And because men spend of their property on women. So good women are obedient, guarding even unnoticed that what Allah (God) has asked them to guard. As for those from whom you fear rebellion in this (i.e. guarding their chastity in your absence), i) talk to them, ii) leave them alone in their beds, iii) strike them. If they then obey you, look not for any way against them.. (Koran 4:34)."
The verse in question is quite clear if we don't jump to hasty conclusions. Men have been given the duty to protect and support women. God has given preference to one gender over another in certain duties. Men have been given preference in being the providers of women and women are given preference in caring for a child. Even if divorce separates a man from his wife, he has to seek her help in caring for the child or another female if the mother agrees (Koran 2:233). Men are told to spend of their property on women and not ask the woman for anything even if she happens to be rich.
Now to the controversial part: The verse asks women to guard even when unnoticed, that which God has asked them to guard. If we have read the Koran carefully, we won't have trouble in determining that God specifically asks women and men to "guard" their chastity (Koran 24:30-31). To the women who cheat on their husbands, the Koran gives a three step, braking mechanism to hasty divorce or worse still capital punishment for adultery.
Step one, the husband should talk to the wife and try to resolve it. Usually, given men's image in popular culture, step one would normally be shouting and cursing and maybe even hitting. Around four million women in the US are severally battered each year. Two to four thousand of them die. Rather unfortunate and avoidable if a braking mechanism exists for people exercising their emotions. Contrary to this, the Koran suggests that talk be the first option.
Step two, the Koran recommends that marital relations be temporarily stopped between the couple, if cheating persists even after a talk. This would give the woman further opportunity to consider if she'd rather separate from the man and provide for herself after divorce or if she'd rather stay in the current marriage. If however the couple want to separate, which most people would if there was cheating going on, the Koran states in the next verse:
"And if you fear a breach between the two (husband and wife), appoint an arbiter from his family and an arbiter from her family. If they(husband and wife) desire amendment, God will make them of one mind. For God is Knowing and is Aware (Koran4:35)."

If however, the woman wants to stay with the man but doesn't quit cheating, i.e. break up the extra marital relationship then the Koran says resort to Step three, which is implicitly for the woman's own benefit especially in an economically harsh environment. In step three, the Koran says strike them. The word used signifies a single symbolic strike. The word strike in the verse does not represent beating up in any way. It is not supposed to injure the woman but is meant to be symbolic. Thus the same word Darab,is used in the Koran to "strike or hit" someone with an example, Darab al imsal (Koran 66:11). If it injures the woman than the woman according to law can have the authorities retaliate against the man as he would have broken the law, as for injury there is equal retribution according to the Koran [Koran 5:45].
Here is the situation that warrants step three: the woman doesn't want to end the current marriage and also doesn't want to put an end to her cheating episodes, the Koran suggests that the husband strike her, for her own benefit. This is very liberal. The woman on her own would be under financial hardship and so she wants to use the current marriage relationship. However she also doesn't want to quit cheating on her husband. People, men or women normally aren't so forgiving as to keep the marriage and accept that the other party remains cheating. Something has to be done to make the relationship compatible, after both talking and temporarily halting marital relationship hasn't worked. However, in all sincerity, I can state confidently that step 3 will never arise since both the man and the woman are free to end the relationship during the course of step 1 and step 2.

The Koran by making the symbolic strike step 3 is actually controlling human tendency of hitting,given popular culture, which usually come before talking and reasoning. It makes it virtually impossible that a man going through 1 and 2 will resort to 3 also and not break the marriage before. Where there are difficulties that need to be settled, the Koran provides a very modern and just arbitration system (see above Koran 4:35). The Koran is concerned to the utmost about women's rights. Human society has usually not given equal opportunity to women, even today in the west. The Koran wants to protect women in a harsh society and at the same time change men's "control-oriented" minds to one that is more reasonable. The method the Koran uses is more result oriented than dogmatic, where both parties are dealt with equitably and with justice.
By making the strike step 3 the Koran effectively controls the anger emotion that is often spontaneous in such situations. Good reasoning and communication, arbitration to settle differences and short suspension of marital relations should effectively do away with any tendency to hit. The Koran is thus not just putting a count of ten between a man and his anger but days and weeks between it. It thus gives anger and mistrusts a long time and a systematic procedure to get reasonable resolved.

Contrary to being discriminatory towards women, this law can be seen as discriminating against men [if everything else were equal, ceteris paribus] as it asks them to hold on to women that cheat in marriage with them, in order to protect the woman. However since it compensates for the "advantage" that men initially have in society, it is very egalitarian and not discriminatory towards either side.
Compare the Koran's breaking mechanism for controlling anger to the fact that wife beating was not outlawed in the United States until 1871 [over 13 centuries after the Koran]. Even after being outlawed, in the absence of such procedures contained in the Koran, domestic violence affects at least a third of all women in the United States over four million annually [this figure is over 80% under represented as most cases go unreported] (Newman 1998). According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report of 1991, it is the leading cause of injury to women 15 to 44. Over a third of women who die in the United States die at the hands of husbands or boyfriends (Kilbourne 1999). I can confidently state that if such a procedure as the Koran presented was internalized and implemented, not only would women not get injured, there would be more talking and communication and little or no violence in the home, and poverty and the fall in the standard of living of a woman due to divorce would be reduced. The system prescribed by the Koran works where just saying, "Don't do it" would not and has not.
This attitude of the Koran to protect women in an economically harsh environment is seen in many places throughout the book. For example, men married to women who then become guilty of lesbianism or bisexuality are told not to throw the women out of their homes but to keep them there till some way is found (Koran 24:3).

The Koran has given some duty preference to men over women and some to women over men. This was mentioned briefly before. However, this doesn't mean that the Koran forbids women from earning their livelihood if they have no man to support them. Koran 4:22 for example states that for men is what they earn and for women what they earn and that both men and women should seek God's bounty collectively.

PROPERTY LAWS:
Around two hundred years back, women had no property rights in Europe. Islam has given them such since the start. Before the 1840s women had no property rights in America. Property rights in Islam, given the nature of the various relationships that man and women fit under, are surprisingly egalitarian. When a man marries a woman, he has to give a substantial part of his property (according to his means) to the woman as a "marriage gift (Mahar)," stated as a man's duty unto God (Koran 4:24).
A woman doesn't have to give anything to a man even if she is rich. It is for this reason primarily that the Koran asks that out of a parents property the son get twice that of the daughter (Koran 4:11). It is expected that the daughter would marry and get a man's property as marriage gift and not have to worry about providing for herself, as it's the man's duty to provide for her. The son on the other hand would Islamically be expected not only to provide for his potential wife but also give a major part of his property to her as marriage gift.

This however, is not discrimination among the genders. There are specific reasons why the son gets twice that of the daughter. When the conditions are different, the Koran suggests that both male and female get the same amount. For example out of a son's wealth both the father (male) and the mother (female) get equal shares if the deceased had a son.

LEGAL BATTLES:

" O believers. When you contract a debt for a given fixed term, record it in writing...and call to witnesses from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not present then one man and two women of such as you approve as witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other admonishes her (Koran 2:82)."

Both faithful believers and attackers from all camps have abused this particular statement in the Koran. It is presented by them in a generalized form with a concluding statement that Islam considers women's testimony to be half that of men.
The above verse does not talk about testimony in general but only presents one case basically involving financial transactions. It doesn't state any generalization of women's testimony being half that of men, or that two women will equal one man. If interpretation is sought, then a positive one would be that the Koran wants to protect women from being unfairly influenced or pressurized by men. As support for the woman another woman is supplemented, so that if one errs the other reminds her.
Not to put down women in any way, but statistics show that women are more difficult as witnesses in courts of law. The Koran recognizes this difference in men and women, be it social or biological and corrects for it to support the woman from being manipulated by men. The end purpose is justice, which shouldn't offend any reasonable person. In different circumstances however, one woman's testimony is given more weight, where it concerns herself than one man's testimony in the Koran, as it can override it. This case would be when a man (husband) accuses a woman (his wife) of cheating in a relationship but has no witness except his own testimony, which is against her testimony (Koran 24:6-9). The Koran gives women's testimony more weight than a man's does!

Before the 1920s, women had no political voice in the United States and weren't allowed to vote. Women have always had a voice based on the authority of the Koran. There is a famous story where a ordinary woman based on the authority of the Koran challenged Omar the Caliph and confronted him in an open forum. Omar acknowledged that he was wrong and the woman was correct as she acted on the authority of the Koran! This was over fourteen hundred years back. A cigarette ad says to women, "You've come a long way baby". Yes, a long way indeed [in the opposite direction] from 1400 years. Women have the freedom to smoke and kill themselves but not to change and challenge laws that govern their lives!

DRESS:
We read above that the Bible recommends that women veil themselves or shave off their hair. Contrary to what Muslim practice has been for many centuries, the Koran doesn't ask women to cover themselves from head to toe. The Koran states:
"Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and guard their chastity; that is purer for them. And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their chastity, and not to make a display of their beauty except what is apparent, and let them cast a cover over their bosoms.... And turn to Allah (God) altogether, O believers, in order that you might succeed (Koran 24: 30-31)."

The Koran suggests that both men and women dress modestly and guard their chastity. Other than this the Koran suggests that women put a covering on their chest (bosom) over the regular clothing they wear and not make a wanton display of their beauty (Koran 24:30-31). This does not fit in any way the picture of a woman wearing a chador or burka [veil] covered from head to toe. It would more closely resemble a picture of a woman wearing a shirt and pants, which do not deliberately reveal her body, with a scarf over her chest (bosom).Tradition and not the Koran made "tradition based" Muslims bring the veil into Islam from Christian custom (see Paul's saying on the veil). The Koran did not sanction it. The statement in the Koran that talks about dress talks about both men and women dressing modestly, guarding their chastity and lowering their gaze. It does not discriminate between the sexes except in the case of women it asks them to take a extra covering over their bosoms [chest] only.

POLYGAMY AND THE KORAN:
Two things that come to mind whenever Islam or the Koran is mentioned in the West (in relation to women) are Islamic polygamy and the restrictive Islamic dress for women (the infamous veil). A third thing also commonly crops up when talking about Islam in general and that is terrorism [Jihad or so-called holy war]. These three effectively describe the stereotype of Islam held by the West. Like most stereotypes they are based either on ignorance or describe the practice of those that base their actions on tradition more than the Koran. Instead of attacking tradition and custom, those with vested interests attack Islam and the Koran even though it is evident that these stereotypes aren't rooted in the Koran.
There is nothing in Christianity or Judaism against polygamy (polygyny- one man taking more than one wife). Indeed the Old Testament assumes that marriages will be polygamous and laws are constructed based on that assumption. For example, Exodus 21:10 in the Bible states:
"If he take to him another wife, her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage shall he not diminish." (The Bible, Exodus 21:10)

There is not a word attributed to Jesus in the New Testament which disallows polygamy. Paul forbade bishops and deacons from marrying more than one wife (1 Timothy 3:2), this implicitly suggests that other were allowed polygamy (polygyny). The insistence on monogamy was an invention introduced by the Roman Catholic Church as late as AD 600 just as the invention of the celibacy of the clergy [the Church being against marriage in general and not only polygamy] (Cairncross 1974:70). The early Lutheran Church in Munster, Germany proclaimed polygamy (polygyny) the "ideal form of marriage" (Cairncross 1974:1)
Any mention of polygamy in the West today, among feminists and non-feminists alike, evokes feeling of hate. This hate is rooted in Western culture and not religion as we have seen above. The culture that hates polygamy however allows all sexual intercourse between a man and a woman in plurality [as long as it is pre or non marital]. However the same intercourse made "responsible" by marriage in the plural is outlawed and hated.

The Koran severely restricted the open practice of polygamy. The statement in the Koran that deals with polygamy is just one yet it is misused and abused by both Muslims and Non-Muslims. It states:
"And if you fear that you will not be able to deal justly with the oppressed women [Yatama- literally, the Orphans among women-see the context], then marry from among them two or three or four, but if you fear you wont be just [even then], then marry only one (Koran 4:3)."
The Koran states explicitly above that polygyny is allowed only if the women you marry:
belong among oppressed (orphan) women. Men cannot pick and choose from "any" women who they want as a second wife
Polygamy is to be practiced only if marriage would bring social justice to such women, justice that they are otherwise denied.
If marrying more than one cannot bring such justice then polygamy is not allowed. Thus the Koran severely restricts the open practice of polygamy in society.
The Koran does not, like the early Lutheran Church, term polygamy the "ideal" form. According to the Koran, polygamy is a good option only when it brings social justice to the oppressed classes of women.
According to poverty expert William Julius Wilson (1996), 31% of the continually poor in America comprise of "non-elderly" African American women. Now these are among the oppressed classes of women. If polygamy by well established men could bring social justice to them by removing their children and hence future generations from this "cycle of poverty," it is good. It is also recognized by many sociologists and by Dr. Wilson himself that "non-marriage" and the "lack of marriage" is a viable reason in their poverty and status. "Lack or marriage" or a "broken household" is recognized universally by sociologists as contributing to such poverty. It is recognized that divorce and out of wedlock childbearing has resulted in the "feminization of poverty ."

In Iraq, after the Gulf War when hundreds of thousands of women became widows, restricted polygamy by just individuals would similarly have been very functional.
In many countries where the population of women is a few million more than the population of men, some women can statistically never find husbands if everyone practiced monogamy. Such oppressed women [I say oppressed because a lack of maritally intimate relationship is to me deprivation and oppression of a sort] could be given family life and hence social justice by "restricted" Koranic polygamy.
The Koran is well aware that men misuse polygamy as they are "swayed by the greed of their hearts" and thus puts severe restrictions on the practice of polygamy to protect the rights of women and wives. As a result the only "religious" book that states explicitly, "then marry only ONE (Koran 4:3)" is the Koran. Monogamy is prescribed for society in general with "restricted" polygamy being allowed when special circumstances warrant it.

DIVORCE:
The Koran by giving women a right to initiate divorce is truly revolutionary. The New Testament, in the supposed words of Jesus, makes divorce an offense similar to adultery, permissible only when the woman has cheated on the husband (Matthew 5:32). The Old Testament states that only a man can initiate divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1).The Koran, contrary to that states:
"...If you both fear that you wont be able to keep within the boundaries of God in marriage, there is no harm if SHE ransom herself..."
The ransom would of course be the return of the initial property that the man gave her when she got married to him (the Mahar).
It is a common misconception that Islam offers a quick divorce. If the man says: "I divorce you," three times to the woman the marriage is nullified, according to popular rumor. This is not true. The Koran offers an elaborate braking system for divorce. A system which is so advanced for its time that it is now being suggested in England to stop careless "quick" divorce which creates a burden on both the adults and children in question.

The Koran's method of divorce is simple yet very functional. If mind is set on divorce, a divorce statement is written and pronounced in the presence of witnesses (Koran 65:2). Then there is a three month break in which both parties stay together as husband and wife, so that time be given to reconsider (Koran 2:228). After the three-month period, if the man initiated the divorce, he can either take the wife back, if she wants to remain in the marriage, or part. If he takes her back he can initiate divorce only once more in his life with the same woman.
If he takes her back the second time, then he has lost his rights to initiate divorce in the same relationship ever again (Koran 2:229). A woman can buyout her divorce by surrendering the property that was given her by the husband whenever she thinks the marriage wont work out. All through this process, the Koran suggest that help be sought by arbitration (Koran 4:35), one person from the man's side and one from the woman's. Very modern concepts given the history of the Koran. Does it not surprise you that people refer to the followers of this book as barbarians? Yet, the same culture that points fingers at these "barbarians" has a divorce rate of over 50 percent. Out of every hundred new marriages in the United States over fifty [old or new] will end in divorce.

Concerning divorce, since the man has been providing for the woman, regardless of who initiated the divorce proceedings, the Koran states:
"..And for women are rights equal to the rights against them but men have a degree over them (in the context of divorce only) in what is just (2:228)."
It is very clear that this verse is stating that there can be no absolute equal laws when conditions on both sides differ. Giving equal laws under unequal circumstances would be injustice. The Koran wants equality with justice. Thus women are allowed to divorce a man once [by surrendering the property the man gave her] and the husband can initiate the divorce twice.
Not only is the Koran the only "religious" book that explicitly states, "and for women are rights equal to the rights against them in justice (2:228)", it is more egalitarian than modern laws. As late as 1982 in the United States for example, the Equal Rights Amendment that called for equal rights for men and women in the law, failed. The Koran truly liberated women over fourteen hundred years back declaring that for women will be rights equal to those against them in justice!

THE LIBERATION OF WOMEN:
Koran; A Defender of Women's Rights:
"And when you men have divorced women, ...then either retain them in kindness if you reconcile, or part with them in kindness. Do not retain them to harm them so that you transgress limits. He who does this has wronged himself (Koran 2:231)."

"O believers! It is not lawful for you to inherit women against their will, nor that you should put restrictions on them, that you might take what you had given them...Consort with them in kindness, for if you hate them, it might happen that you hate something in which God has put much good (Koran 4:19)."
Men and Women Together:
"Women impure for men impure. And men impure for women impure. Women of purity for men of purity, and men of purity for women of purity. These are not affected by what people say. For them is forgiveness and an honorable provision (Koran 24:26)."

"And their Lord has heard them and says: 'I don't let the work of any worker be lost be they male or female. You both proceed one from the other..(Koran 3:195)."

" Indeed, men who submit and women who submit, believing men and believing women, and men who obey and women who obey, and truthful men and truthful women, and men who persevere and women who persevere, and men who are humble and women who are humble, and men who give alms and women who give alms, and men who fast and women who fast, and men who guard their chastity and women who guard their chastity, and men who remember God much and women who remember God much. God has prepared for them forgiveness and a great reward (Koran 33:35)."

"And the believers men and women are friends one of the other, they enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, and they establish worship and pay the poor due, and they obey God and his messenger. As for these, God will have mercy on them...(Koran 9:71)."

Women as Examples for Men and Women:
" God cites an example for those who believe: the wife of Pharaoh when she said: My Lord! Build for me a home with you in the Garden, and deliver me from Pharaoh and his work and save me from a tyrannous people. And Mary the daughter of Emran, who guarded her chastity, and we inspired in her of our spirit. She confirmed the words of her God and his books and was of the steadfast (Koran 66: 11-12)."
While reading the above statements in the Koran take note of the fact that men and women are mentioned together as "equals" in status. This concept is repeated time and again in the Koran based on the common origin of humankind (4:1). Unlike the Bible the Koran does not accept woman being created from man or for man. As a result a common notion that is repeated in the Koran is, "You (men and women) proceed one from the other (3:195 etc)."

CONCLUSION:
Most people may not have any idea on what Islam is or what it stands for but they are all "experts" on the oppressed woman in Islam. After reading the contents of this paper, it should be evident that:

1. Islam is the only religion that gives equal rights to everyone regardless of race or sex. There is no religious book, not even the constitution of the US, which states explicitly like the Koran, "And for women are rights equal to the rights against them in justice."

2. The Koran does not ask women to veil themselves completely from head to toe. Such may be Muslim practice in many parts of the world, but it is not sanctioned by the Koran. The Koran merely asks both men and women to dress modestly and not to flout their nakedness. On the other hand, the Bible which many claim western civilization was based on, demands that women wear the veil (1 Corinthians11: 6) or risk having their head shaven.
3. Men and women are of equal human status in the Koran (Koran 3:195), however Christian doctrine on which the early American societies were based, had Biblical norms which hold that a woman is subordinate to a man (1 Corinthians 14:34) and are created for man (1 Timothy 2:11)

4. Islam based on the Koran, which is very different to the Islam that Muslim masses believe in, gave women the right to property ownership and a voice in legal testimony centuries before such "revolutionary" ideas were even dreamed of by Europe [the word "feminism" was coined in 1882 in France and voting rights and property ownership rights followed many years thereafter].

5. The Koran prescribes polygamy only among the oppressed classes of women IF marriage can better their status in society and is just and equitable. If marriage cannot provide justice to the woman then the Koran prescribes monogamy as the only option. The only "religious" book that explicitly states, "then marry only one (Koran 4:3)", is the Koran.

6. Within the text of the Koran the ignorant practice of female circumcision, which many people believe is the norm in Islam, is not even mentioned. It is an innovation that entered "tradition based" Islam, not something that the Koran suggested or prescribed. It is not a part of Islam or the Koran.

7. Islam has never had a problem with women in authority. Even in modern days, Muslim lands have seen female heads of states. We have yet to see a woman president in the US.
Note: This paper does not at all validate Sunni or Shia Islam. The "Islam" believed in by the masses of Muslims [which I refer to as "tradition based" Islam], includes with the Koran other authorities in their "religion". These authorities are Hadith [sayings falsely attributed to the prophet] and fiqh [so called Islamic jurisprudence]. These sources are not warranted by the Koran and entered Islam centuries after the death of the prophet, in the form that we have today.
They were based on oral traditions unlike the Koran which was written down from day one. In these "extra-Koranic" sources we find many statements that are derogatory of women and give them a lower status compared to men. Some statements in the hadith for example compare women to monkeys and dogs and call them bad luck. They even suggest that the woman serve her husband like a "lesser-god" stopping a little short of worshipping them. Not only is this outrageous, it goes against the strict monotheism of the Koran. The Koran is the only book of authority in Islam.

Copyright © 2000 Muhammed Asadi

The cure for Sexism and Racism:
"O Humankind! We have created you male and female and have divided you into nations and tribes that you recognize each other. The best of you in the sight of God is the one most socially aware (taqwa- literally it means "extremely careful")." Koran 49:13
Division into sexes and nations is merely for the purpose of recognition and has nothing to do with status or one being better than the other according to the Koran.
"And of God's signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference in your colors and languages. Indeed in this are signs for those who have knowledge." Koran 30:22
Just like the different languages in the world, the different colors of humankind are a sign of God. They have nothing to do with status of one or the other being better based on language or color. It shows intelligent creation, which puts in variety and not random chance.

Bibliography:
1.The Koran: translated from the Arabic.
References to the Koran, e.g. Koran 24:5 signify, chapter (Sura) 24, Statement (aya) 5.
2. The Bible. Revised Standard Version (1971) and Good News Bible.
3. Hopfe, Lewis M. Religions of the World, fifth edition. Mc Millan Publishing C 1991.
4. Jones, Baldick, Radice. Hindu Myths. The Penguin Classics 1975.
5. Wilson, William Julius. 1996. When Work Disappears. New York. Alfred A. Knopf.
6. Naomi, Neft and Levine, Ann.D. 1997. Where Women Stand: An International Report on the Status of Women in 140 Countries. New York. Random House.
7. Brotman, Barbara. 1000 Years. The Chicago Tribune. December 29, 1999 (Page 1, Section 8).
8.Cairncross, John. 1974. After Polygamy was made a sin. London. Routledge & K.Paul.
9. Ellerby, Helen. 1995. The Dark Side of Christian History. San Rafael. CA. Morningstar Books.
10. Kamal, Omar. 1989. Deep Into the Qur'an. Karachi. Pakistan
11. Kilbourne, Jean. 1999. Deadly Persuasion. New York. The Free Press.
12. Newman, David M. 1998. Sociology.Thousand Oaks California. Pine Forge Press.
13. Weber, Max. Edited by Gerth, Hans. The Religion of China: Confusianism and Taoism.1964. New York. The Free Press.

A RATIONAL INQUIRY INTO HADITH by MUHAMMED A. ASADI

2006-11-20T11:05:00.000-08:00

A RATIONAL INQUIRY INTO HADITH
by MUHAMMED A. ASADI

HADITH ARE THEY AUTHENTIC??
Hadith are the various traditions contained in specific books, believed in by the majority of Muslims to be the sayings of the prophet Muhammed. These in the major part are extra Koranic, i.e from outside the Koran. They either contradict or add to the Koran. They are sometimes presented by Muslims as an explanation of the Koran or as an integral part of Islamic law, even though they are not confirmed by the Koran.
A minority among the Muslims do not accept the various books of Hadith as being an accurate representation of what the prophet Muhammed said. They take the Koran as Criterion (Furqaan in Arabic), according to the Koran's own claim (2:185), accepting only those hadith [tradition or narration attributed to the prophet] which the Koran confirms and attests in totality. I represent that view in this paper.
The various books of hadith that we see in Muslim society today are the same in relation to Muhammed, as the Gospels are to Jesus. They are both similar in that both were complied [in what we possess today] centuries after Muhammed and Jesus respectively [unlike the Koran which was memorized and written down at the time of its revelation] and they both present no proof of authenticity [unlike the Koran in which numerous verses say:"In this is a sign [or proof],,,", and then asks you to refute it]. Therefore, objectively speaking both the hadith and the gospels do not present any evidence as to be considered a 100% reliable representation of the words of the prophets, Muhammed and Jesus.

Most Muslims who have taken on themselves the responsibility of teaching Islam to others have themselves abandoned the Koran by upholding hadith. They say without hesitation: "The majority of Shariah (Law) in Islam is contained outside the Koran in books of hadith and fiqh." Such a saying is a direct attack on the validity of the Koran, which claims to contain the complete Islamic law from God. We need to ask ourselves, what kind of submission (Islam) is this when you are rejecting God's words to follow your traditions.
"...If any do fail to judge by what Allah(God) has sent down (i.e the Koran), they are unbelievers." (Koran 5:45).
"...If any do fail to judge by that which Allah has sent down, they are tyrants(dhilamoon)." (Koran 5:45)
"...If any do fail to judge by that which Allah has sent down, such are evil-livers (fasikoon)." (Koran 5:47)
The Koran reports that the messenger himself will complain to God about his so called followers abandoning the Koran:
"And the messenger says,"O my Lord, my OWN people have forsaken the Koran." (Koran 25:30)

Muslims, those who claim also to believe in the hadith as being totally true, need to be objective and not subjective. They should, as concern for truth demands not change standards while evaluating phenomena. If they reject the Gospels as being true based on reasons that are valid, i.e contradictions, history etc (and they almost all do), then they should also reject the hadith on the same criteria. Hadith have the same problems of authenticity as the gospels do. Hadith do not represent the words of Muhammed just like the gospels don't represent the words of Jesus in total.
Hadith believing Muslims make big claims on the so called scientific compilation of Hadith. Let it be clear however, that no matter how scientific you are in your compilation of what is "false" to start with, the compilation cannot make it true. Even the criteria that is presented are un-objective, i.e the truthfulness of a particular narrator with a story of how truthful he was. To repeat, falsehood is not converted to truth by its scientific compilation.
The scientific method demands that "subjective" proof i.e how truthful a person was be ignored and the item tested on objective criteria. What does the content say?

A DILEMMA
Hadith doctors have traditionally evaluated hadith on its chain of narrators and its body text, according to their own criteria of what should be correct. However even according to their own standards, they fell into a dilemma. Some hadith exist which have according to them a "sound" chain of narrators i.e it was truthfully narrated but they dispute the text of the hadith. One example of this and their whole system collapses. The Koran gives us the standard for judging anything that is presented. If the Koran confirms it in total its true. If the material adds to or contradicts the Koran, its source is not God or his messenger.

HISTORY OF COMPILATION OF HADITH:
A) Out of the books that the majority of Muslims believe in as being authentic, Sahih Bukhari is presented as being the MOST authentic. However a analysis of the history of the books shows that it is anything but authentic. Imam Bokhari the collector of the narration lived in a period over 230 years after the death of the prophet. Out of the 600,000 hadith (narrations) that he collected, which were initially attributed to the prophet, he threw out as fabrication 592,700 of them and kept only 7300 as being genuine. They further reduce to 2762 hadith after repetition.
The margin of error in these numbers is so great, that any rational inquirer can see that accepting the book of Bukhari as containing all authentic hadith or even a majority of authentic hadith is stupidity. YET THE MAJORITY OF MUSLIMS UNQUESTIONABLY ACCEPT IT.
There are many scientific errors in the Book of Bukhari, as well as the other books . Some examples:
i)The prophet according to Bukhari in one of the narrations tells his companion Abu-Dharr Ghafari that the sun goes around the earth, in the apparent description that he gives (hadith 421, pg 283, vol 4 of M.Muhsin Khan's translation of Sahih Bukhari).
This erroneous view was very popular at the time Bukhari compiled his collection. However this is absurd, we know today that the earth rotates around the sun, proven by scientific evidence. The Koran not only corrected this erroneous notion but gave an accurate description of a round earth centuries before scientists discovered it.
ii)According to hadith no disease is contagious [Adwa]. This as we all know is inaccurate. What about the common cold and viruses like Ebola etc. [Hadith 649, page 435, volume7]
iii)Books of hadith contain many home-remedies, according to ideas prevalent at that time, which are scientifically absurd. The hadith mentions there being a cure for every ailment in black cumin seed [Hadith 591, pg400, vol7]. This is evidently not true. can it cure cancer or aids, not to mention even the common cold? Hadith suggests that we drink "camel-urine" to recuperate after an illness [Hadith 590, pg399, vol7]. This is disgusting, naturally speaking. Urine is toxic stuff . The Koran places extreme importance on cleanliness and clean eating (tayyab). The hadith mentions that "fever" is from the "heat of hell" [Hadith 621,622, page 417, vol7]. Atrocious.

The Hadith books insult the prophet by giving him a contradictory personality. In one instance it mentions that the prophet ate with a leper and in another it mentions that he refused to meet with a leper who had come to take allegiance at his hand and accept Islam. He told the man to leave and accepted his allegiance in absentia. Many other such stories are given.
The famous hadith about the fly: "If a fly falls into the vessel of any of you, let him dip all of it (in the vessel) and then throw it away [and use the material in the vessel], for in one of its wings there is a disease and in the other there is a healing [Bukhari, hadith 673, pg 452, vol7]
Things when blindly accepted even though it is clear that their source can never be the messenger of Allah can cause great harm. If the above was taken as fact there would be a wide scale outbreak of typhoid and cholera. As an example I would point you to a historical fact. Some people on reading the statement attributed to Jesus in the gospels, castrated themselves for the "sake of God". That statement was :"..and there are some who make themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven." Let us be rational and reasonable in our outlook and use our senses which God has given us. The Koran is the most rational book on earth.

MAA

WHEN IS THE MESSIAH COMING by SHABBIR AHMED M.D.

2006-11-20T10:42:00.000-08:00

WHEN IS THE MESSIAH COMING
by SHABBIR AHMED M.D

INTRODUCTION
In the last few years, Dr. Shabbir Ahmed has emerged as one of the foremost Islamic scholars in the world. He is also considered by many as the best contemporary writer of Urdu. I, and many others, regard Dr. Ahmed as the most eloquent spokesperson of Allama-Iqbal as well. Read any of Dr. Ahmed's books and you will probably agree with these statements.
A man of true knowledge, Dr. Shabbir Ahmed writes with confidence, honesty, boldness, clarity, and humor. His grasp of the subject under discussion is awesome and the documentation is superb. Once you start reading his book it is difficult to put down because it is so interesting and when you finish, it is difficult to disagree because he is so convincing.
The advent of the Messiah (and Mehdi), and the appearance of the Antichrist (Dajjal) and Gog Magog (Yajooj Majooj), have captured the imagination of billions of people for centuries. Almost every nation and every religion has looked forward to welcoming the SAVIOR. People have their own versions of the catastrophic events of the "Armageddon". It is easy to understand that any nation in her period of decline will be more prone to believe in a "promised one". Muslims today are showing the best example of this phenomenon.
In this booklet Dr. Ahmed has collected some of the most important traditions and made objective observations about them.
This work highlights the fabricated accounts introduced into the Islamic history and helps readers discern the truth.
Dr. Javed Iqbal
March 2000

FOREWORD
Why was it necessary to write this booklet? It (the booklet) will obviously be controversial.
I believe that the advent of the last savior or reformer is already a very debatable issue among people and nations.
O.K., why not leave it as such? If no one ever comes let people wait, wait, wait and pass on. Fine and dandy!
But there are two problems:
1. It is an insult for scholarship to learn the truth and not share it with fellow human beings.
2. The West is faring well globally despite their (faded) belief about the second coming of Jesus. On the contrary, the East (especially Muslims) have fallen into the cold valley of inaction. Why should they worry? Someone will come and improve their lot.
In general, the orthodox Jews are waiting for the Messiah in person. Other Jews are looking for the Messianic age where peace and love will reign.
Many Christians are anticipating the action of Armageddon, that final war between the rulers of the world. The good will have its final victory over the evil. Armageddon is in fact a place in central Palestine where several battles were fought in the ancient history.
Likewise, the Hindu scriptures speak of the 24th and the last divine person "Kalki Avtaar" in the latter days. Buddhists are hoping for the "Maitreya". Jains for "Tri Thanker" and Zoroastrains for Meeta or "Mithra". All of them are supposed to bring glory to their respective followers.
In the Qur'an which is the Final Word of God, there is no mention of an oncoming savior or reformer. However, the Muslim tradition is loaded with reports about two reformers to come, not just one. According to these traditions the Messiah and the Mehdi will help each other in getting rid of all evil. They will kill the "Antichrist" and wipe out "Gog and Magog".
This booklet intends to present some of these historical traditions collectively. The position of the Qur'an will be outlined along with comments by the author. It is hoped that the intelligent reader will draw his or her own conclusions about the reality.
Respectfully,
Shabbir Ahmed, M.D.

WHO AND WHEN?
The weekly "Urdu Times," New York, dated Oct 6th, 1999 has published a detailed interview of Dr. Israr Ahmed. The respected doctor is a sincere and renowned scholar of Islam. One great thing is that he does not prefix his name with "Maulana". He knows that according to the Qur'an, "Maulana" or the "Master" of us all is no one but Allah (9/51).
More than 3 decades ago, the daily "Jang" Karachi prominently published the news that Dr. Israr Ahmed had quit Jamat-e-Islami. The chief of Jamat-e-Islami was called Maulana Syed Abul A'Ala Maudoodi. Dr. Israr and others who quit with him maintained that "Al-A'ALA" is the name of God, meaning the most Glorious the most High. Abu means father. Therefore Abul A'Ala would mean "THE FATHER OF GOD". Hence, Maulana Syed Abul A'Ala Maudoodi translates "our master, owner, Father of God Maudoodi" (Syed means owner).
Instead of acknowledging the truth, Mr. Maudoodi became furious and fired Dr. Israr from the Jamaat. In turn, Maudoodi came under fire that he had been a dire opponent of the Pakistan Movement. Also that Allama Iqbal was a great benefactor of Maudoodi since he brought the jobless Maudoodi from Deccan to Pathan Kot and assigned him to do Qur'anic research. But, the daily "Jang" exclaimed that, for some ulterior reason Maudoodi carefully avoided citing the verses of Iqbal in his writings.
No doubt Allama Iqbal enjoys such a high station in Urdu and Persian literature that any scholar writing in these two languages without referring to the Allama will reflect his own ignorance and incompetence.
In an interview with Urdu Times, answering a question, Dr. Israr said, "Tableeghi Jamaat" accomplished nothing in 70 years, Jamaate-Islami brought no change in 60 years. Why wonder that I and my Tanzeem-e-Islami have created no dent in 40 years? (The weight of Dr. Israr's logic should be scaled by our reader).
Dr. Israr Ahmed has his admirers world-wide. Shabbir Ahmed is one of them. But the answer to the Urdu Times' journalist is something else. It is hidden from the truth-seeking eyes of the doctor sahib. There is a word in Arabic, "Taghreez". When a vehicle gets stuck so that it's wheels keep spinning in the sand but the vehicle stays put, this is called "Taghreez". The truth of the matter is that whether it is Tableeghi Jamaat or Jamaat-e-Islami or any other Islamic movement in the world, their engines are screaming while the vehicles remain stuck in the sand of tradition. "Movements" which do not move! Allama Iqbal very aptly identifies the situation for us:
The Truth is lost in non-sense
This nation is lost in legend

Look at the magic of these legends and traditions. A mullah of the caliber of Dr. Israr Ahmed states in his interview that "Imam Mehdi" has been born in Arabia in 1962. The authority he has referred to about his startling discovery is the late Jane Dixon of the U.S. Jane Dixon, the self-proclaimed diviner who gained fame for "foreseeing" the assassination of J.F.K. (but could not predict her own demise!)
How numerous a vessel has drowned
When the thought of the jurist, the
Mystic and the poet has downed!
Many of my respected readers have been calling me regarding this interview partly because they don't have Dr. Israr Ahmed's phone number. Several of them have asked me to write on the subject of the Advent of the Messiah (&Mehdi) and comment on Dr. Israr's mysterious statements. (Many of the readers surely know that the correct spelling of doctor saheb's name is Asrar which in itself means "mysteries").

THE NEED FOR BELIEF IN THE SECOND COMING OF JESUS (And a reformer, Mehdi)
First of all it is important to note that this belief is not one of the essential articles of faith, which are outlined in the Qur'an (2/177).
Next, it is imperative to realize that Muslims in general are a nation of experts. Every member of the Ummah happens to be a politician, a philosopher, a religious leader, a scholar, a judge or a Mufti (verdict dispenser). Being a member of the Ummah, I am no exception. So I wish to share my expertise on the subject with the open-minded reader.
In my "expert" opinion blind following of tradition and of people is no better than idol worship. This statement by itself is sufficient to draw an adverse verdict from our experts, but I have crossed the boundary lines drawn by mullahs quite a few times with no luck. "Imam" Ghazali advised centuries ago, "Do not consider yourself a significant person unless you have been honored by a verdict of infidelity!"
Before we get the ball rolling there in a RED ALERT. If you are in love with your present dogmas, if the darkness of conjecture is dearer to you than the light of the truth, if you feel safe in the cocoon of preconceived notions and rethinking is likely to disrupt this cocoon, PLEASE STOP HERE. Read something else. Watch TV. Eat a hamburger or go out for a
walk. On the other hand, if you wish to let the stark reality gaze at you, PLEASE READ ON and draw your own conclusions.

A large majority of Muslims are heard saying that the advent of the Messiah and the Mehdi has been foretold in the Islamic tradition. BUT MOST PEOPLE HAVE NOT READ THESE NARRATIVES. They have only heard them from the mullah screaming in his usual high-pitched, topless stopless voice. Only a senseless mind can ascribe these insults to the holy prophet. Anyone with reason who reads these accounts in the so called Islamic books, will get amazed (or amused) at these contradictory, and ridiculously funny insults. A mind without reason and committed to blind following will, of course take it with a grain of salt. Now, here are some examples:

SOME PASSAGES FROM BOOKS ON HISTORY AND TRADITION
• The prophet (our salutes to him) said that there shall rise a person from me. His name will be Mohammad, the son of Abdullah and he will fill the earth with equity and justice (Kitabul Mehdi, Abu Dawood volume III).
• That person's name will be Mehdi (not Mohammad, the son of Abdullah) (Ibid).
• Hazrat Ali quoted the holy prophet, "A person will emerge from Maawara-tan-Nahr. His name will be Harith (neither Mohammad nor Mehdi). A man by the name of Mansoor will walk ahead of him and he will bestow rule to the family of the prophet" (Ibid).
• The holy prophet gave the glad tiding of Mehdi that he would come in times of chaos and instantly spread equity and justice on earth. He will stay seven, eight or nine years and then no goodness will survive on the planet (Musnad-e-Ahmad).
How tragic! The final reformer of people comes after
centuries of expectation and waiting. His monumental efforts
bring about a few years of peace and then there is the instant
doom!
• Imam Mehdi bin Hassan Askari was born in 255 A.H. (9th century A.D.). He disappeared at age four or five just 10 days before the death of his father. Then he hid in the cave of "Samera" near Baghdad. He took with him the whole Qur'an which had forty parts not thirty and seventeen thousand verses not 6,200. The child Mehdi took with him (nobody knows how) the ancient books of all prophets, the scrolls of Ali, the scrolls of Fatima, the knowledge of "JAFR", miracles of all the prophets; the staff of Moses, the shirt of Adam, and the ring of Solomon.
Imam Mehdi will come out of the cave before the Dooms
Day. He will exhume Abu Bakr and Umar from their graves
and bring them to life. In one day and night he will kill them
one thousand times and revive them one thousand times.
Other traditions include Hazrat Uthman among the victims
(Hablillah vol 6 page 32, Alkafi, Muhaddis Al Jazaeri).
• Mohammad, the Holy Prophet will be the first one to take the oath of allegiance (do BAIAAT) at the hand of Imam Mehdi (Basair Darajat p:213).
• Mehdi will bring people to life and send them to paradise and hell (Miratul Anwar p: 68).
• The hidden Imam Mehdi will bring a new religion and the new book as he comes (Fasl Al-Khitab p:283).
• Only Mehdi will bring the real Quran. Until then use the available Qur'an. Remember! one who has no "Taqayya" has no religion. (Taqayya means uttering falsehood in order to hide the truth) (Faslul-Khitab, Imam Kalaini, Aljaezari on the alleged authority of Hazrat Ali).
• The Ahadith of Tirmizi, Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Daud, Musnad-e-Ahmed Bin Hanbal, Al-Kafi and numerous other books note differently the period of Mehdi's rule from seven to forty years. Mehdi will fight Gog Magog! To this day it has not been determined who really Gog Magog are. Some far reaching minds suggested in the past that they were the Mongols. Today's bright mullahs think they might be the super powers of this time. In some narratives Gog Magog are shown to be abundantly numerous and intensely foolish but powerful nations. For 3000 years they have had a great wall built around them to keep them from invading other nations. Since then they have been licking the wall all day until it becomes paper-thin by dusk. That brings a simultaneous sigh of relief from the millions (or billions!) "Let us do the remaining task in the morning", only to find that the wall has grown back to its original, full proportions!

This has been happening every day for thousands of years. Gog Magog learn no lesson. But around the end of the world, i.e. during the times of Imam Mehdi they will lick the great wall to extinction and set themselves free. Imagine their numbers. They will dash and fill the earth. They will drink up all the oceans on the globe (and ease their thirst with salt water!). The narrators do not say what would become of the sea life. Mehdi would watch them like a super- bowl spectator. The Qur'an does not speak of Gog Magog in any of these terms.

• According to some references the monocular Antichrist will appear around this time.
• After killing Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, one thousand times Imam Mehdi will gather Muslims on the scrolls of Ali and scrolls of Fatima. Mehdi's task will thus be completed. What will happen next? See Tafheemul-Qur'an of Maududi vol IV, explanation of surah Ahzab, addendum. Maududi has collected quite a few Ahadith from Abu Daud, Mishkat, Muslim, Tirmizi, Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Mustadrak Hakim etc. It is not clear why he left out Bukhari.

TAFHEEM-UL-QUR'AN (by Maududi)
􀂙 (In Damascus) Muslims will be lining up for prayers. Takbeer, Aqamat would have been uttered as Jesus the son of Mary will suddenly descend (from thin air) and he will lead the prayers for Muslims (Ref: Mishkat & Muslim).
􀂙 Jesus, the son of Mary will descend. The leader of Muslims (Imam Mehdi) will ask him to lead prayers but Jesus will say, "No, you are leaders unto each other" (Ref: Muslim and Musnad-e- Ahmed).
􀂙 The Imam of Muslims will turn back so that Jesus may advance but Jesus will say, "No, you lead the prayers." So the Imam will lead the prayers. (Incidentally, mullahs world-wide seem to have a burning desire to lead prayers whenever and wherever possible, not realizing its significance.)
However, these three Ahadith do not clarify as to who will
actually lead the prayers. Jesus, Mehdi or some ordinary
Muslim.
􀂙 After ending the prayers with Salaam right and left, Jesus will command that the door of the Masjid be opened. Outside, Dajjal the Antichrist will be present with 70,000 armed Jews. As soon as Jesus looks at him, the Antichrist will start dissolving like salt dissolves in water and he will quicken to flee. Jesus will run after him. (After approx. 30 miles of dash and marathon while the 70,000 watch the greatest foot race ever) Jesus will get the Antichrist at the eastern gate of Lydda (near Tel-Aviv). And ALLAH WILL DEFEAT THE JEWS (Tafheem-ul-Quran p. 160). (Please note that Allah will defeat the Jews).
􀂙 If Jesus left the Dajjal alone the latter will die himself dissolving and melting. But Allah will get him killed at the hands of Jesus. And Jesus will show his blood on his spear to Muslims (show his blood to get some lollipops!).
􀂙 After finishing the prayers Jesus will walk toward the Antichrist with his spear in hand. As soon as the Dajjal sees Jesus the former will start melting like the melting of lead (not like salt dissolving in water). Jesus will kill him with his spear (no marathon this time). (Tafheem-ul-Quran v.IV p.161).
􀂙 Jesus, the son of Marry will descend in the eastern part of Damascus near the white minaret. (The white minaret probably helping the landing). He will be dressed in two yellow shawls and will come down with his hands placed on the arms of two angels. His breath will reach as far as his eyesight and all infidels in the range of his eyesight will succumb instantly (ref. P.158).

THE WESTERN SARCASM
The orientalist Dorcey Williams writes:
"The Messiah of Muslims will descend from the heavens holding on to the wings of two angels. He will start breathing fire like a dragon. He will be attired in two pieces of yellow cloth like a sick weakling. The moment he touches the ground, (In times of rockets, missiles and laser) he would hold his spear and race after the Antichrist for thirty miles. The rest of the world would be watching the drama probably on CNN. At the gate of Lydda the Antichrist will say "Brother Jesus! I am tired. I have had it, please, for God's sake kill me".
Muslim, Tirmizi, Abu Daud and Ibne Majah report in this Hadith that Jesus, the son of Mary will not concern himself with following or leading prayers. While the same books and others also narrate that first of all he will follow or lead prayers. I will urge Jesus not to pull his spear and have some mercy. Let the dissolving melting Dajjal Antichrist vanish in peace."

Williams comments that:
"The Muslims keep and will keep living under the wishful thinking that the Dajjal (Antichrist) will have only 70,000 soldiers in his legion holding only swords in their hands. While Imam Mehdi will be an amused spectator, Jesus the son of Mary will step forward and solve all their (Muslims') problems and get rid of all non-Muslims" (The Return of Jesus p.271-273).
Note: Some people believe that during those times all technology might vanish, therefore an "Armageddon" of sword and spear is quite possible. But, the same traditions
insist that this high drama will take place with science at its fullest glory.

MORE (FABRICATED) AHADITH
􀂙 Not one of the followers of Dajjal will survive the spear of Jesus (Tafheem vol 4 p 158).
(But, a short while ago all non-believers, infidels had been
killed by Jesus's breath!)
􀂙 (What will the Muslims do when the Messiah's breath kills all infidels in the range of his sight? Probably clap their hands). Allah (not Messiah) will defeat the Jews (ref. Tafheem vol.IV p. 168).
􀂙 Muslims will prevail and break the cross, kill the swine and revoke jizyah (tax) (Ibid p.162).
􀂙 (Sorry, Muslims will not do that) The son of Mary will break the cross and kill the swine (Ibid p.155).
􀂙 Allah (not Jesus) will kill the Dajjal near the incline of Afeeq (Ibid p. 162).
􀂙 (Sorry again, it won't be Allah, rather) the son of Mary will kill the Dajjal at the gate of Lydda (please forgive and forget Afeeq) (Ibid p. 160).
􀂙 The Antichrist will rise among the Jews (Ibid p.165).
􀂙 (No, No, sorry!) without any doubt the Dajjal has to rise amongst you (Muslims) (Ibid p.142).
􀂙 Many books of history and tradition narrate a fabricated Hadith that Umar Farooq (R.A) wanted to kill a man believing him to be the Dajjal. The Holy Prophet stopped him from doing so saying, "If this man is Dajjal you cannot be his killer. Only Jesus, the son of Mary will be the one to kill him."
Readers should note here that in this fabricated Hadith Dajjal is clearly depicted as a man, as is the case in Ahadith noted by Maududi. Any interpretations showing Dajjal or Antichrist as a nation, as a super-natural creature, the railway engine etc. are nothing but shameful apologies of the text.

Once the Muslim deviates from the Qur'an and falls into the swamp of conjecture, he finds it difficult to get out. Irrational and apologetic explanations bury him even deeper.
Maududi, the most "authoritative" and popular Islamic scholar of the mid 20th century writes on page 165 of Tafheem vol.4:
"The literature of Jews is loaded with sweet dreams about the promised one. They have been living in this utopia for the last many centuries."
Paradoxically, was Mr. Maududi not a victim of this sweet dream till the end of his life? How about other mullahs and their blind followers?
All the above mentioned lines and paragraphs of Maududi's Tafheem have been taken from addendum to the explanation of the surah "Ahzab" vol:4 Urdu (Maktaba Taameere Insaniat, Lahore).
The writer (Maududi) has selected these Ahadith from, Abu Daud, Muslim, Tirmizi, Masnade Ahmed, Mishkat, Hakim etc.
Now watch a beautiful confession on page 163. Maududi unwillingly reveals the truth:
"The belief in the promise one is founded on nothing but Ahadith." (It is nowhere seen in the Qur'an)

Everyone seems to be waiting
Wider than the confession of Maududi is the fact that the dogma of a promised one is found almost in every religion of the world. When the Messiah of the Jews comes he will bestow upon them the everlasting kingdom. When the Messiah of the Christians shows up again, mankind will unite under Christendom. Likewise when the Meeta, Buddha II arrives he will erase all religions and turn every human being into a Mahatma. The Mithra of Zoroastrians will herald the return of the lost Maggian glory for his followers. The "Kalki Avtaar" will revive Hinduism to total victory. The Tri-Thanker of Jainism will unify all human beings on earth into his religion. Then all people will become Bugs Bunnies eating plants only. It is amazing to note that even some ancient tribes of Africa and the Americas charm themselves with this "redeemer" concept.
Let's conceive for a moment that dozens of promised ones have appeared in the world for a final round. Trying to prevail over one another ! Violence, commotion, social disorder, blood shed, total chaos as far as our imagination can take us.

MIRZA GHULAM AHMED
(1830's to 1908)
The most interesting claim was made by Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian around 1900 A.D that he was the Mehdi and the Messiah (two in one).
Step One:
First he relates that God made him Mary. Then God exercised his power of manhood (i.e. performed the male sexual act on Mary Mirza). Mirza as Mary became pregnant. Then Jesus was born. Mary disappeared and now Mirza Ghulam Ahmed is Jesus, the son of Mary (Ref: Islamic Sacrifie by Qazi Yar Mohammad Qadiyani).
Read and enjoy again before going to the next step; How Mirza became Mehdi!
Mirza Ghulam writes in his book (Shahadat-ul-Qur'an p.61).
Step Two:
"It is written in the Bukhari (collection of Ahadith) that a voice will announce from the heavens. This Mirza is Mehdi, the caliph of Allah."
Tragic for Mirza that there is no such thing remotely mentioned in the Bukhari. And Mirza was the sole figure to be blessed with that voice!
Mirza Ji went onto claim that he was all in one i.e. the Holy Prophet, Mehdi, Jesus, Krishna plus the promised one of all religions.
Countless people have claimed to be the promised one, the Mehdi or the Messiah in the last many centuries. It is a strange paradox that people keep waiting and waiting intently for someone to come. But as soon as some priest, monk, mullah, sufi, yogi, mystic makes the claim, they raise furor against him. They even attempt to kill him!

THE PROBLEM
The real problem with the dogma of a promised one is that it serves as an opium for nations. It snatches from them the will to strive and struggle. Well, someone will come to solve their problems and raise them to glory. The situation is quite understandable as far as other religions are concerned because they do not have "Al-Qur'an" the Criterion between the right and the wrong. But it is strange that Muslims who regard the Qur'an as their own book, keep groping in the dark. We will see shortly that the final Word of God very clearly rules out the coming of another promised one after Prophet Mohammad (our salutes to him). We have documented that Maududi in his Tafheem vol. 4 pg. 163 admits that there is no place for this utopian dogma in the Qur'an.

SIR SYED AHMED KHAN
(1817 to 1898)
JESUS WAS NEVER RAISED TO HEAVEN.
That great wizard of a genius was a commentator of the Qur'an par excellence. Follow his pen,
"Our (Muslim) commentators of the Qur'an have blindly followed the Christian traditions to concoct such Ahadith. These so-called experts have assigned totally erroneous meaning to
"Rafaa" or the raising of the prophets Jesus (3:55) and Enoch (19:56). The Qur'an absolutely does not portray the raising of these prophets bodily up into the heavens. It describes raising them in honor. The prophecies of the coming of Mehdi and Messiah have been introduced into our history by non-Muslims. The Qur'an is absolutely free of these ridiculous statements. (Ref. Tafseer vol.I part 7 pg 123 and vol 2 several pages).
DR SIR ALLAMA MUHAMMAD IQBAL
(1877 to 1938)
The most outstanding exponent of the Qur'an, Sir Iqbal does not subscribe to the view of ascension of Jesus up into the heavens or to his second coming. Nor does Sir Iqbal see Mehdi as a specific person.
You O' preacher, have placed God on top of the heavens.
(Didn't you think) what kind of God He would be
that shies away from his servants!
See another example:
"Who is the Mehdi, who is the leader of the last period?
The one whose self wakes up, one who recognizes the human potential. He is Mehdi and he is the promise one of the latter times."
And another:
Look at the revelation of God on the minaret of your heart
And stop waiting for the advent of Mehdi and Jesus
In his English writings against the Qadianis, Sir Iqbal thrashed the dogma of a promised one as a Maggian and a Jewish heritage.
Abulkalam Azad And Ubaidullah Sindhi
These two noted scholars of the twentieth century in their respective explanations of the Qur'an very forcefully and convincingly dismiss the notion of the advent of a Messiah or Mehdi (Ref Tarjamanul Qur'an Urdu and Ilhamur Rahman Arabic; commentary on surah 3:55).
MUFTI SHEIKH MUHAMMAD ABDUH
(1849 to 1906)
The celebrated scholar of Islam, Mohammad Sheikh Abduh of Egypt maintains that the stories of a living Jesus in the heavens and his second coming were inserted into our Ahadith centuries ago by Christian scholars so that Christianity may seem to be superior to Islam.
JAMAL-UDDIN AFGHANI
(1830 to 1899)
This great torch bearer of Muslim unity said, "My intensive research in the Qur'an, Hadith and history has taught me that any human being who tries to save the planet and make it a better place to live is the Mehdi and the Messiah in his own right."

THE FINAL WORD, AL-QUR'AN
􀂾 God said, "O' Jesus verily, I shall cause thee to die and shall exalt thee unto me." (3:55)
The word "Rafaa" means honoring or exalting. "Nowhere in
the Quran is there any warrant for the popular believe that
God has taken up Jesus bodily into heaven" (Ref: The Message
of the Qur'an, Tafseer by Allama Muhammad Asad 3:55 and 4:158).
􀂾 "And we raised Enoch (Idrees) in honor." (19:56)
(God exalted him) (Ref: Allama Muhammad Asad, Tafseer19:56).
The great German scholar and exponent Allama
Muhammad Asad writes that the very common belief that
Jesus was taken up to the heaven in body is absolutely non-
Quranic and therefore it has no merit.
􀂾 (O' Muhammad!) We did not give any person before you immortality (21:33).
􀂾 Muhammad is but a messenger, all messengers before him have passed away. If he dies or gets killed, will you turn back? (3:144).
This verse makes clear that Jesus too has died. He has passed away and was not raised to the heavens. When Muhammad (our salutes to him) died not one of his companions
complained why he was not raised to heaven like Jesus and Enoch.
􀂾 This day I have perfected your religion for you (5:3). The words of your Sustainer have been completed (6:116).
Hence, no further Divine revelation. No further messenger.
􀂾 Muhammad is the messenger of Allah and he is the last prophet (33:40).
Hence, no room for a Divinely guided one to come.
􀂾 Verily this Book of admonishment We have revealed and We are its Guardian (15:9).
Therefore no further prophet, Mehdi or Messiah is necessary.
􀂾 (O' Muhammad!) all prophets that we sent before you we gave no one a body that won't (need and) eat food and they were not here to stay (so was Jesus not given a body that he won't eat food or sit up in heaven eating his daily bread or stay alive indefinitely).
􀂾 Jesus the son of Mary was only a messenger. All messengers before him have passed on (5:75)
􀂾 Messiah and his mother (Mary) the truthful both (were human beings and they) used to eat (5:75)
􀂾 See how clearly and plainly we narrate Our verses. Then look how they are straying in the opposite direction (5:75)
(These ignorant people make human beings that eat and walk
about in markets, sit up in heaven with their bodies!)
􀂾 Is the Qur'an not sufficient for these people? (29:51).
􀂾 You will never find change in the Laws of Allah (48:23) (Bodily ascension is not a Law of Allah. Returning from heaven to this world too, is not His law).
􀂾 The Qur'an states "Allah does not change the condition of a nation unless they bring about a change in their psychology." (13:11)
Please stop here and think for a moment why Mehdi and
Jesus would come to change the condition of a nation or
nations? Doesn't this dogma collide with a rock solid law of
the Qur'an.
􀂾 While God is Omni-present the rising of Jesus in body above the skies and seating himself on the right hand of God males no sense. It confines God to some place in the heavens. It also gives a man like image to God. This picture is obviously Biblical. It is certainly not Quranic (ref: Dr Maurice Bucaille and of course commonsense).
􀂾 Jamaluddin Afghani, Mufti Muhammad Abduh, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Allama Iqbal, Allama Muhammad Asad, Maurice Buccaille, Allama Inayatullah Mashriqi, the brilliant sons of the Ummah and countless others narrate that bodily ascension of Jesus confines God to a certain heaven while the Quran makes it very clear that God is present every where.

THE TRUMP CARD
Dear reader, Muslims, the so called custodians of the Qur'an are facing a strange dilemma. North or South, East or West, the Christian missionaries are asking a few simple questions to Muslims especially the youth. A sample of that Q.A. session goes likes this:
22
"Well, dear Muslim friend! you believe that Jesus is sitting in the company of God in the heavens."
You also believe that in the final times he will come again.
Now just think who is more glorious? Jesus who is living in the heaven or Muhammad who is burried in dust.
Is that Messiah greater who will come and bring order to the earth or that Muhammad who will wake up when the bugles are blowing only to find Moses alert and oriented and standing holding the thrown of God!
(Moses holding the thrown, this statement has been interjected into our Ahadith obviously by Jewish historians).
The unsuspecting Muslim easily falls into this trap because the religious school and the mullah have taught him exactly this nonsense. Hardly any sufi, mullah, or maulvi advises the Muslims to turn to the Qur'an. The Muslim does not study the Qur'an and Ahadith himself. He only listens to the maulvi.
He has been entangled into the cobweb of stories, legends, and mythology. According to Sir. Iqbal much of our tradition consists of Israelite history, traditions and sayings.

ABANDONING THE QUR'AN
Now let the Qur'an keep saying O' people! listen carefully, the Laws of Allah do not change. Bodily ascension is not the Law of God. Allah has not given immortality to anyone. The messengers before Muhammad have all passed away. Jesus was a prophet like other prophets who used to eat and drink. Let the Qur'an remind again and again that religion has been perfected. The last prophet has come and gone. The Book of Allah has
preserved all rules and laws of religion. All the teachings necessary for mankind have been compiled in this book for all and for ever. Therefore, there is absolutely no need for a Mehdi and Messiah to come. Let the Qur'an declare that all prophets were mortal human beings. Then let it affirm that the dead do not return to this world (23:100, 23:107) and let the Qur'an scream whatever and however, the Muslim places peacock feathers and rose petals between its sacred leaves and squeezes the book shut in reverence with silk covers and binders then places it on the highest and the remotest place in the closet.
RESULT: The Muslim wants to live and die believing that "Imam Mehdi" will come out of the historically mysterious cave near Baghdad in Samera or Sura Mann Rye. (Wish he had come out during the 1990 Gulf war to defend Muslims). He will head straight for Medina, will exhume and revive Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman (the first three rightly guided caliphs of Islam). He would then kill them with one swipe of his sword. He will do this 1000 times in 24 hours more that 40 times an hour, about once a minute. Revive them kill them revive them kill them!
The historical narratives and Ahadith literature is unclear whether Mehdi will still be a 5 year old child, a youth, a 40 years old mature person or whether he would be 11-1200 year old at the time of his peak performance!
Anyhow the current "fake" Qur'an will be pulled by God up into the heavens probably angels fishing it up with millions of fishlines.

IMAGINE!
Mehdi will then bring the real Qur'an (Mashaf-e-Ali and Mashaf-e-Fatima) and unite all Muslims over them. While unity would be trying to prevail among Muslims, Gog Magog will appear from nowhere! Their population will be such enormous and they will be so thirsty that they would drink all seven oceans along with the salt and spills and pollution in no time. Sea life will start living on trees! Mehdi will be preparing to kill these billions of human beasts and offer prayer in the mosque in Damascus. Right then the Antichrist will lay siege of the mosque along with his legions of 70,000 Jews. Mehdi and two billion Muslims in the world will find themselves pitifully helpless. So, Jesus the Messiah will, without seeking permission from the Father descend from the heaven near the white minaret of Damascus in the manner of a sick man being supported by two angels. Medium height, two yellow shawls, white blonde fellow with blue eyes, curly hair as if drenched in water, a short spear in his right hand. In times of nuclear, hydrogen, neutron bombs and laser technology a battle of spear and 70,000 swords will take place. Dajjal (the Antichrist) runs away or not, melts down or not, the Messiah will plunge his spear into his chest. Then (most important) the Messiah will show to Muslims the Dajjal's blood shining on his spear (probably to get a good round of applause and a lollipop). Now suddenly rocks and trees will start yelling, "O' Muslim! O' Abullah! O'Abdur Rahman! here, behind me is hiding a Jew-----come here, kill him. Before the blink of an eye all 70,000 Jews will be slain! The rest of the millions will probably watch the superbowl.
Then Jesus breaks the cross (which will be provided to him graciously perhaps by the pope) and kills the swine (gifted to him probably by the chief priest of Damascus). Lo and behold! Two billion Christians in the world will suddenly embrace Islam.
Here the narrators breathe a sigh of relief but only for a moment.

Breaking of the cross and killing of the swine has been interpreted by the so-called scholars with frank apologies. For, example, Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian writes that breaking of the cross signifies the end of Christianity. And that he has done it. On the contrary during his life and after his demise in 1908, Christianity beat up the Muslims quite thoroughly and convincingly. A quick glance at the First World War will suffice to elaborate that point.
Killing of the swine is interpreted as restoration of the Law of Moses. But, didn't Jesus this time come as a follower of Muhammad? (our salutes to them).

THE DROP SCENE
Ironically the conclusion of the thrilling story is very tragic. Like the story itself the drop scene has been fabricated and concocted by our "able" historians, narrators and commentators and filled in by non-Muslim "experts". Think about it ------
The five to six billion years old planet, inhabited by Homo sapiens for a million years. Human civilization for ten thousand years, numerous prophets and reformers, wars and battles, the pursuit of peace, fall rise and decline of human civilization, political and social turmoil, ups and downs. Finally the advent of the last messenger Mohammad (our salutes to him), gradual evolution of the human culture. Billions of men and women in fourteen centuries pass away waiting for the establishment of the Divine kingdom on earth. What was not accomplished in centuries is done with a stroke of magic by Mehdi and Messiah. They kill all Jews, convert all Christians and pat the back of Muslims. The whole scenario changes. What a lovely scenario! A paradise on earth. Peace, prosperity and wellness. Tiger and lamb drinking water from the same fountain. No more injustice.

Men become angels and women became "hoories" (heavenly creatures). But for some obscure reason the God of our narrators hates the happy change. He was sitting in the skies on His royal thrown. He summoned the angel of winds. "O, angel of wind and rain! I hate the tranquility and prosperity of the planet earth. The happiness of its inhabitants is sorrow to me. Turn about your feet. Quick! go back. Blow noxious wind all over the planet. But watch, formulate this wind with a very clever technique. It should be such that my believing servants fall dead as soon as they take their first breath. Then I will send the angels of the Day of Dooms. Every thing will fall apart. Earthquakes, cyclones, fires, and floods will have their day out. Mountains will blow up like cotton shreds. The sun will come down the distance of 1 1/4 spears from the earth. My dear angel, I intend to bring this horrible torment upon those men and women who are the slaves of the Satan, not mine.
Our great scholar and historian writes that the Dooms Day will befall the infidels. He has forgotten that previously he wrote that all Jews of the world would be perished. All Christians will become Muslims. Muslims will remain untouched by the "blessing of the Kalema." No non-Muslim will survive the great calamity. Now he changes his mind and states that the Qiamat, the apocalypse will befall the believers!

FUTURE DESIGNS
The author will feel honored if someone reading this booklet will honor him with a verdict of infidelity. However, let us not forget that the Christian missionaries throughout the world are claiming that Muslims in their hearts believe in the divinity of Jesus but hesitate to admit it.
Please watch the following pointed questions thrown by missionaries especially at the Muslim youth:
1. Do you believe that Jesus was born without a father? The Muslim says, "Yes".
The Qur'an says that even God won't have a son since he has no consort (Saheba) (6:101)
(Likewise how could Mary have a son without a husband! Some readers would find this point shocking. But, it has been elaborated in my book "Why I am not a Christian").
2. Do you believe that Jesus was given many miracles one of which was raising the dead to life? The answer from the Muslim is again a solid "Yes".
(Here the Qur'an in fact means awakening of people.)
3. Do you admit that Jesus is alive in the heavens while Mohammad is buried in the ground. "Of course, yes", says the Muslim. (Wrong interpretation by the mullah of 3:55 under Biblical influence.)
4. Now, don't you have faith in Jesus's coming in the final hour to rectify problems of mankind and to restore order in the world. Also, that he will kill the Antichrist. The Muslim responds, "Of course I do believe in all this (junk). How can I be a Muslim if I don't??" (The mullah has taught the Muslim masses exactly as above).
This is the crucial moment when the Christian missionary embraces the Muslim youngster saying, "This is what we believe in too. We are from you and you are from us!" The next step is a little favor of some sort. Suddenly wine becomes fine and the forbidden fruit of dating becomes permissible. 'Jesus died for the sins of humanity.' So life becomes fun without accountability.
This is the current design for the near future but the foundation was laid a thousand years ago when the enemies of Islam had introduced stories in our Ahadith that Jesus is sitting up in the heavens and he will come to the world once again.

PLEASE REMEMBER
That a living Jesus and his second coming are absolutely non- Quranic. Therefore it is not one of the five article of faith (2:177). Maududi is absolutely right that this dogma is entirely based on Ahadith and it is not found in the Quran. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Jamaluddin Afghani, Mufti Muhammad Abduh, Allama Iqbal, Allama Muhammad Asad (The greatest German exponent of the Qur'an) Ahmed Deedat, Imam Vehbi Ismael, Mujtahid Imam Al-Husseini, and Maurice Buccaile, Allama Inayatullah Mashriqi, Abul Kalam Azad, Ubaidullah Sindhi, Allama Tamanna Imadi, and numerous other scholars reject this story as fabrication or interpolation. These great scholars maintain that only those Ahadith should be accepted that agree with the Quran. They are infact obeying the Holy Prophet.
The Prophet (our salutes to him) said that quotations recited in his holy name must be checked against the Qur'an. The author of this booklet remembers thousands of Ahadith by heart and those Ahadith which stand up to the criterion of the Qur'an are extremely dear to him.
Now it is up to the reader whether to accept the Quran or keep these fabricated stories close to the heart and let the coming generations embrace Christianity.
"When it is said to them, Follow the Book of God they say No, we will follow the path of our ancestors" (Al-Qur'an 2:170).

GOG MAGOG
View for a moment that in the age of laser, nuclear and missile technology, on the East side of the Jordan River are standing Muslims. Their commander is Jesus clad in two yellow shawls and holding a spear in his hand. On the West bank of the Jordan River is the arch enemy, Dajjal (Antichrist) with his armies. Gog Magog have also appeared. Both armies East and the West of the river are holding swords. Gog Magog have drunk all seven oceans. Mehdi says "Allah-o-Akbar." Jesus stops Mehdi from attacking. Then Jesus the Messiah whirls his spear in the air. Millions of infidels scream "Ah! I am dead" and suddenly collapse like dominoes. Only believers remain on earth. The apocalypse is about to come but Jesus stops the angels from blowing their trumpet. Wait, I have not married yet. A beautiful believing lady steps forward and gives herself to him. Instant marriage takes place. All believers on earth are invited to the wedding and at the valima (the post wedding reception). Then several children are born in the household of Jesus. Non-Muslims have already perished. So Jesus tries his best to convince Muslims, "Look, this is my wife and here are my children. So, believe me I am a human being. I am not divine, I am not the son of God (Please note Jesus is assuring Muslims who already know on the authority of the Qur'an that he was not divine).
Anyhow the angels appear again with their trumpet. Jesus signals to them to stop and says, "No, wait! one thing is still remaining. I have to die before Qiamat" (the apocalypse). With billions of crowd watching in anticipation, Jesus begins his 800 miles stroll to Madina. The gentle stroll takes only one hour. There he goes and lies down on the ground next to the Holy prophet's grave. Once again with his index finger up in the air he screams at the top his voice that he is not and never was the son of God. He also announces that in his second coming he was only the son of Mary and Joseph. No prophet, no nothing, just a humble follower of Mohammad (our salutes to him). Then he closes his eyes and peacefully breathes his last. Men and Angels of all the universe are summoned for his funeral prayers.

With all empathy to the respected reader, the story of insult to the human intelligence has not ended yet. Our brilliant historians show mood swings in hundreds of books, essays, copies, and commentaries. These insults are so numerous that it is difficult even to list them.
I believe and hope that I have been able to convey the essence of what our "respected, revered and honored", so called scholars and Imams of the Islamic History have generated.

DAJJAL , THE ANTICHRIST
Let's bear some more insults for the sake of completion. Our brilliant historian gets stuck in his own mess. He has to explain the Dajjal. This powerful creature is described differently in different books. To be brief he is a master magician, has super- natural powers, can travel at incredible speed. He can kill people and he can bring them back to life!
Sometimes he happens to be a European and at other times becomes the leader of the Jews. He has a blind right eye. Letters K F R (KUFR) meaning infidelity are inscribed on his forehead. Sometimes he is seen as the railway and at other times the railway becomes his donkey. If you happen to read details in the related books you will see ignorance and apology at their height.

MEHDI AND MESSIAH
Mehdi at times happens to be a Sunni, at others a Shiite. A five year old kid, 40 years old strong or 1200 years old. Thousands of people throughout the world have claimed to be Mehdi in the past centuries (I have seen one in chains!). And they will keep coming until the Muslims return to the Qur'an.
There is a host of pictures of Jesus in the literature, he is an old prophet and he is the follower of the Holy Prophet. His appearance is remarkable. People will recognize him as a man of medium height, reddish white (British complexion) of course, with blue eyes and blonde hair. His hair would look as if water is about to trickle down from them but doesn't.
He is shown clad in two yellow cloths. The sick looking man supported in his descent by two angels. Suddenly he becomes mighty (like Popeye after eating spinach) and wealthy (without owning Microsoft) and showers so much of wealth that soon no one in the world is willing to accept it. He will abolish taxes. Everyone will be a Muslim, so what jizya taxes will he abolish?
For the most interesting picture given by Mirza Ghulam see page 16.

THE OTHER SIDE
Dear reader, more than 60 million Americans and approximately 300 million Christians and Jews worldwide believe in the myth of Armageddon. But they are not in a state of morbid waiting for someone to come.

BREAKING NEWS: Grace Halsells' book "Forcing God's Hand", published in 1999' and the Washington Report of March 2000 on Middle East Affairs have reached me just today i.e. April 7, 2000. A quick glance at these two publications indicates that there is a massive collaboration underway between fundamentalist Jews and Christians trying to force an urgent Armageddon. Detailed plans have been made to demolish Masjid Al'Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. Evangelists more than Jews are preaching that Jesus Christ, the Messiah will come only when the new and the third Jewish Temple has been built at the site of the Holy Muslim shrine!
This Messiah will annihilate all people on earth but Jews and Christians for "they worship a tribal God concerned with only two peoples Jews and Christians" (Grace Halsell).
The Christian interest according to the Washington report rests in providing a landing base to the Messiah at the new Jewish temple after destroying Masjid Al'Aqsa.
My good friend Dr. Javed Khan of New Jersey has called and suggested to include the translation of a verse of Sir Iqbal here:
The way of those you call infidels is plan and action for Jihad
The way of the mullah is in the name of God fasad (dissension)

Now a few excerpts from these two publications will be presented:
United States shows "unmatched combination of high levels of education and high levels of religious belief and activity".
"Now is the time for the temple to be rebuilt".
"The Israeli government must end the pagan Islamic occupation".
"Who is the Antichrist? ---- A personified opponent of Christians ------- He will take over the government of the world".
"Who are Gog and Magog? ---- Enemies of Israel. Generally taken to mean Russia, China (and of course Muslims)".
"The Arab World is an Antichrist World".
"Jews are the earthly elect and Christians are the heavenly elect of God".

It is easy to see that the promised one of each nation seems to be bent upon destroying the other peoples. Will mankind make this horrible scenario a self-fulfilling prophecy?
It is the author's conviction that no promised one will ever appear (The last one to come was the holy prophet Mohammad) and God willing, mankind will choose the path of love and peace rather than tread the horrible way to a Third World War. The mankind has to and eventually will become one community as stated in the Holy Qur'an. Amen!

Conflicts and Contradictions in Human Thought and the Approach to the Holy Quran---Prof.Dr.Manzoor-ul-Haque

2006-11-19T20:26:00.000-08:00

The Trail of human thought, from Grecian to the most recent time philosophers and scientists, is fraught with conflicts and contradictions. In the beginning, the universe in its nature, to the human thought, was simply a dune of inanimate clay.

Nature of Universe.
Now it is found that it is not such a heap of clay but a "pure movement" or "abstract energy" in its origin. It brought two questions to the human thought: what is the origin of the absolute energy; how the diversified fickleness and wondrously awe-inspiring novelties gushing forth? The human mind to these questions is still struck with awe and finds no head or tail of what he has discovered over years for understanding the nature of universe.

Life and Consciousness.
The human mind pondered over the nature of life and consciousness, and eventually concluded that it came out of itself merely on the basis of mechanistic process of its evolution from the organic matter, but when maturity prevailed over his experiments and experiences, he changed his mind and inferred that life and consciousness can never be the outcome of this mechanistic process; it has its origin somewhere else. Again the searching question to the mind was "where does lie its origin? The human thought till now finds no clue to it to go ahead.

Ethics: Good and Evil in Life.
The other questions flashed in the human mind were about the occurrence of the events: why does man labor under the vicissitudes of calamities and misfortunes? Why is he yoked in the well of life as an oppressed and suppressed person? Eventually what is his fault in case of failure? Why is evil let loose in the universe? Why does 'good' not prevail everywhere? What is, ultimately, the remedy to the human ills and misfortunes? He reflected deeply over these issues. But his insight was trapped when he found that the solution, he discovered was itself a riddle of a perplexing enigma. He searched for other pragmatic solutions but soon became disparaged and discouraged of what he had invented. Now his final analysis of the things is that "good" is what synchronizes permanent values and "evil" is what is discordant to these values. Here again new questions popped up: what are the permanent values? Why are these permanent? Where do these values come from? Unfortunately the human reason could not answer these questions. He is, at present, awfully wonder-struck at this point and finds no clues to these questions.

Politics: The Form of Governance.
Then this trail of human thought caught another question: when the man has to live his life socially on this biosphere, which form of governance be lived so that there be no wedges of human interests creating clashes and chaos among the contending groups of masses? It was confoundingly a confusing question to him. The human mind struggled days in and days out for its satisfactory solution but enchanted every time by the solutions he discovered he remained deceptively oligarchic. Now he is of the view that there should be a universal law operative in the universe under a single state of the whole of mankind. He had not moved further when other questions clasped his faculty: which would be the universal law that could entail satisfaction to the confronting and contradicting segregations of the human beings? From where would that law be made available? And what would be the pragmatic test of the fact that this law accomplished what it purports to accomplish? He is today wonder-struck standing and reclining at the crossroads of life he wants to live by.

Economics: Dissipation of Earnings.
Then, there came again another problem of the same similitude and magnitude: basic needs of human life are limited but the area of his rapacious desires and wants for more than what he needs abounds the very limits imposed on, then how could that be managed, so that the entrepreneurial aspect of the society is not hampered and consequently every body is provided with the necessities of life smoothly? Seemingly it was a basic problem to the human vision but its satisfying answer put the human thought in the whirlpool of chaos and confusion to the extent that though he spent a lot of his time and energy on its solution, it remained paradoxically a quagmire for the human intellect. The human faculty could neither solve it nor it was empowered potentially to solve it. Today the human reason is standing at the confounding crossroads where one school of thought says 'depriving man of his hard earnings is an injustice to him' and the second school of though roars 'every one should work to the best of his potential and be given only what is enough for him to make his both ends meet'. The human reason is awe-struck on this crucial point and is probing the way to proceed righteously further and farther. This was the economic aspect of human life and reflected no exception to the multi-variate impediments the human reason has been confronting incessantly on the walk of life.

Internal Conflicts Within Man.
Though confused, man never forgot to exercise the option of his choice and will. In doing so he got trapped on way to his path where there was no external danger encountering him; it was only the will-o'-the-wisp clung to the apron of his intellect at every measure he suggested. It was his new adversary whom he did not understand. It was invisibly a plague to him and now, wherever he goes; it follows him advertently or inadvertently. This was both a melee and affray within human reason and his desires, and made human thought awfully peevish and petulant.

Mysticism or Religion.
To get rid of this affliction, he coined a series of arcane techniques but of no use. He became so confused of the hardened crust of the way of his life, the extended journey he traversed, the intensity of the conflicts he encountered and the difficulty of the new mixed metaphors in his life that he decided to bereave his own intellect and opt for something else, irrational and illogical, the taken-for-granted paradigm.He, within the fold of his own vision close to the lap of an ice-covered mountain of reason and rhyme, saw an enchanting orchard bestowing shady groves, showering cold winds with peaceful calm rivulets and providing silence and solace with absolutely no sigh of any leaf. Enchantingly he jumped there and felt so sleepy that he forgot the spectrum of his own goal and destination he had been endeavouring so far. This fascinative, intoxicative, rapturous and solace-infusing orchard is the mysticism, which the tired philosophers of the West termed as religion and God. To human thought, this is now the ultimate consequence of the human conflicts and the final answer to all those questions, which have kept him, perplexed throughout the whole of his life career. This is the halt where the human vision has put up today.

Basic Infirmity of Human Thought.
But this is not the first halt in the life span of human thought where he has made this alluringly intoxicating envisioned garden the product of his life. So often this has happened earlier that whenever he confoundingly became tired of the hard realities and wearisome conflicts of life, he opted for escape. Mysticism (the other name of personal concept of God and religion) is the last resort to escapism. Even the history of human thought stands witness to this fact that the horn of tranquility has never been any cause of solace for a long period of time to the human thought. Now, after he passed the plateau of tiring mental activity, he has again started probing for virtuous satisfaction and real consolation; so the western philosopher, perplexed with the conflicting state of life today, is searching for the blissful solace in the garb of religion, which could not be any cause of satisfaction any longer. He would, in real sense again come out in the search of that ideal world where he hopes he might find the satisfying solution to those problems which have kept him in the state of agony, grief and restiveness for the whole of his life.

These are the multi-variate issues of human life for the solution of which the human thought has traversed such a long mental journey and these are the halts where he has stood today awe-struck, confounded and is wandering about in a depressed state of mind! He will again come forward and take initiative to start his mental traverse. This is not despising to him. On the contrary these trails of human thought are appreciative and facilitative. If you have to weigh and watch of what he brought, just visit the Negroes of Africa or America and Australia and the high sounding philosopher and inventing scientist in the contemporary world, the difference of the mental vision/horizon found in the mores and cores of these two segments of people would make it clear that all this has become possible only due to this tedious and long intellectual journey of the human thought, and this constant struggle is a thing of beauty as a joy for ever. But the basic infirmity of the human thought is that man proceeds on the axiom of hit and trial, coins a way for himself without knowing whether it would lead him to the destination sought or to the caverns of destruction and annihilation. But before reaching its farther end, he finds that cognizance of the ultimate reality is beyond the scope of human intellect. Hence man follows the way opened to him, faces dacoits and buccaneers, combats with the beasts of the jungle where the brutalities of wilderness in man, find blood streams gushing out during the clashes, and the humanity broken, tortured, exploited. But the human thought remains outpouring continuously. Sometimes it so happens that the way he has been moving to, leads to somewhere else he did not visualize earlier. These are the halts where the human thought reclines deadly tired and consequently the Western thought is now searching for these refuges like the 'Rosicrucians', the 'mystics', the 'sages', the 'hermits' folds at present.

The Problem in Real Sense.
The question is whether the human thought be left to itself to operate on the process of hit and trial or there is any other mechanism which leads the humanity to its goal of life. In other words: is he endowed with the faculty to really solve the problems compatibly to the urges of his life he has? If man has no other means leading him confidently and safely to his destination, there is no alternative except his own hit and trial mechanism and hence the calamities and disasters so encountered be faced bravely with perfect calm and patience. Compulsion has no remedy in the world. But if there is a way leading man to his destiny safe and sound, it would surely be a psychopath who would not prefer to follow it. This problem has become the real crux of the matter today.The fact is that man is a finite being and the powers with which he is endowed are necessarily limited in scope. Human reason is no exception. It has serious limitations. But the glorious successes of reason led man to over-estimate its capacity: he expected that reason would give him absolute knowledge. When this expectation was not fulfilled, he became disillusioned with reason and went to the other extreme in rejecting reason outright and forgot that only a few aspects of reality are accessible to reason and reality has an infinity of aspects. There is also no denying the fact that human reason can subdue the forces of nature-the history has proved it-but this is also a stark fact that it cannot find by itself a satisfactory solution to the complexity of the problems of mankind, even its manifestations, the sciences, do not and cannot possibly help to solve these problems of human life. If a nation adopts a wrong course of action, it may be years before it begins to experience its effects because reason can legitimately function within its own sphere and ceases to be reliable the moment it steps beyond it. We can put it to the best only when we know what it can do and what it cannot.As indicated earlier we are witnessing the violent reaction against reason today. After a long period of unquestioned supremacy, its authority was challenged from various quarters: mystics, philosophers, scientists, psychologists because according to them, the intellect is compelled to invent specious reasons to justify the irrational operations of unconscious desires. Reason functions according to the role one gives it.In voyaging across the uncharted seas of existence, the man cannot depend solely on the fitful flickering light of reason. The Qur'an sets forth a sustaining practical program for this inviting enterprise-the reason-and corroborates that human reason acting in the light of Revelation enshrined in Qur'an cannot miss the right path.

Approach to the Qur'an.
For this purpose our first task is to understand the real meaning of the Qur'an with the help of all the intellectual faculties we possess. We can then proceed to assess the value of its teaching. How are we to test the truth and usefulness of the Qur'anic teaching? The Qur'an itself helps us to answer this question. It proposes three ways in which it may be tested and offers to abide by the results of these tests. It is significant that the tests proposed are all acceptable to reason. Nowhere is the supernatural invoked. The appeal is invariably to human reason and experience.

Before proceeding to consider the tests, let us recapitulate the teaching of the Qur'an. The Qur'an enjoins man to believe in God, to follow His laws, to believe in one's own self, to love and serve his fellow-beings, to act in a virtuous manner so as to develop and express the best in him, and finally to believe in and prepare for the Hereafter. All these we are invited to test in the light of reason. Is there anything in this teaching that is repugnant to reason? No doubt it is possible to doubt the existence of God and the reality of the Hereafter. But then, it is also possible to doubt the existence of the world. There is no conclusive proof of the existence of objective world and some philosophers have argued, in all seriousness, that belief in such a world is unjustified. All that we can be sure of is the actual momentary sensation. In spite of philosophical arguments our belief in objective reality remains unshaken. Life pays little heed to the cobwebs of such philosophers. The point to bear in mind is that suprarational realities are not less real because they cannot be proved by logical arguments. In applying the rational test it is permissible to ask whether there is anything in the teaching, which runs counter to reason and to that part of human knowledge which commands universal acceptance.

The question as to whether every element in it can be logically proved is inadmissible, because, the teaching, if it is to be true to its nature, cannot avoid reference to realities, which transcend reason. In this case, the rational test will take the form of determining whether or not the teaching is in direct conflict with reason and whether it furthers the interests of humanity. It is needless to say that the Qur'an has stood the test of reason and proved itself to be in harmony with the best in man:
Say (O Muhammad! To the unbelievers): I say not unto you (that) I possess the treasures of Allah, nor that I have knowledge of the unseen, and I say not unto you: Lo I am malak. I follow only that which is revealed to me.Say: are the blind man and the seer equal? Will ye not then reflect on this? (The Qur'an 6:50, 11:24)
Secondly, the Qur'an invites people to judge it in the light of history. It asks them to ponder over the rise and fall of nations. It assures them that if they seek the causes of the downfall of a people, they will find that the people had contravened the principles of right conduct and permanent values, which were communicated to them by the Nabi of their age. Right belief and right conduct enable a nation to rise to power and wrong beliefs and actions lead to its downfall. Time and again the Qur'anic teaching, which confirms the teaching of earlier Anbiya, was put to the test and was found to be a trustworthy guide to the good life. People who rejected it and followed the wrong path inevitably fell into decay and were overtaken by a dreadful fate. The Qur'an advises men to pay attention to the facts of history in order to discover the difference between the ways of life of the nations, which flourished and prospered and those, which perished. It will be brought home to them that the latter cherished false and harmful beliefs and their conduct was not in harmony with the eternal laws of God:But they deny the knowledge that they could not compass and whereof the final result had not come unto them. Even so did those then deny? Then see what were the consequences for the wrong-doers (The Qur'an 10:39).
Finally we come to the pragmatic test. The unbelievers are repeatedly urged to apply this test and satisfy themselves about the truth and value of the Qur'an. A tree is judged by the quality of its fruit and a creed by its effects on the life and conduct of men. The believers who had accepted the teaching and had regulated their lives in accordance with it, provided irrefutable evidence of its value to man. Their character had been transformed overnight. Formerly they were mean, selfish, quarrelsome, narrow-minded and self-centered caring only for petty gains. Afterwards, they were united in the pursuit of noble ends, were bound to each other by ties of love and affection, were kind and just to their enemies and lived up to the high ideals, which they professed. The Qur'an had brought into existence a new type of man- self-respecting, self-reliant, conscious of his worth and desirous of enhancing it and fired with the ambition to set up a better social order in the world. These men by their lives and actions testified to the value of the Qur'an, the spirit of which they had imbibed. The Nabi, Muhammad PBUH, was fully justified in pointing to these men as a living testimony for the truth of the faith he preached. The astounding effect of the faith on the life of man was the strongest proof of its truth and values:Say: O my people! Work in your own way.

I too am working. Thus ye will come to know for which of us will be the happy sequel. Lo! The wrong doers will not be successful (The Qur'an 6:136).Such are tests, which the Qur'an desires to be applied. Even bitter critics will have to concede that the tests are crucial, practical and provocative.
Again and again the Qur'an exhorts man to think and think hard. The man who uses his reason is held up to admiration:The blind man is not equal with the seeing, nor is darkness equal to light, nor is the shadow equal with the sun's refulgence; nor are the living equal with the dead (The Qur'an 35:19-22).Those who think rightly can find the light of knowledge and can discover the path that leads to success:Are those who know equal with those who know not? But only men of understanding will pay heed (The Qur'an 39:9).

Again:
Surely those who strive for Us, We guide them to our ways, and verily Allah is with those who lead a balanced life of goodness (The Qur'an 29:69).
The Believers (Mo'minin), according to the Qur'an, are:Those who, when the revelations of their Rabb are presented to them, do not fall thereat deaf and blind (The Qur'an 25:73).This is Iman! Not to accept even God's revelations as the deaf and the blind.

Cosmic Process.
At present discussion emerges out of the question: why the Qur'anic Social Order which assures a peaceful, prosperous and glorious life to mankind has not been established anywhere in the world, not even in any Muslim state, although the Divine Guidance, enshrined in the Holy Qur'an, has been with us for fourteen centuries. The answer corroborative of the phenomenon is that cosmic process is slow, very slow when measured by serial or historic time. The point requires further elucidation. Evolutionary changes take place in the outer universe automatically, according to Divine plan, and by stages, each involving thousand and thousand of years to accomplish. This is cosmic process. In the case of man, however, this process works in a somewhat different way. Man (and here we mean man not travelling in the light of Divine guidance) when pressed by circumstances to modify any existing state of affairs, adopts a course which he thinks the best, works on it strenuously day in and day out, but finds at the end that the course adopted was wrong.

He abandons it and embarks upon another course. This he has to repeat time and again. Often he feels exhausted during the course of his journey and leaves the experiment incomplete in dire frustration. Even when he reaches his destination, the labor involved and the time spent do not commensurate with the results achieved-the span of human life is so short and the distance to be traversed so lengthy. This process of "trial and error" is another form of cosmic process. Man has, however, not been left in wilderness to find his way out, un-aided by a guide or without any signposts on his way. He has been blessed with Divine guidance. If he adopts the course suggested by it straightaway, not only is he protected against pitfalls but the time taken to reach the goal also shrinks from cosmic reckoning to human calendar. Fourteen hundred years ago, a group of believers made this experiment most successfully, which, apart from the miraculous results it produced, proved that neither the Qur'anic Social Order was a utopia nor the program laid down to establish it was unworkable.

Their later generations, however, abandoned that course; with the result that they met the same fate as did the past nations who acted similarly. (This, by the way, is the negative proof of the efficacy of the Divine Law governing the rise and fall of nations). The Divine course is still there and can be taken up by any nation who wished to reach human destination safely and within the shortest possible time:Say: The truth from your Rabb is there; so let whosoever will accept, and let whosoever will reject (The Qur'an 18:29).So why to waste time and shed blood! That nation will survive which strives to assure for all men a life of happiness, peace and prosperity. Armed might, control over the forces of nature and wealth will not avail a nation if its policies are detrimental to the interest of mankind.

It is bound to pass away, forOnly that remains which is beneficial for mankind as a whole (The Qur'an 13:17).

REFERENCES1. Berdeau: The Divine and the Human2. Brend: Foundations of Human Conflict3. Buber, Martin: Between Man and Man4. Cobban, Alfred: The Crisis of Civilization5. Haldan, J.S.: The Philosophical Basis of Biology6. Hill, A.V.: The Physical Reasonableness of Life7. Johnson, R.F.: Confucianism and Modern China8. Kierkegaard: The Present Age9. Moore, Thomas: Personal Mental Hygiene10. Paul, Leslei: Annihilation of Man11. Parvez, G.A.: What Man Has Thought (Urdu Version)12. Parvez, G.A.: Islam a Challenge to Religion13. Simpson, G.G.: The Meaning of Evolution14. Time-Special Issue: The New Age of Discovery, January, 199815. Toynbee, Arnold J.: The World and the West16. Turner, H.H.: Introduction to the Foundations of Einstein's Theory of Gravitation.

Economics In The Social Structure Of Islam--- Idara Tolu-e-Islam

2006-11-19T20:20:00.000-08:00

ECONOMICS IN THE SOCIAL STRUCTURE OF ISLAM
(Contributed by Idara Tolu-e-Islam 25-B Gulberg II, Lahore, Pakistan)

1. Economics plays a significant role in the social structure of Islam; so significant that Allah did not leave the economic aspect of life to be determined solely by human intellect and experience, but made it the subject of Revelation.

2. Briefly the essential provisions of the Quran about the economic aspect of human life are:
Firstly, Quran promises peace and plenty for those who follow the Code and for those who turn away from it, Quran portends scarcity (Al-Quran 20:124)
Quran has used in this verse the word "MA’EESHAT" from which comes the word "MA’ASHIYYAT", the recongnised translation of "Economics".
Secondly, the Quranic Code of life does not put off the realization of its fruits until after death, nor does it hide them in spiritual abstractness. Observance of the Code makes earthly life economically rich; its non-observance makes life on this very earth economically miserable. In fact, the economic condition of a people provides a pragmatic test for the soundness of the revealed guidance.

Thirdly, while Quranic Social Order promises a life of peace and plenty the un-Quranic systems are bound to result in economic imbalance, and economic imbalance means Allah’s wrath.
In Chapter 16, Verse 112. of Quran "Allah cites the example of an habitation, where people lived peacefully and securely, receiving sustenance in abundance from everywhere and then they showed ingratitude for Allah’s gifts with the result that Allah made them to taste hunger and fear. Ingratitude for Allah’s gifts signifies that they gave up the Divine system and began living according to a man-made system".

Fourthly, Quran declares that the people whose economic conditions in this life is poor will be worse off in the Hereafter. The concluding portion of the verse already cited (20:124) saying that "whosoever turns away from Our Code of life shall live a life of scarcity", ends by declaring that:
"He will on the day of Qayamat rise blind".
Fifthly, according to Quran, Economics and the Moral Code go hand in hand and they cannot be separated from each other. Chapter 43, Verse 84, says:
"Authority and control are His in Sama and in Arz".

In this context, Sama in the Quran signifies universe and Arz signifies man’s social and economic world. The verse, therefore, stressed the point that the Divine Laws under which the universe functions so smoothly should also apply to the economic life of man, so that he might achieve a balanced all-round development. Sama might also be taken to mean the Source of Permanent Values, (Quran. 16:64-65). In that case, the meaning of the verse will be that man’s social and economic life should accord with the Permanent Values given by Allah. According to either interpretation, the eventual meaning would be the same. The position is further borne out by Chapter 21, Verses 21-22, which first poses the question:
"Do they acknowledge controlling powers other than Allah for the expansion of (or enriching) their economic life?" and then goes on to say:
"If there were in Arz and Sama controlling powers other than Allah, that is, one for Sama and another for Arz, the entire universe would have been in chaos".

3. Thus, Tauheed, a main pillar of Islam, signifies that man’s economic life should be governed by the Laws of Allah in the same way as they control the rest of the universe.
Another main pillar of Islam is Salaat, and an idea of its extent will be gauged from Chapter 11, Verse 87, in which his people told Shu’aib:
"Does your Salaat command you that we should give up those whom our ancestors worshipped and cease to do with our wealth as we please?" The verse brings out prominently the close relationship between Salaat and Economics.

4. In view of the great importance, which Quran attaches to economic life, elaborate guidance has been given therein for building up a sound economics system together with a clear exposition of the purpose.

5. Chapter 11, Verse 6, contains an assertion that there is no creature on earth the responsibility for whose sustenance has not been assumed by Allah:
Again, Chapter 17, Verse 31, assures mankind that they should not "kill their offspring fearing penury, since "Allah provides sustenance for them as well as for their offspring".
The responsibility for feeding human beings could not have been assumed in clearer and more emphatic terms. Yet, inspire of a solemn assurance we see hundreds of thousands dying of hunger and millions struggling for a scanty meal. Does this indicate non-fulfillment of the responsibility solemnly assumed by Allah? No, that is unthinkable. How do then the two positions reconcile? Chapter 36, Verse 47, shows how in human affairs Allah’s responsibility is discharged. The Verse says: "When they are asked to keep open for the development of others a portion of what Allah has given them, the people who refuse to believe in Divine Laws, tell the believers ‘should we make provision for one whom Allah could provide if He willed it?" In answer to the question, the Quran says that in their logic they are sadly in error:
Allah does not feed the hungry directly with His own hands, but does so through the agency of men, i.e., the Social Order established to enforce Divine laws makes itself responsible for the discharge of this responsibility.

6. What is the mutual relationship between the Individual and the Islamic Social Order? There is an unwritten agreement between this Social Order and its individual members. The basic provision of this contract is that the individuals surrender to Allah their life and belongings in return for Jannat (place of peace and plenty); see Chapter 9, Verse 111:
Undoubtedly there is a Jannat, which will be attained after death, but according to? Quran, the life of Jannat is to be attained in this world also, provided a Social Order is built upon the lines delineated by Allah. The main characteristics of this earthly Jannat have been cited in Chapter 20, Verse 118, as "none will remain without food or clothes, none will suffer thirst nor heat (i.e., inclemencies of weather)".

In other words, in the earthly Jannat, no individual remains unprovided for with the basic necessities of life. Therefore, under the unwritten agreement, referred to above, Quranic Social Order becomes the agency for the discharge of Allah’s responsibility for meeting the necessities of life of each individual.
And the justification for existence of the Quranic Social Order is that every individual is assured the provision of the basic necessities of life, so that he may be free to devote himself to the real purpose of life, namely the development of his Self or Personality. This Self when developed is capable of living forever. The development itself is accomplished by advancing the programmme, which the Social Order sets before him for achieving the common good of all mankind.

7. For the establishment of this Social Order, the Quran has laid down certain fundamental principles:
The first principle is that land (Arz) cannot become the personal property of any individual.
Arz is means of production and shall remain available for the needy equally:
The second principle is that surplus money, (the basis of Capitalism) should not remain with individuals.
Chapter 2, Verse 219, carries a question and its answer. The question asked by the faithful is:
"How much money should we keep open for the Social Order for meeting the needs of the needy?" The answer given by the Quran is:
"Whatever is left over after meeting your own needs". This leaves no room for an individual clinging to surplus money.
The third principle is that wealth should not be hoarded.
Chapter 9, Verse 34, says:
"Those who amass gold and silver and do not keep it open in the way of Allah, (i.e. for the uplift of mankind according to Divine Laws) warn them (O: Prophet) of an agonising doom!" (This provision relates to a stage in the establishment of he Quranic Social Order, earlier than the one envisaged under the preceding principle. Otherwise, when there is no surplus money left with individuals, there will be no question of hoarding any).

The fourth principle is that wealth shall be spread throughout the Society and shall not be conquered by tribes or classes as practices in un-Quranic societies where most of it circulates among the middle class and an infinitesimal portion amongst the overwhelming majority -- the poor class. Wealth shall circulate throughout the different quarters of the Society, unrestricted just as the blood circulates through the entire body from head to toe.
In Chapter 59, Verse 7, which deals with the distribution of Fai, the reason stated for the distribution is that wealth should not circulate among the affluent only:
Higher and lower standards of living lead to imbalance and hamper the even circulation of wealth throughout the society.
The fifth principle is that no one shall subsist on the earnings of another and that, excepting those who have become incapacitated, every one shall work.
Quran uses the term Mutrafeen for those who lead an easy life with the earnings of others, and mentions three groups in particular. One group consists of persons "who take with an even balance and give less with an un-even balance".
Another group comprises those who inherit money, land, property etc., by reason of birth. They collect all the inheritance and with the momentum, it provides gather for them more and more of what the others have:

The third group comprises the Priest-craft. Chapter 9, Verse 34, mentions them and says:
"That the majority of them gobble up the earnings of others without having any right to it and thereby stand in the way of its utilization as Allah ordains", i.e., for the benefit of humanity.
8. These briefly are the five principles based on which the Quran established its Social Order. (This theme has been dealt with at considerable length in a book entitled Nizam-e-Rabubiyyat by late Allama Ghulam Ahmed Parwez and published ( in Urdu language) by Tolu-e-Islam Trust, 25-B, Gulberg II, Lahore). The importance of establishing the Quranic Social Order will be obvious from Chapter 47, Verse 38, which says; If you will not establish the Order, then Allah will bring another people in replacement who will not be like you.

9. Before concluding this discourse a couple of questions which generally arise in this connection, deserve to be answered briefly:
The first question is, if the Quranic Social Order is as depicted why does the Quran talk also of Sadaqaat (chairty), Wirasat (inheritance), etc.
The Quran envisages establishment of the Order not overnight but by stages. The provisions about Sadaqaat( charity) etc., relate to a transitory period during which the Order is still in the course of evolution.
The other and more important question is, if the Quranic Economic System is as stated then what is the difference between Communism and Islam?
Communism gives an economic system based on a particular philosophy of life. In the same way Islam is not only a Social Order but also a Code of Life, which deals with man as a whole and covers all aspects of human life? Communistic philosophy sees Man just as a physical being--nothing more nothing less--which ends with death, and provides an economic system, which can cater only for his physical welfare. Islam, on the other hand, views life as an uninterrupted and ascending stream and man as possessing, besides his physical being, a Self or Personality capable of development and of living efficiently further and on higher evolutionary planes of Life. The law governing development of human Self, as enunciated by the Quran, has for its basis the permanent value that by helping others a Self helps to develop itself; although this is in contradiction to the fact that the development of man’s physical being is possible only by helping itself.

Those convinced in Islamic ideology form themselves into a society or a nucleus for crystallization of the ideology. The responsibility for assuring every individual his basic needs of life, physical as well as cultural, is shifted to the Society. The proper discharge of its responsibility necessitates control on the resources of production, creating thereby a healthy environment in which the individual may be free to bring forth his utmost and to give his best for the development of all humanity. Communistic philosophy of life and the Islamic concept of life are, therefore, diametrically opposed to each other.

In addition, it is the philosophy of life one believes in, which invokes motives, fixes the destiny and moulds the shape of the society one builds. The fact is that the Islamic way of life is unique and none of the other ways of life can be called Islamic. Nor can the Islamic way of life be separated into parts, and a partial similarity between one Islamic phase, and a phase of some other system can make the latter Islamic. The Islamic way is an indivisible whole like the human body, breaking of which into separate parts would finish the body itself. (Chapter 2, Verse 85, is very clear on this point). Islam’s economic system is an integral part of the Islamic Deen (way of life) and cannot be separated therefrom.

Understanding The Quran: Pre-requisites---Dr Manzoor-ul-Haque

2006-11-19T20:16:00.000-08:00

The Quran seeks to awaken in human the consciousness of his/her intimate relation to the universe. Its main emphasis is on reason and knowledge. Its purpose is to help to build up a free, self-reliant and rational personality, vivified with the sense of Allah's working in the universe according to His immutable, unalterable laws. Now the question is: "How to understand the Quran?" For this purpose, some pre-requisites are suggested. Study them very carefully, minutely, and meticulously before manifesting any emotional reactions.

Pre-requisite No. IFor understanding the Quran, it is not enough to have mastered its language, the Arabic language. A man may be proficient in the Arabic language and yet the meaning of the Quran may elude him.

Pre-requisite No. 2 He/She should approach this Divine Book with a receptive mind, free from preconceived ideas and notions, prejudice and bias.

Pre-requisite No. 3 He/She should be serious about human life and universe in which we live, and should have an intense consciousness of participation in a purposeful cosmic process.

Pre-requisite No. 4 He/She should be anxious to guard against pitfalls in the way of life and to steer clear of the obsacles which hinders his/her progress.

These are, according to the Quran, the essentials pre-requisites for understanding the Quran. Those who do not approach the Quran in this way, it remains a sealed book to them. In the stories of the Anbiya -the Messengers recounted in the Quran -we are told how those who were not perceptive and alive were only bewildered when they listened to their i.e., the anbiya's passionate exhortations. Some of them frankly confessed that they found their words unintelligible:O Shu'aib ! We understand not much what you say (11: 91)Our first task, in the light of the above mentioned pre-requisites, is to understand the real meaning of the Quran with the help of all the intellectual faculties we possess. It can only be then that we can proceed to assess the values of its teaching.

Role of a Rasool? --- Taseer Cheema,MD

2006-11-19T14:41:00.000-08:00

Role of a Rasool? This is a very important question and the answer can not be given in few lines. We have to dig deep in Quran to see what Quran tells us about a Rasool. It is going to be a very long post so please bear with me and read it at your leisure. First of all we have to understand what is Nabuvvat. History gives us a very beautiful example. Just turn few pages back and you would see a Man standing at the highest point of Mount safaa inviting his people to gather around. When they arrive, he lays down the newly arrived message before them and asks them to consider to embrace it. This story sheds light on the full role of a nabi. He is the one who evolves his personality to the maximum level achievable by a human being. He is the chosen one and this status can not be earned through meditation or any kind of hard work. Its "given" by Allah swt. Its not something we say " aag lainay gaay, Paighambaree mil gaee". Nabuvvat is not a spiritual experience but a real phenomenon which always produces same results. In Surah Najam ayah 11 describes the chemistry of Wahee so beautifully. 53/11 The knowledge given to the Rasool through Wahi is unlike that which the eyes perceive; and the heart too cannot decide whether it is reality or a delusion.

In Nabi’s case, his conscience confirms whatever his eyes see. (That is why Nabi is the first one to profess Eiman on the truthfulness of his Wahi ~ 2:285; 6:164.) The Nabi's experience is valid and reproducible unlike a dream 53/13 (Furthermore the state of Wahi is not that of a dream which cannot be experienced for the second time, in the same sequence and detail.) However, the Nabi’s eyes can see again the phenomena he has seen once. (Therefore for him the seeing of realities is not the same as dreaming. Wahi is not a dream. It is the observance of real facts.) It reminds me of Ghalib Tha Khawb main khayaal ko jo unn sai wastah Jo aankh khul gayee to na khaawb tha na khayala tha. ( please correct me if there is some mistake in this shair) The above ayah clearly tells us how the experience of Nabi is different from a mystic. Here i would take the opportunity to present how Allama Iqbal understood these ayah.. Allama Iqbal in his 5th lecture in "reconstruction of religious thought in Islam" states: ‘Muhammad of Arabia ascended the highest Heaven and returned.
I swear by God that if I had reached that point, I should never have returned.’1 These are the words of a great Muslim saint, ‘AbdulQuddës of Gangoh. In the whole range of Sufi literature it will be probably difficult to find words which, in a single sentence, disclose such an acute perception of the psychological difference between the prophetic and the mystic types of consciousness. The mystic does not wish to return from the repose of ‘unitary experience’; and even when he does return, as he must, his return does not mean much for mankind at large. The prophet’s return is creative. He returns to insert himself into the sweep of time with a view to control the forces of history, and thereby to create a fresh world of ideals. For the mystic the repose of ‘unitary experience’ is something final; for the prophet it is the awakening, within him, of world-shaking psychological forces, calculated to completely transform the human world. The desire to see his religious experience transformed into a living world-force is supreme in the prophet.

Thus his return amounts to a kind of pragmatic test of the value of his religious experience. In its creative act the prophet’s will judges both itself and the world of concrete fact in which it endeavours to objectify itself. In penetrating the impervious material before him the prophet discovers himself for himself, and unveils himself to the eye of history. Another way of judging the value of a prophet’s religious experience, therefore, would be to examine the type of manhood that he has created, and the cultural world that has sprung out of the spirit of his message. In this lecture I want to confine myself to the latter alone. The idea is not to give you a description of the achievements of Islam in the domain of knowledge. I want rather to fix your gaze on some of the ruling concepts of the culture of Islam in order to gain an insight into the process of ideation that underlies them, and thus to catch a glimpse of the soul that found expression through them. Before, however, I proceed to do so it is necessary to understand the cultural value of a great idea in Islam - I mean the finality of the institution of prophethood.2 A prophet may be defined as a type of mystic consciousness in which ‘unitary experience’ tends to overflow its boundaries, and seeks opportunities of redirecting or refashioning the forces of collective life.

In his personality the finite centre of life sinks into his own infinite depths only to spring up again, with fresh vigour, to destroy the old, and to disclose the new directions of life. This contact with the root of his own being is by no means peculiar to man. Indeed the way in which the word WaÁâ (inspiration) is used in the Qur’«n shows that the Qur’«n regards it as a universal property of life;3 though its nature and character are different at different stages of the evolution of life. The plant growing freely in space, the animal developing a new organ to suit a new environment, and a human being receiving light from the inner depths of life, are all cases of inspiration varying in character according to the needs of the recipient, or the needs of the species to which the recipient belongs. Now during the minority of mankind psychic energy develops what I call prophetic consciousness - a mode of economizing individual thought and choice by providing ready-made judgements, choices, and ways of action. With the birth of reason and critical faculty, however, life, in its own interest, inhibits the formation and growth of non-rational modes of consciousness through which psychic energy flowed at an earlier stage of human evolution. Man is primarily governed by passion and instinct. Inductive reason, which alone makes man master of his environment, is an achievement; and when once born it must be reinforced by inhibiting the growth of other modes of knowledge. There is no doubt that the ancient world produced some great systems of philosophy at a time when man was comparatively primitive and governed more or less by suggestion. But we must not forget that this system-building in the ancient world was the work of abstract thought which cannot go beyond the systematization of vague religious beliefs and traditions, and gives us no hold on the concrete situations of life.
This was Iqbal's description of a nabi and his experience when he dwells to explore the reality. During this search He is aided by the universal forces termed as Malikah in Quran. He the Nabi is the station where a Man reaches through complex system of evolution specially designed by the Divine Agent or Universal Agency. And no other human being can attain that station by any means. Once He becomes a Nabi ( one standing at the highest station) his other job to do is to deliver what was entrusted to Him. This is the point where a Nabi assumes the role of a Rasool, contrary to the popular belief, Nabi and Rasool are the two aspects of the same person. He delivers to the mankind whatever was given to Him for the betterment of mankind and adds or subtracts nothing. This is why He is called "Ameen" and "Sadiq". Therefore for the purpose of understanding we can divide the roles of a Nabi into the following three categories. Role # 1- He delivers the Message to the mankind: see 5/67 Despite their opposition, O Rasool, you should continue delivering Allah’s message to mankind. If you do not do this you will fail to perform the function of a Rasool. Allah will safeguard your mission from evildoers (3/144). Those who deny the truth deprive themselves of the chance to follow the right path.

And while doing this job He does not adds or withholds from the message. 10/15 O Rasool! when Our verses are recited to these people those who do not believe in the law of Mukaf’at say: “Bring a Quran different from this or alter some of its provisions.” Say: “It is not for me to make any changes therein according to my wishes. I follow only that which is revealed to me. Indeed, I fear the chastisement of the Day of Reckoning if I go against my Rabb” (11/113, 17/46, 74, 29/51, 68/9). 17/73 Your opponents tried hard to lure you away from what We had revealed to you and cause you to substitute something else in Our name and thus take you as a friend. And Allaha also warned Him if he happened to be dishonest He would receive chastisement in double proportions. 10/74 Had you not adhered steadfastly to Our Laws, you might have leaned a little towards them (10/15, 11/113, 68/9). 10/75 In that case you would have tasted double chastisement in this world as well as in the next and you would not have found anyone as a helper against Allah. More severe warning. 69/44-46. There is no mixture of human ideas in the Wahi of Allah. If the Rasool had ever dared to attribute some (of his own) saying unto Us, we would have indeed seized him firmly grip by his right hand and deprived him of his ability and power to act. We would never have allowed his programme to progress; and would have made his faculties ineffective and his plans lifeless. The first one who puts his faith in the Divine message is no one but Rasool HImself. 39/11-14 11. Tell them, "(You can do whatever you like but) I have been commanded to obey the Divine Laws in such a way that it does not imply any obedience to others. 12. “And I have been commanded to be the first amongst those who submit to the Divine Laws. (In other words my task is not only to deliver the sermons, but as a first step to become subservient to these laws and thereafter, to invite others to follow and form a group of like minded people.)”
13. And tell them that, Allah's Law of Mukafat is such that (in terms of consequences no one is spared or given any sort of concession; and let alone others) if even I were to disobey these laws, I too will be unable to escape the chastisement on the Great Day (of Decisions). (If this is my own position, then how can I save others from facing the consequences. No one can help in this regard.) My note: see how Quran abolished the Aqeedah of "Shifaat" which muslims borrowed from Christianity. 14. “Therefore, I obey only the Divine Laws with full devotion (and you too had better do so). Role # 2: Until this point we were discussing the personal experience and honesty of Rasool that how faithful he has to be but this is not the only role he plays, Quran assigns Him an other job too. In the first role He received the message and delivered to the mankind as it is but then he goes a step further. His other job is more vital and that is to establish a system based on the Laws he had received. Because with out implementation the laws are nothing but lifeless words. The real purpose is to implement and practice these laws in such a way that a man gets freedom from the slavery of other men and finally Al-Deen becomes manifest in the physical world.

And when this system is established one is to follow none but Divine Laws, Rasool also follows these Laws along with other muslimeen. 7/3 O Jama’at-ul-Momineen follow only that which has been revealed to you by your Rabb and do not follow another ally. This course of life is clear but people generally do not follow it absolutely. And once this system is established there has to be a central authority. Who would be the Central Authority in an Islamic System ? 49/13 (The above social evils have been mentioned because some people consider themselves superior and try to belittle others. This attitude is also prevalent in other walks of life. For instance, men think that they are superior to women; or that certain families are more respectable than others. Both these concepts are wrong.) We have created humans in a manner that all of them are formed from a male and female (meaning that in every child, whether male or female, there is a portion of a man and a woman.
It is therefore incorrect to presume that men are superior to women; or that women as human beings are different from men). As regards various families or tribes, the objective (of different distinctions) is that you should be able to recognize each other. No tribe or family is superior to the other. According to the Divine Law the criteria to determine status or superiority is how closely and consciously one follows and guards the Divine Laws? And Who obeys Him more? The one whose whole life is in conformity with this criteria is most worthy of respect. The person may either be man or woman, or from any family or tribe. The criteria for superiority is not race or status, but personal character and behaviour. This is being told by the Almighty, Who knows well what superiority means and how it is earned. This is the criterion for someone to be an Imaam of that system. In the times when Rasool Himself is alive no one else can claim this status. Because Rasool is the most steadfast and in complete harmony to the Divine Laws. He knows more than anyone else.
He is the closest to Almighty. see 53-9 As a result of this closeness and unison, he became Almighty's companion in the human world, to fulfil His Programme (8:17). This closeness was similar to the strengthening of the bond of friendship, just like drawing two bows together, both appearing almost one and then together shooting the arrow. This example shows the close affinity between the Rasool and Allah the Almighty. In fact however, it was far stronger and deeper. However, He would implement these Divine Laws and would not enslave other human beings for his personal gain. 3/78-79 The fundamental principle of Deen is that no human being – even though Allah may have given him a Code of Laws or the power to enforce it or even Nubuwwat – has the right to say to the others: “You should obey me rather than Allah,” what he should say is: “You should be amongst those who belong to Allah by following His Book which you study and teach to others.” He should also no tell the others to worship Malaika or their Anbia. A Momin will never do so.

Do you think that after he has himself believed he would bid others to resort to Kufr? He would ask others to join hands to establish this system and then practice the Divine Laws collectively. No one other than Allah would be the Ruler of this state, only His Laws would be the criterion to judge between right and wrong and rest are the subjects of this Divine System. Rasool Himself is an Ab'd. 19/36 (As regards the Christian belief that Jesus was God himself, there cannot be a better argument than Jesus's own proclamation that) Verily Allah is my Sustainer and yours as well. All of us should obey Him, for this is most certainly the (only) straight and balanced path (3:50). Rasool is on the fore front of this group of adherents of Divine laws and hence Quran calls Him "AbdoHoo" He warns people about the dangerous consequences of their wrong decisions38/65 (O Rasool!) Tell them that I am giving you warning about the forthcoming doom. That I am also telling you again and again, that you should clearly understand that in the universe no one holds absolute authority and control except Allah. He alone is the source of all powers. When the system was established for the first time in the life time of Rasool, he was the Central Authority and he was deciding among them according to the Divine Laws. Therefore, the obedience of Laws given out from this Central Authority was called Ateeullah wa Ateeur Rasool. As we have discussed above Rasool says nothing of his own but delivers and implements the words of Allah with absolute honesty.
To understand Ateeullah and Ateeur Rasool in more depth, we should move to the Ayah 59 or Surah Nisaa O Jama’at-ul-Momineen you should obey the System established by the Rasool in accordance with Allah’s Laws, and obey the local authorities appointed by this Order. In case of a dispute with the local officers, an appeal can be made to the Order (the Central Government). This will constitute evidence that you believe in Allah and the Hereafter. This is the best and fairest way to reach a settlement. The misunderstanding of this ayah created a havoc and left the whole Ummah confused. According to the traditional understanding, one concludes from this ayah, as below. 1-Ateeullah means accepting the authority of Quran 2-Ateer Rasool is translated as accepting the authority of Ahadith 3-AtaaAt-e-Oolil A'mr means obeying the Government. And then it was concluded that if you have any disaccord with the Government regarding some issue then you should take Quran and Hadith and grab the neck of the Govt.Thats is a recipe to disaster and anarchy. No system would ever prevail if masses display this kind of behavior. Islam stands for discipline and this interpretation is no way in conformity with the Quranic education. Nevertheless, this ayah is very simple which denotes that to obey Allah and Rasool means to obey the Central Authority. Then it was Rasool and in the present day when Rasool is not among ourselves, it would be justly elected government which is comprised of those who are well versed in Quran and hold the highest character and follow the Divine Laws day and night. And Oolil A'mr means Governmental officer or those who implement laws. Furthermore, its also commanded if you happen to have difference of opinion with the local officers then refer this case to the Central Authority and accept the decision or verdict.4/83 These people are not habituated to a disciplined life.

Whenever they hear any news of peace or danger they broadcast it directly. Had they brought the news to the notice of the Rasool or the local authority, those who have been charged with the responsibility of scrutinising news would have found out the truth. Were it not for Allah’s goodness towards you, the majority amongst you would have followed Shait’an. Which means if something happens in Madina it would be notified to Rasool himself and if its out side Madina it would be brought into the attention of local officers. The point to note is that not every head of state of so called Islamic counties is the Central Authority but it will be he who will establish the Divine Law in its entirety. The First central Authority was Rasool Himself and now if someone follows the same footsteps and establishes the same kind of system will be the Central Authority. It should also be noted that a Rasool's job is to implement the laws and not devise new ones of his own. He was the central Authority and now Ummah which adopts the Quranic laws would be the Central Authority. And to establish this Law , momineen who are intoxicated with the knowledge of these laws are required , as no system can be established with out men.
Role # 3: Now we will move to discuss the third job of a Rasool which is teaching and training to produce a group of individuals who would be instrumental in establishing and sustaining the Divine System. see3/163 Allah has been gracious indeed to the Momineen when He raised from amongst their own people a Rasool who communicates His Laws to them, purifies and develops their character and teaches them the Book and its objectives. Hitherto, they were in a state of rank ignorance. This role was the most difficult one.
He had to train group of people who were indulged in ages old evil practices.It was not easy to make the arabs amend their ways and purify their hearts.Why it was important? The purpose of training and education is to equip someone with the tools to awaken the abilities which are there in their potential form and then utilize those abilities to produce positive and fruitful results. The purpose of revelation of Quran is to liberate humanity from all evils and slavery. This slavery is of two kinds. One physical and one spiritual. The physical slavery is easy to throw away, in the history of mankind many weaker nations were able to liberate themselves from occupation forces but the second type of slavery is extremely complex and difficult to get rid of. The slaves of religion/priesthood accept the slavery out of their own free will. If a slave is told by the master to run away, he would waste no second to do so but if a Peer tells his mureed to get out of his circle, he would consider it the worst moment of his life and would fall on his feet and beg him to keep him in his circle.

This was the purpose of Quran to liberate humanity from all kind of enslavement. And the enemy was priesthood. As Iqbal said: Chaist Quran? Khajah ra paigham-e-marg Dastgeeray banda'ay bay saazo barg This was His job to develop independence of thought and dynamic behavior.And this independence of thought is very vital for the human potential abilities to go through the stages of evolution. Mental slavery is the biggest obstruction on this way of human liberation and Quran elevated this bar and brought freedom to the subjects of unjust system. Despite all these superior roles, He was repeatedly introduced as a Human being and not some super natural being. 10/2 Do these people wonder why We have charged one of them to warn human beings of the consequences of their wrong-doings and offer glad tidings to those who believe in His Laws that they shall have a high rank with their Rabb?
These people think that the Rasool should be superhuman. Hence they demand miracles from him and when he does not perform them they declare that he is a liar. also see 18/110 And say to them: “I am a human being like you with the only difference that it has been revealed to me that the entire authority rests with Allah - the one, let him who believes in His law of Mukaf’at do that which is right, and not to obey anyone other than Allah - and thus associate any authority with Him.” He lived like a common human being and did whatever every one else was doing, he ate, drank and walked like anyone else. There was nothing in His life which could be called Super natural. see25/7 (After levelling charges against the Quran they raise objections against the Rasool and say), “What kind of Rasool is he, who eats, drinks and moves around in the streets (like other human beings). (They think a Rasool should be a supernatural being and that) An angel should have been sent down with him; to warn people that if they did not listen to him they would be destroyed. He lived like a normal human being and then departed like any one else, see 6/50 The truthfulness of Our Laws can be understood and appreciated by observing these universal signs.
However these people still insist that the Rasool must produce signs which are different from natural phenomena, to show that he is someone supernatural. Tell them the Rusul are also like other human beings; they eat and drink and then pass away. Even before you We did not create any human being who would live forever. Just as you have to die one day, they too are not going to live forever! He does not even possess some secret knowledge of unseen, see 6/50 O Rasool, say to them: “I do not assert before you that I possess the treasures of Allah or have knowledge of the unseen. Neither do I assert that I am a malak. I only say that I receive Allah’s revelation which I follow myself.” Ask them “Is one who is blind at par with one who is seeing? Do you not reflect upon this?” He can not even interfere in the functioning of natural laws, he has no control over his own profit or loss except that what a common man possesses using the basic human intellect and will. see 7/188 O Rasool tell them: “I have not even the power to have control over what may be helpful or hurtful to me personally. All this is determined by Allah’s laws. If I had knowledge of the unknown I could have accumulated much that was good for me and seen to it that no ill touched me.

I am only a warner and announcer of glad tidings to those who believe in Allah.” His job is only to show the right path and has no control over people to make them go the way he is inviting them to. see 28/56 O Rasool! Your mission is to keep on delivering the right message to these people. As regards making the people adopt the right course, that is not your responsibility. In fact it is not even within your reach that every one whom you would like to take the right path necessarily adopts it. (2:272.) The only person who would take the right path, is one who himself wishes to do so. (How can one come to the right path when he does not want to utilize his human faculties of intellect and reason, and intead follows a path with his eyes closed. (10:99-100.) Allah knows very well who the people taking the right path, after thinking about it, are. Now we enter a very critical point where Quran abolishes the "Hero Worship" once for all. Hold you heart and read this beautiful ayah 3/144 Take note that the system based on eternal principles is not shaken by the death of an individual, no matter how important his position may be. This principle applies even to as great a personality as Muhammad (peace be upon him). He is no more than a Rasool from Allah.
Rusul before him have passed away. If he dies or is slain, will you then turn on your heels thinking that the system is finished? Whosoever does so will not harm Allah in any way. Allah will reward those who remain steadfast out of their conviction that the system does not depend upon personalities and will continue as long as the Book of Allah is followed. Is there any place left for Hero worship? This was Quran but lets see what kind of independence of thought this Trainer/Educator had developed among his followers. When Rasoolullah saw passed away there was a havoc and crises. Every one was sad and depressed and uncertainty and worries inflicted great misery on muslims. In that time of crises this greatest Student of Rasool who is known as Syedna Abu Bak'r stood up and said," O' People!Whosoever, had held Mohammad as his Mahbood must know that his mahbood has departed. But whosoever took Allah as his Mahbood should be aware that He is ever living and death would not come to Him." and then he recited 3/144. Rasool saw was the recipient of revelation of Quran and was the Central Authority in the system of Deen. Quran is preserved safely and its integrity is guaranteed by Allah swt therefore Mohammad's Risaalat is also preserved for ever. However, the position of Central Authority is now transferred to the right full Ummah. Now a nation or people who will take Quran as their Guide and will strive to establish the Divine System in its pure and pristine form would be the Central Authority. In spite of all these roles, He was a person also and he was prone to make mistakes in his personal capacity .

A mistake was made regarding the prisoners in the battle of Bad'r, Quran did not over look it and right away admonished, 8/67 O Jama’at-ul-Momineen! you wanted as many prisoners of war as you could have in order to secure their ransom. It does not behove your Rasool to do this since he is waging war in order to accomplish the Divine purpose and not for the fleeting gains of the world - Allah looks to your future as well as your present for He is not only Mighty but also Wise. Later on, during Ghuzwa-e-Tabook, Rasool saw let some people stay back, with out proper investigation, Qurans says: 9/43 O Rasool, Allah forgive you! why did you permit them so readily to stay away? If you had waited for a while they would have exposed themselves and thus given you an opportunity to tell apart those who were truly staunch in their Ei’man and those who were liars. At one occasion Rasool saw promised to himself not to eat something, Quran again corrected him, 66/1 O Nabi! Given whatever Allah Almighty has made legal for you, why did you impose prohibitions on yourself just to please your wives? (You have been warned so that) You should not have shortage of protection and development (which would be a natural consequence of declaring things legal or illegal). This is important because your actions do not remain confined to your person. You may leave something because you do not like it; but your followers might think that this thing is intrinsically bad and therefore forbid it for themselves. Therefore you have to be extra cautious.

Tasuv'vuf------ a brief historical review ----- Taseer Cheema, MD

2006-11-19T14:40:00.000-08:00

Mootu Qabla Antamootu --------------- this is the argument a sufi puts forth which is misunderstood by him. Dieing before death does not mean isolation from the community or escaping the responsibilities one owes to the family. It means supression of the unneccessary desires and focus on only productive activities which would be benificial to both the individual and the society at large. What good someone could do by sitting in the "khanqah" and doing "zikar". It may have some value to the very individual in terms of stregthing the concentration power but cannot benifit the society.The ideaology of tasuvvuf was originated by Pythagorus the greek philosopher and Palto was also of this school of thought.He was of the opinion that all spirits were living in a different world before getting trapped into this material world and they are still left with some memmory of that life and by stregthning this one can get to know about the absolute reality, this is hard to get any information about the reality but one can recognise it through a process which popularly is termed as "mahrafat". The term sufi is not found in the early islamic literature, later someone fabricated a hadith about ashab-e-suffa but its not reliable since the ashabah ikram R were mujahid not darwaish ( in sufi sense).

Some researchers are of the opinion that its origin is greek word "sophia" which means something like reason/intellect.There is an other opinion that its derived from the word "soof" which literally means a rough woolen piece of cloth. The bottom line is this term is not found in the early islamic literature, in the beginning people of this school of thought were called ehlay khair or saliheen and they were notorious for fabricating hadiths, such as in saheeh muslim mohammad bin yahyah bin saeed stated that ehlay khair were notorious for being liars.The first sufi found in islamic history is Abu hashim usman ------------ he was the first one called as sufi. he was from koofah and moved from there to Ramlah(palestine) in 160 HIjrah and settled down in the first khankah which was founded in 140 hijrah.After this many others connected the word sufi with their names and haris bin asad is more prominant in these early sufya.They claimed that they acquired this knowledge mystically from rasoolullah SAW and since this ideology took birth in iran so Syedna Hadhrat ALi was considered the SHAH-E-WILAYAT except Naqshbandi who associate themselves with Syedna Hadhrat Abu Bakr Siddique R. Later this faith developed so many forms and every sect has its own Aqaaid.
But in islamic history they were not considered to have an authority of understanding QUraan. Tareeqat and Shariat were always cutting each others throat.Like shariat tareeqat is also devided into many sects such as "haloolee", "wahdatul wajoode" and "wahdatul shahoodee".Hallool ----HIndus have an aqeedah of halool that eeshwar appears in different forms and species and everything from an ant to ram karishm has eeshawar in it.The same Aqeedah is found in many sects of shias such as ghali, naseeryah, kaisanya, Qaramtah and Batneyah ------- they believe that Allah is found in the personalities of Syedna Ali R and his offsprings, this aqeedah lead hussain bin mansoor hallaj to proclaim Anal HaqueKhood razay AnalHaque ko wohee khole raha haiMansoor kai parday main Khuda bole raha haiMansoor describes in his Qitabul tawaseen that Lahoot did "halool" in "Nasoot" and thats how Khaliq and Makhlooq turned into one unit.Mansoor once used these words" Kufrat badeenallah walkufr wajib ladee waindalmuslimeen Qabeeh" After this Abassee khaleefah Almuqtadir Billah hanged him in 309 AH and burnt his dead body.

After Mansoor this Aqeedah did not become popular but many prominant Sufya had respect for mansoor for his aqeedah.Ali Hajwairee in Kashaful mahjoob also shows respect for mansoor.Wahdatul Wajood --- This aqeedah is very similar to Halool and was formulated by ibnay arabee who was born in spain in 6th hijrah and and died in damishq. He is the founder of this aqeedah and believd that Allah is in everything and everything has Allah in it. he also believed that human fate is connected to numbers, stars and dreams.he based his aqeedah on the following ayah of quraanMinha Khalaqnakum wa feeha noeedokum wa minha nukhrijokum taratan ukhrah 20/55"It is He Who created all of you from this earth (inorganic matter) and He shall revert your lifeless physical body back to it; and raise you forth once again from it. (Therefore, amongst human beings there is no distinction between ruler and the ruled, master or the slave. He is the real master or ruler; all human beings are equal and are His servants.) You have now understood what kind of Rabb He is, Whose message we have brought to you."This was so simple but he derived from this ayah that all of us came out of ahadeeyat and we will meet with ahadeeyat after fina then we'll reappear---- Fasoosul hakam. In short this ideology states that noting has its own existance but Allah and everything has Allah in it ---- Hamah oost ---- and this aqeedah astrayed them so much that they started believing if everything has Allah in it then there is no difference between different things, individuals and aqaid so Ram and Raheem are same------------ would u believe Ibnay arabee went so far he wrote in Fasoosul hakam " Firawn was very right to say "ana rabbakomul ahla" becasue Allah is in everyone." According to his belief a man is not respoonsible for his deeds, whatever he does he is compelled to do so, there would not be any accountability.Look where its taking us.I guess this is the most easy religon one can desire to have, do everything and you dont have to be accountable since everything is from Allah ----------- Aqeedah-e-Jabr.In India Akbar and Dara Shakoh propagated this philosophy tro the great extent. Dara manageds to trasnlate upnishads into farsee and introduced muslims to hindu waidanat ( tasuvvuf).Two sects Qadria and Shatareeyah mixed hindu tasuuvuf with islamic tasuvvuf.

Mian mir of lahore was the torch bearer of qadreeah and dara shakoah's murshad Mullah Bakhshee was his mureed. Darah Shakoh was of the opinion that there is no difference in islamic tasuvvuf and hindu waidanat and Ram and Raheem are the same. THis lead to the Baghtee movement in india which was solely designed to prove that Quraan and Paraan, Ram and Raheem are the same and there is no difference in hindusim and islam- it was a great conspiracy against islam. Bahat Kabeer and guru nank are among the most prominant ones in this movement. Kabeer saysGangah aik ghaat behteeray Kehat Kabeer aqal kai phairayAlong with kabeer numerous punjabi and sindhee poets left no stone unturned to propagate this belief.Lets see what Bullay shah saysKittay Ramdas, kitay Fateh mohammad, ehho Qadeemee shoreMit gaya dohna da jhagra, nikal paya kujh horeBaid parana parh parh thakkay sajday kardayan ghiss gai mathayNa rab teerath na rub makkay jis paya uss noor anwaarWahdatul Shahood------- This was put forth by Sahiakh Alauddin samnani and was propagated in india by Mujaddad alif sani - in short it says hama az oost.
This Aqeedah describes that this universe is not khuda ( means khuda in not everything ) but everything is His shadow. Basically there is no big difference in these two ideologies , only difference of words and expression.The followers of Wahdatul shahood also believe that although man is not part of Allah but by going through different stages of salook he can merge into the absolute being.This was a brief introduction or review of different aqaid of tasuvuf.

Halal/Haram/Islamic economic system/Syeaat/Hasanaat ---Taseer Cheema,MD

2006-11-19T14:37:00.000-08:00

The follwoing post is a work in progress and inshalh i will complete this one of these days, initial work is being presented here:
Human life has two spheres, the worldly life and the "personality". For each sphere there are different set of laws. The physical life attains benefit by following the physical laws. Whoever will follow these laws will be benefited regardless of faith or ideology. Similarly who follow the other set of laws pertaining to the development of human personality would also be benefited. A momin is the one who submits to both laws. Kafir is the one who rejects these laws, mushrik is the one who contaminates the divine laws with something from his own. Every law and the action which takes place by following that law, has its own consequences -- which is called taqdeer. And if someone does not follow the set rules to achieve a desired result his effort wud go in vain and thats termed as "habtil aamaal". If someone follows only physical laws he wud be benefited only in worldly affairs ( Thawabud Dunya) but he will not be able to develop his personality ( nafs). Only a Momin who submitts to physical laws and laws pertaining to evolution of personality would be truly benefited in both spheres of life. NOw the question arises whats halal and whats haram Haram: To stop something, to forbid something ( it has been used in other meanings as well but we will focuss only on this aspect at this time) Halal:To liberate someone by cutting the chains/ropes/restrictions. However some restrictions ought to be there to keep the caravan of life going in the right direction and those laws are given by no one but All Knower ( Aalimul Ghaib Washahadah). Otherwise if there are no restriction there would be a crisis/chaos ( Tavaiful malookee).

Allah has made only few things haram , rest is halal but He also added the word "tayyab", and gave consideration to our liking and disliking. We can eat anything halal but we dont have to eat anything whats not Tayyab for us even though its halal. NOw lets see whats Haram and whats Halal 7:33 Say, "My Lord forbids only: - Indecent shameful deeds, open or secret. - Actions that hurt the “Self” and drag down the individual and collective human potential. - Unjust aggression. - Idol worship in any form. It has been completely unauthorized by Allah. - And that you say things about Allah that you know not.” 6:119 Why should you not eat of that on which Allah’s Name has been pronounced (i.e. it is not dedicated to other than Him)? He has explained to you in detail what is forbidden along with certain exceptions in dire need (5:3). Numerous of the clergy mislead people in this matter without knowledge, and with their personal opinions.
Verily, your Lord is fully Aware of those who go beyond moderation. 6:120 Abstain from violating the Divine Commands, whether openly or secretly.
Those who drag down their “Self” by such violations will be awarded what they have earned. (They will live a subhuman existence and meet a befitting consequence). 6:121 Eat not anything (not just meat) unless the Name of Allah has been pronounced first, for that will mean drifting away from Commands. The rebellious among people inspire their companions to dispute with you. If you people heed them, you will be associating others with Allah. 6:145 Say, "I do not find in the Revelation given to me, any food that is prohibited for one who wishes to eat except: Carrion (dead meat), running blood as against organ meats, the flesh of swine for it is disapproved, or anything (not just meat) which, in disobedience, has been dedicated to other than Allah.” If one is forced by dire need without being deliberate and without transgressing, your Lord is Forgiving, Merciful. ('Rijs' = Foul = Unclean = Disapproved. 'Fisq' = Drifting from the Command = Disobedience. 2:173, 5:3). 5:3 Forbidden for you (2:173) for dietary consumption are: - Any Animal that dies of itself. - Blood. - The flesh of swine. - And anything (not just meat) that has been dedicated to any other than Allah (such as an idol, grave or saint). - Any Animal that has been strangled to death. - Beaten to death. - Dies by falling from height. - Gored to death by horns. - Animal eaten by a wild animal unless you are able to slaughter it while it is still alive. -That which is sacrificed on altars (devotional stones or blocks in shrines considered sacred). Also forbidden is dividing the meat through raffling and games of chance (2:219, 5:90). This Day, the rejecting opponents have given up the hope of eradicating your DEEN, System of Life. Clear distinction in matters of the Lawful and the Unlawful draws a tangible line between their ways and your way.

Fear them not but fear Me. This Day, I have perfected your DEEN for you, completed My favor upon you, and chosen for you Islam as the System of Life. (There is no hardship in Islam 2:185). Therefore, if one is forced by hunger to consume the Unlawful, with no intention of exceeding the limits, Allah is indeed Forgiving, Merciful. Eat only the flesh of these animals 5:1 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! Fulfill your pledges and obligations. Permitted for you is the flesh of every beast that eats plants, except what is specifically forbidden in the Book. Allah has ordained that all hunting is prohibited during Hajj. Verily, Allah Ordains as He deems fit. Marrying the women against their wishes is haram 4:19 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! It is not lawful for you to force women into marrying or holding on to them in marriage against their will. Pressuring women to remain in wedlock by threatening to take away the marital gift is forbidden.
A wife could forfeit the right to the marital gift only if she has indulged in clear lewdness. You shall treat your wives nicely. Even if you dislike them, it may happen that Allah has placed much good in what you have failed to realize. Only Allah swt has the right to make things halal or haram 7:32 Say, "Who has forbidden the beauty and nice things Allah has brought forth for His servants, and the pure clean things of your choice?” Say, “Such things are for those in this world who practically believe in the Divine Laws. And on the Day of Resurrection they will be exclusively for those who attained Conviction.” We thus explain Our Laws for those who make good use of what they learn". Do not label things halal or haram on your own 16:116 Do not keep uttering in falsehood, "This is lawful and this is unlawful”, thus inventing lies against Allah. Those who fabricate lies against Allah, fail to prosper in their “Self”. 10:59 Say, “Have you considered how Allah sends down to you all kinds of provisions for your minds and bodies? Then you render some of them unlawful and some lawful?” (You go after man-made dogmas thus tampering with the revealed Word of God and declare unlawful His Bounties of sustenance, food, clothing, ornament of life and things of aesthetic beauty such as art). Say, “Has Allah permitted you to do this? Or do you invent lies and attribute them to Allah?” (7:32).

So much as that even a Rasool is not permitted to make halal and haram on his own 66:1 O Prophet! Would you prohibit something that Allah has made Lawful for you, even to please your wives? For, Allah is Absolver of (their) imperfections, Merciful. Hasanaat and Syeaat: These are two comprehensive terms used in Quran. Deeds of Hasanah help shape a balanced personality and remove obstructions in one’s life. ON the other hand “Syeaat” which are opposite of “hasanaat” makes the path uneven and form an unbalanced personality. Syeaat are crafted by human mind and Hasanaat are those deeds which are ordered by our sustainer/nourisher. 4:78 Wherever you may be, death will find you, even if you live in fortified castles. When something good happens to them, they say, “It is from Allah.” And when affliction befalls them they say to each other, “This is from you O fellow-man!” Tell them, “All things happen according to Allah’s Laws.” What is amiss with these people, they understand not a thing? 4:79 Allah never creates evil. Things and events have good and evil aspects. When you act according to the Law of Allah the results are pleasant, and when you act against the Law the results are unpleasant (42:30). So whatever good happens to you is from Allah, and whatever evil happens to you is from yourself. We have sent you as a Messenger to mankind and Allah is Sufficient as Witness. As per Quran our path becomes even and easy to tread by doing Hasanaat and uneven, obstructed if we commit sayeaat.

The reward of Hasanaat and sayeaat is built in 28:84 Anyone who brings actions that benefited others, the reward to him is better than what he has done. And anyone who is unfair in his dealings with others, such will be punished, but not more than the like of what they have done. There are so many examples of Syeaat such as Riba( usury) . This practice has kept the humanity enslaved for thousands of years. If we look around the humanity appears helpless and look towards the heavens for the Creator to help them. There are so many households which are devastated and it has literally made this world a hell. Lets see how Quran liberates the humanity from this monster. Those men who do not follow the Divine Laws have infinite hunger for wealth. 70:19 Verily, man is created with an anxious disposition. (Halooan= whose hunger is never satisfied) He is eager to accumulate wealth 100:8 And behold, in the love of wealth he is ardent. (102:1-2). He is obsessed with wealth 104:2 Whose efforts revolve around gathering material possessions and counting them. (Devoid of a higher goal, he opposes any semblance of reform He believes his wealth is the only thing he can depend upon 104:3 Thinking as if his wealth will help him for forever! He desires only immediate gain 75:20 Nay, but you love instant results. He prefers only life of this world. 87:16 But nay, you prefer the life of this world. They are anxious to grab wealth from all sources 89:19 And you devour the inheritances with greed. 89:20 And you love wealth with boundless love. The spend their whole life to accumulate wealth until death comes to them 102:1 The relentless greed of material gains distracts you (from the real purpose of life). (57:20, 83:26). 102:2 Until you go down to your graves. The human life was dwelling in heaven but when the Divine guidance was ignored the personal rivalry took place and they anchored “wedges” between themselves which left them divided. 2:36 But Satan caused them both (men as well as women) to stumble therein and impelled them out of the happy state they were in. And so We said, “Degraded you have become with wedges of discord among yourselves! There shall be for you on Earth habitation and livelihood for a while.” [Their straying egos and selfish desires had clashed and led them into dividing among themselves for the pursuit of self-interest.
Humanity fell from the height of felicity into contention and rivalry. The plentiful provision of the land that used to be open for all became a matter of private ownership and hoarding. They have since been living in a state of continuous turmoil and strife.] When the life takes this route the disintegration hits the families and the society at large and everyone looks at his/her own interest. 80:34 On the Day when a man will flee from his brother, 80:35 And his mother and his father, 80:36 And his wife and his children. 80:37 To everyone on that Day will be enough his own concern. 74/52( Mafhhom ul Quraan) (It is not that they do not understand what they are being told. They certainly do understand it. But the fact of the matter is that their selfish interests do not allow them to come this way. The Divine Order requires a collective life where everyone’s interests are common. However) Every one of them wants that his business interests be spread out and function independently. They desire that the socio-economic system should not be subjected to any common control; and that it should be left to one's own likes. Instead of striving for collective good, everyone should pursue individual interests4. When this pattern of life becomes fashion of the time the whole nation falls into it . Then a time comes, as promised by Law of Respite, when the whole nation faces the natural consequence of their wrong doings. 7:38 Allah will command them to join the previous uncivilized and civilized communities into the Fire. Every later group will blame the former, "Our Lord! These are the ones who misled us; double their punishment.” He will say, “The punishment is doubled for both.” (The first group violated the Laws and misled others, and the second group was guilty of blind following and misleading their successors). These people (Mutaffafeen) want everything for themselves and do not give out anything for the welfare for the society and even when they give they keep their measures smallest possible [Author’s note] This is the 83rd Surah of the Qur'an. It has 36 verses. The title refers to cheating or defrauding others. Cheating people in business transactions violates human rights.

Another title given to the Surah is Al-Mutaffifin meaning the cheaters or the defrauders. “Tatfif” also denotes unfair dealings, not doing justice to one’s duties, failing to show gratitude respect or honor where it is due. And in general, it signifies being deficient in fulfilling human rights. 83:1 Woe unto the dealers in fraud! These Mutaffafeen demand full measures from others but do not follow the same rules when they have to give it to others. 83:2 Those who demand full measure when receiving from people. 83:3 But give less than due when giving them by measure or weight. (Or diminish the recompense of the laborer). Mutrayfeen: These are those people who do not do anything to contribute towards the betterment of the society but have greed to snatch the earnings of others. This groups consists of all the suppressors of humanity especially priests, rabbis, mullahs etc 9:34 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! A great many religious leaders, rabbis, priests, monks, mullahs, yogis, and mystics devour the wealth of mankind in falsehood, and debar them from the Path of Allah. All those who hoard up gold and silver and spend it not in the Cause of Allah, to them give tidings (O Prophet) of a painful doom. In a Quranic society every one would do his best, keep what is necessary and donate rest for the betterment of the society but these Mutrayfeen are not in habit of hard work so they are the one who are the staunch opponents of the revolution to establish the Quranic society. They try their best to weaken the support for this system by telling lies to the masses. 43:23 Thus it is. Whenever We sent, before you, a Warner to a community, its luxurious ones said, "Behold, We found our fathers following a certain religion, and we are following their footprints." An amazing point to note here that a capitalist takes risk when he invests but priest does not have to take that risk. His business is riskless and he keeps accumulating wealth without investing any money out of his own pocket.
This is why in 9/34 there is a special mention of priests regarding hoarding the wealth and in fact priesthood is the worst form of capitalism. This was the faith of Mutrafeen and Mutaffafeen now lets see what a Momin believes in The economic system of a Momin is based on “ Anfaqay Fee Sabeelillah” Nafq is that tunnel which is open on both ends. Anfaaq is used as opposite to “bukhal” in Quran. Anfaaq would mean keep the resources open to the society and Bukhal , holding on to the wealth and not sharing with others. The Mutaqeen are those who shared their earnings with the needy and this is what they learned from the Divine Laws 51:19 And in their wealth was the Divine Right of the requester and the deprived (6:142). They are aware of the fact that whatever they spent out of their wealth on others, in fact they are earning something for themselves. This is going to help develop their personality and they will be able to go through the evolutionary stages. 64:16 So be mindful of Allah as best as you can. And listen, and obey, and spend on others (your wealth and person).

That is good for your own ‘Selves’. For, any who is protected from his own greediness - it is they, they who are truly successful. Keeping the earnings open to the society is like you are loaning to Allah swt and He will return you in double. “Qareez”= When an animal ingests something the food regurgitates to his mouth which is chewed thoroughly and returned back to the stomach in a much digestible form, so when u give “qarz” to Allah swt he makes it “digestible” for you. 64:16 So be mindful of Allah as best as you can. And listen, and obey, and spend on others (your wealth and person). That is good for your own ‘Selves’. For, any who is protected from his own greediness - it is they, they who are truly successful. 64:17 If you lend unto Allah a goodly loan, He will multiply it for you and will grant you the protection of forgiveness. Allah is Appreciative, Clement. And they do this out of their free will, there is no compulsion in it and in return they don’t even desire a word of thanks 76:9 (They do all this selflessly) saying, "We provide for you for the sake of Allah alone. We want no return from you, not even a word of thanks.
Work in Progress ----

Tattoos and Lahv O La'hb ---- Taseer Cheema, MD

2006-11-19T14:35:00.000-08:00

Quran is a book which provides basic principles and outlines the salient features of the constitution of an islamic republic and its left up to the islamic society to derive legislation. Allah swt not only provided means of sustenance and nourishment for the benifit of the society but also addressed the asthetic sense of the man, hence made this world or should i say the whole universe full of beauty. He provided things of beauty to charm and please the eyes of the humanity.If we look around the immense beauty all around it throws us into amazement. We the humen are here for a purpose and the basic goal is to achieve that target and that can be avalied only by the development of personality.

The Hasanaat are the deeds which pave the way to the success and Syyiaat are those which prevent us from being victorious. PLease see my post "halal/haram/syyiat/hasanaat" for the details of these terms. There is an other term which Quran introduces "La'av" and "La'ab". These terms are very significant and need special attention. La'av: are those deeds or activities which divert your attention from a useful matter and indulge you in vain things and activities which have no significance or importance and make you consume your time and effort and energy and money for nothing. La'ab: A deed which has movement in it but it produces no positive results. It is opposite to being serious( Quran uses the term Jidd= something serious) 4:119 Satan (Iblis) in allegorical terms had said, “I surely will lead them astray, I will entice them, confound them.” (2:34-36, 7:11, 15:30-32, 17:62, 18:50, 20:116, 38:74). According to Satan’s promise, these representatives of his mislead men and women away from the Qur’an, and COUNFOUND them with RITUALISM and SUPERSTITIONS, such as magic, dreams, astrology, amulets, numerology, ghoul, exorcism, and vain beliefs. Marking cattle's ears, choosing red cows or black goats for specific sacrifices, are superstitions that the clergy propagates.

They try to present the Laws of Allah operative in the World of Creation in a distorted fashion. They assign miracles to living or dead "saints" ignoring the Law of Cause and Effect (4:51, 4:60). Whoever befriends this handiwork of Satan, has ignored Allah. Such a person is verily a loser and his loss is manifest. Now let me prsent Quranic verses to make clear whats laav and laab La'ab: When the divine message is pesented to them they dont take it serious. 9:65 And if you ask them (O Messenger), they will say, “WE ONLY TALK AND JEST.” Say, “Do you realize that you are mocking Allah, His Revelations and His Messenger?” 9:67 The hypocrites, both men and women, are all of a kind. They enjoin the doing of what is wrong and forbid the doing of what is right, and withhold their hands from doing good. They are oblivious of Allah, and so He is oblivious of them. (Whoever forgets Allah, forgets himself and his honored stature of being a human 59:19). Verily, the hypocrites drift away from humanity. Not serious trowards life: 43:83 So let them chatter and play until they meet their Day which they have been promised. Again not taking the life seriously andbindulgence in vain rituals 52:12 Who peddle the play of SHALLOW RITUALS. 70:42 Let them CHAT AND PLAY until they meet their Day which they are promised. La'av: These are the things which divert your attention and make you focuss on those which prevent you to achieve the goal you are here for.Piling up money and not keeping it open for the wellfare of humanity is also one of those acts(102/1),Let not your wealth or children make you drift from the right path (63/9) 15:3 Let them eat, drink, and enjoy life while hanging on to false hopes (47:12).

They will come to know. (If they do not come to the Truth, the Truth will come to them, and they will see it 102:7). LAHWAL HADITH: 31:6 But among people, there are those who invest their time in HADITH which is unfounded, so as to lead those without knowledge away from the Path of Allah, making mockery of it (the Qur'an). For such there is shameful punishment in store. [In order to defend the ‘Imams’ of Hadith, some commentators try to explain away ‘Lahwal Hadith’ as music. This obviously makes no linguistic or contextual sense]. 31/6---- Mafhhoomul Quran On the other hand, there are people who do not have before them any higher objective in life; and they consider this worldly life and its temporary comforts as an end in itself. In this manner, without having any knowledge or wisdom they themselves go astray and also lead other people away from the right path. They ridicule the higher values of life and the path leading towards them. These are the people whose end will be a very humiliating chastisement. There are plenty of ahadith which are presented to denounce tattooing such as Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle said, 'The evil eye is a fact,' and he forbade tattooing. (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Dress, Volume 7, Book 72, Number 827)" "EVIL EYE IS A FACT"? and i would say in the words of Quran Hatoo Burahnokum in kuntum saadiqeen. There is no such thing as "evil eye", its all superstition.

Narrated 'Aun bin Abu Juhaifa: "My father bought a slave who practiced the profession of cupping. (My father broke the slave's instruments of cupping). I asked my father why he had done so. He replied, 'The Prophet forbade the acceptance of the price of a dog or blood, and also forbade the profession of tattooing, getting tattooed and receiving or giving Riba, (usury), and cursed the picture-makers.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Sales and Trade, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 299)" "price of a dog or blood" chech mahnay darad? Whats Qisaas and diyat??? IN addition to it,why in the first palce, he had a slave when Quran had abandoned slavery. Picture making is forbidden then why Syedna Sulaimaan was enjoying this art work 34:13 They worked for him as he desired, making forts, sculptures and images, pools, and boilers well-dug into the ground. We said, “Labor O Children of David, in gratitude for what you have been given. Few of My servants are truly grateful in practice.” Narrated 'Abdullah: "Allah has cursed those women who practise tattooing and those who get themselves tattooed, and those who remove their face hairs, and those who create a space between their teeth artificially to look beautiful, and such women as change the features created by Allah.

Why then should I not curse those whom the Prophet has cursed? And that is in Allah's Book. i.e. His Saying: 'And what the Apostle gives you take it and what he forbids you abstain (from it).' (59.7) (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Dress, Volume 7, Book 72, Number 815)" Prophet cursed??? I think He was "Rehma tallil Aalameen". He could not use foul language, is'nt it false accusation hence merits to be a blesphamy. "hairy face" no women would want to have that.Allah never forbade things of "zeenat". I think there is no need of any hadith to denounce tattooing since this comes under "Laav and Laab" and we have clear guidelines from Quran. NOw lets look at this from an other aspect. Tattooing is a "culture" and people who are obcessed with it spend so much time and money in thinking,planning and getting it done. A small tattoo may cost about $ 100 to $200 which is a waste of money. That same amount can be used for the wellfare of the society.On to the top of it, this practice has health hazards such as its one of the source of spread of Hepatitis B and C and Hep c is a devastating disease which is acquired through the use of sahred needles. The people who draw tatoos do not observe safe techniques and the dye tiself is contmanated and may become source of spread of infection.This is why i would strongly discourage tattooing on two reason
1- Its Laav O Laab
2- Medically hazardous

Who is Kafir? ------ Taseer Cheema, MD

2006-11-19T14:33:00.000-08:00

Kafir is in my opinion a term very much misunderstood by many including Muslims. Usually its a term to distinguish between a muslim and a non muslim which is the partial reality.Let me shed some light on this Quranic term here. Kafir comes from a root Kuf'r= to cover or hide something. Someone whose body is all covered with weapons is also called "kafir" Night is also called Kafir because it coveres every thing Black clouds are called Kafir as well Rivers and Oceans are also called kafir because they hide everything contained in the body of water. Peasant is a kafir too becasue he hides the seed in the soil Grave is also called Al-Kafro Kafoor is the shell which encloses the growing bud. and also a medicine( herbal) which is believed to decrease the heat.

When we ponder on Quranic verses we see Kafir is brought in opposition to Momin and would mean someone who hides the truth after he has realised the turthfullness of something. IN Quran Kafir is used as opposed to "eemaan" and "shukar" Shukar= when goats mammary glands are so much filled up with milk that it starts dripping = would mean the natural consequences of sincere efforsts based on truth) A momin also commits Kuf'r when he rejects the Falsehood --- see the term Kuf'r bit' Taghoot(16/36, 4/60) Eemaan and Kufr are two schools of thought. When someone evaluates the Divine message and accepts it whole heartedly after pondering over these realities and seeing the hidden good in them and also lives by those absolute values then he would be called a Momin and on the other hand there is a person who also goes through the same process and knows its all true what has been presented to him but knwoingly and being fully aware of the built in good of whats being presented to him , he takes the other path because of his stubborness, ancestry, tribal pride, hatered so on and so forth, and he ends up rejecting those absolute valuse which are nothing but Truth ---- thats the point when he declares himself as a kafir.

In Quran Kafir is not used as a curse word but to differentiate two schools of thought or two groups. ONe who accepts the divine message and the other who rejects but the emphasis is after he knows that the message is nothing but truth. Not all the non muslims are kafirs, there are many in this world who never ever pondered over the Divine message or evaluated it. They might be non mulsims but not kuffaar. They are Dhaaleen the ones who are not on the right path.