Mughal
August 17, 2003, 02:34 AM
Why I Think The Quran Is Not The Word Of God.
1) Because God we are told is unique but no scriptures is found unique to be consistent with nature of such a god
2) Because I think the quran has been changed.
3) Because it teaches violence
4) Because it teaches people to discriminate against each other and be unfair to each other
5) Because it contains clear cut mistakes about various kinds of facts
Any rational person should be able to see that no allegedly divine religion can be proven something real or true. There is no proof nor anyone has been able to prove it as such. This is the reason that it comes under faith in faith or blind faith or as I call it superstition.
In our case (ie muslims) it is time to examine the quran itself for various problems within it as well as problematic issues in Islamic faith itself.
For example, it is claimed by muslim scholars and on their authority by muslim masses that the quran is the only perfect divine revelation that exists today on the face of the earth. The question is, is it really true?
The history of the quran is reported in the hadith books and the hadith books show quite a bit of variation as regard the collection of the quran and the different versions of the quran. The case is similar in both shia and sunni hadith books. In fact there has been debates between the two as to who is to blame for raising the issue of quran not being complete.
There have been written books on this issue both by muslims and nonmuslims as well. However, here is what we find in Bukhaari for example.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/061.sbt.html
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to 'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an. Then I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Abu Bakr replied, "By Allah, it is a good project." Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and 'Umar. So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is:
'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty..(till the end of Surat-Baraa' (At-Tauba) (9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with 'Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of 'Umar.
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 510:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur'an and I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their covenant with Allah.' (33.23)
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 511:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:
Abu Bakr sent for me and said, "You used to write the Divine Revelations for Allah's Apostle : So you should search for (the Qur'an and collect) it." I started searching for the Qur'an till I found the last two Verses of Surat At-Tauba with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari and I could not find these Verses with anybody other than him. (They were):
'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty ...' (9.128-129)
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 512:
Narrated Al-Bara:
There was revealed: 'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and those who strive and fight in the Cause of Allah.' (4.95)
The Prophet said, "Call Zaid for me and let him bring the board, the inkpot and the scapula bone (or the scapula bone and the ink pot)."' Then he said, "Write: 'Not equal are those Believers who sit..", and at that time 'Amr bin Um Maktum, the blind man was sitting behind the Prophet . He said, "O Allah's Apostle! What is your order For me (as regards the above Verse) as I am a blind man?" So, instead of the above Verse, the following Verse was revealed:
'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame etc.) and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah.' (4.95)
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 513:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas:
Allah's Apostle said, "Gabriel recited the Qur'an to me in one way. Then I requested him (to read it in another way), and continued asking him to recite it in other ways, and he recited it in several ways till he ultimately recited it in seven different ways."
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 514:
Narrated 'Umar bin Al-Khattab:
I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat Al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited in several different ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. I was about to jump over him during his prayer, but I controlled my temper, and when he had completed his prayer, I put his upper garment around his neck and seized him by it and said, "Who taught you this Sura which I heard you reciting?" He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me." I said, "You have told a lie, for Allah's Apostle has taught it to me in a different way from yours." So I dragged him to Allah's Apostle and said (to Allah's Apostle),
"I heard this person reciting Surat Al-Furqan in a way which you haven't taught me!" On that Allah's Apostle said, "Release him, (O 'Umar!) Recite, O Hisham!" Then he recited in the same way as I heard him reciting. Then Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed in this way," and added, "Recite, O 'Umar!" I recited it as he had taught me. Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed in this way. This Qur'an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever (way) is easier for you (or read as much of it as may be easy for you)."
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 515:
Narrated Yusuf bin Mahk:
While I was with Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said, "O mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Qur'an," She said, "Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Qur'an according to it, for people recite it with its Suras not in proper order." 'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from Al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire. When the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: 'Do not drink alcoholic drinks.' people would have said, 'We will never leave alcoholic drinks,' and if there had been revealed, 'Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 'they would have said, 'We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse.' While I was a young girl of playing age, the following Verse was revealed in Mecca to Muhammad: 'Nay! But the Hour is their appointed time (for their full recompense), and the Hour will be more grievous and more bitter.' (54.46) Sura Al-Baqara (The Cow) and Surat An-Nisa (The Women) were revealed while I was with him." Then 'Aisha took out the copy of the Qur'an for the man and dictated to him the Verses of the Suras (in their proper order) .
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 518:
Narrated Shaqiq:
Abdullah said, "I learnt An-Naza'ir which the Prophet used to recite in pairs in each Rak'a." Then Abdullah got up and Alqama accompanied him to his house, and when Alqama came out, we asked him (about those Suras). He said, "They are twenty Suras that start from the beginning of Al-Mufassal, according to the arrangement done be Ibn Mas'ud, and end with the Suras starting with Ha Mim, e.g. Ha Mim (the Smoke). and "About what they question one another?" (78.1)
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 521:
Narrated Masriq:
'Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned 'Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, 'Take (learn) the Qur'an from four: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai bin Ka'b.' "
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 522:
Narrated Shaqiq bin Salama:
Once 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud delivered a sermon before us and said, "By Allah, I learnt over seventy Suras direct from Allah's Apostle . By Allah, the companions of the Prophet came to know that I am one of those who know Allah's Book best of all of them, yet I am not the best of them." Shaqiq added: I sat in his religious gathering and I did not hear anybody opposing him (in his speech).
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 523:
Narrated 'Alqama:
While we were in the city of Hims (in Syria), Ibn Mas'ud recited Surat Yusuf. A man said to him), "It was not revealed in this way." Then Ibn Mas'ud said, "I recited it in this way before Allah's Apostle and he confirmed my recitation by saying, 'Well done!' " Ibn Mas'ud detected the smell of wine from the man's mouth, so he said to him, "Aren't you ashamed of telling a lie about Allah's Book and (along with this) you drink alcoholic liquors too?" Then he lashed him according to the law.
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 524:
Narrated 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) : By Allah other than Whom none has the right to be worshipped! There is no Sura revealed in Allah's Book but I know at what place it was revealed; and there is no Verse revealed in Allah's Book but I know about whom
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 525:
Narrated Qatada:
I asked Anas bin Malik: "Who collected the Qur'an at the time of the Prophet ?" He replied, "Four, all of whom were from the Ansar: Ubai bin Ka'b, Mu'adh bin Jabal, Zaid bin Thabit and Abu Zaid."
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 526:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
When the Prophet died, none had collected the Qur'an but four persons;: Abu Ad-Darda'. Mu'adh bin Jabal, Zaid bin Thabit and Abu Zaid. We were the inheritor (of Abu Zaid) as he had no offspring .
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 527:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: 'Umar said, Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he recites.' Ubai says, 'I have taken it from the mouth of Allah's Apostle and will not leave for anything whatever." But Allah said
In these reports, we can clearly see people at the time differing as to the collection of the quran in form of a book as well as correct version of the quran.
The strange thing is that despite believing in seven versions of the quran and the single version of the quran muslims do not see any contradiction.
Question arises, if only one version was necessary then why seven were revealed? Or if seven were necessary, why only one was kept in circulation?
Moreover, why seven version were revealed at all? Was it because Arabs used to speak different versions of Arabic? If so why choose a language that is yet to develop to become proper?
Even if we accept that variation was to compensate for variations in arabic language that people spoke at the time, the question remains, why not then the concern of people who spoke other languages was taken into account?
Beside the hadit clearly tells, usman the 3rd caliph burnt the copies of the quran that varied with the one he published.
Why would one burn the copies of an alleged divine book if there is nothing seriously wrong with them?
In fact there are reports as to longer and shorter versions of the quranic suras. We are again confused as to why there should be more than one version of the same sura, one shorter and the other longer. Some bring in the rule of abrogation to explain away this problem but they fail to realise that this theory has its own drawback. For example, why would god reveal anything that needs changing within the 23 years of the revelation? Would that not indicate that if the change in Arabia in 23 years requires change in the message of god then how about times before and after the quran and the wider world's circumstances?
All such points clearly show that the quran we have today is not exactly what it was that was allegedly revealed.
As we have seen the situation so far regarding the alleged holy scripture is quite unsatisfactory. Common sense throws doubt at such claims and the history of the scriptures is also very much doubtful.
Under such circumstances it will be wrong for me to put my faith 100% in such scriptures and allow them to take over my life or to kill other human beings in their name or be killed myself by others in their name. This is why I do not like wars in the name of religion. Dharma yuds by hindus,, crusades by christians or jihads by muslims are all one and the same thing ie killing of others in the name of their religion.
My argument is very simple, if god is good and all merciful being, can such scriptures as are alleged to be his word be really his word?
If one’s father is a really good man, is one right to attribute anything to him that does not fit his personality?
Christians think and so they claim that the holy bible is god's word, are they right? Muslims likewise think and claim that the holy quran is god's word, are they right?
The point is not that these books are god's words because they are miraculous etc etc etc...... but that are these books good enough to be attributed to such a unique being? Many people may not know but it is assumed that word god comes from word good ie god is called god because he is all good.
If we study the alleged divine scriptures, they contain mistakes, wrong ideas, systems and practices which people do not hesitate to attribute to god. Some may take action as they see fit in order to stop people from being critical of a religious scripture. They do not realise that believing in a book as revealed word of god is not as simple as they think. It is paramount that people do not attribute to god what is obviously not from god no matter who says it is.
In fact, we need to ask ourselves some serious questions eg if jesus says something about god that does not fit the nature of god, is he not to be ignored? Why not?
If muhammad attributes something to god that does not fit the being of god, should he be believed?
Likewise, if Muhammad is a prophet of god and a good man, should we accept anything that anyone attributes to such a good man in the name of hadith?
All this calls for very careful and very serious critical examination of such claims or attributes. If we must fear god as the quran suggests, is it not then yet more important that we do not attribute to god what cannot be proven to be from himself?
If this is the case then blind faith is no faith at all or is it? Are we doing the right thing by believing in any alleged divine scripture as god's word without satisfying ourselves that that is really the case? Or does it dissolve our individual responsibility once we are born in a religion?
Moreover is it enough to attribute anything anyone has written about any holy man or should we be seriously critical of it, for our whole being is at stake here?
These like questions force one to make up one's own mind oneself about any alleged heavenly scripture. It is these like questions that force one to be critical of any alleged divine scripture and take nothing for granted. Moreover god should be happy that one is doing his will or god having given us brains and making us human beings would count for nothing.
This leads me to criticism of the quran ie is the quran truly word of god or a hoax attributed to an imaginary god? I am using word imaginary because if the scripture proves to be false then god of this scripture is also a false. Only true god can give us a true scripture. In other words if we have imagined a god for ourselves for some reason (and there are plenty of reasons why we would do that) then we must also have imagined a scripture of him as well.
So the questions arise, what is quran, its structure and contents etc etc? Also what is islam and its structure etc etc?
Some people who do not question their faith out of respect should think about, who deserves our respect most? God or quran, God or Muhammad? Muhammad or hadith? Muhammad or ulema? Hadith or ulema? If the answer to first two questions is god then quran must be examine and Muhammad must be examined. Likewise in turn it is hadith must be examined and ulema must be examined and so on and so forth.
If questioning the authorities to find out the truth is being disrespectful then let us be disrespectful because the question is, are we being respectful by attributing wrong things to higher authorities? This is a catch 22 situation ie whether you question or you don't you are being disrespect either way. Who put us in this situation? Did we ourselves or was it god? If the answer is god then he knew all this did he not?
2) Concept Of Jihad And The Quran
For online quranic translations visit the following link.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION 2/256, 109/6 etc.
My understanding is that the quran commands its follower to make nonmuslims embrace islam by all means including force and violence.
Here is why I reached this conclusion.
A) The quran divides the world into two groups, believers and unbelievers. The believers are called the party of Allah and the unbelievers are called party of satan 4/76, 58/19-22 etc.
B) The quran clearly states that Allah has sent islam to overcome all other religions 9/33, 48/28, 61/9. Moreover it is promised that believers will overcome the unbelievers, perhaps, to give them the sense or encouragement that they should.
C) The ways and means of propagating islam are also stated in the quran eg exchanging ideas nicely to convince the other side 16/125, 25/63, 29/46, 31/18-19 etc etc. Also by insulting, provoking, threatening the other side 2/6-20, 170-171, 6/25, 39, 7/176, 179, 8/55, 59-67, 9/28, 34, 10/43, 21/51-69, 22/46, 73, 25/44, 27/20-44, 80, 31/9, 35/22, 43/40, 46/26, 47/12, 62/5, 63/4 etc etc.
The idea seems to be that when weak talk to people nicely to convince them. When no longer weak, just invite people to islam even by provoking them by insults. Should this result in an armed attack, be ready to defend. However, when strong just order infidels to turn muslims or all hell is going to break loose upon them.
In case of war, go for mass murder do not take captives till you have killed a good number of them and they are well humiliated. The captives are further humiliated by way of being looted and enslaved for good. Their women and children are humiliated by way of slavery. Their women have to sleep with anyone whoever can force himself upon them. I rather abstain from putting too much detail here, for people should read the holy quran and hadith for themselves in this regard and see what kind of battles were fought by muslims at the time and how they treated their enemies when they had overcome them.
The quran not only condones tribal warfare but takes it a step further in the wrong direction in a more organised way.
I am not looking for justifications of these action on the basis of history and historical context but from the perspective of divinity and divine messenger-ship. We can assume that other people were barbarian but purpose of islam was not to respond in kind but to turn them into sensible human beings. At least that is what is preached nowadays about islam. The quran and the hadees as well as Islamic history tell us a very confusing story.
Some stories are not worth posting they are so low in morality, even tribals used to deal with each other better than that.
My view is that muslim writers have been hyping up stories to create a better contrast for muslims as a better people. However, in reporting things, they made serious errors.
For example, most Islamic books would have us believe that people in Arabia in time of Muhammad were ignorant, worthless, barbarian and had no respect for life or liberty etc etc. Muhammad came and brought them out of this depth of immorality and darkness of ignorance etc etc.
We are also told that some of these people were literate and very sensible who were businessmen and produced very good pieces of literature. For example, when muslims talk about the challenges of the quran as to none could produce like it, they very proudly state that the scholars of Arabia at the time could not produce a single sura like that of the quran. So where do these scholars of Arabia suddenly pop out from? We are also told that makka was a centre of trade and commerce. This also means these people were very peaceful and progressive, for it is impossible for such things to happen unless right conditions exist for them. You cannot have good trade centre in middle of war torn city or country. If arabs were busy in tribal warfare then how did Muhammad get married into a jewish family? This indicates the fact that relationship between various tribes were really good or why would jews do business with arabs and give them jobs or even go for intermarriages?
To me it would seem that it were muslims to be blamed for whatever went wrong after the declaration of Muhammad’s prophethood. Somebody is scheming here and finger would points to the person or the group that has caused this disharmony in a people who are all living peacefully and going about their daily business.
It seems that muslims have been having designs right from the word go to dominate the world. The reason why islam spread so fast and wide is not that Muhammad managed to convince so many people about the truth of islam over night but that Arab world was caught by surprise. People who are living peacefully do not expect to be suddenly attacked from all sides. Once a few tribes joined together, it was not possible for individual tribes to combat them. And as the number grew it gave muslims a great advantage. Most of all it was an easy way to earn one’s livelihood ie by conquering and looting people and being praised for it.
The idea is very similar in some suicide bombing campaigns. Even useless people become heroes over night. This fact took ages for America to realise that because people praise these people for carrying out such acts, some really get the buzz out of dying for such causes. Imagine a young lad who is broke and so has no future and no girl would marry him, suddenly beautiful girls crying for him and shouting his name. I do not mean by this that all causes are useless and so are all those who take part in them but that this is a factor in this story.
Anyway lets go back, I am talking about problems with my understanding of islam ie in this case my problem with concept of jihad.
I am quite aware of the fact that some muslims take it to mean struggle in general or a defensive war not an offensive war in the name of islam. However, the sense I get after reading the quran and hadees is that in islam jihad is an offensive war as well. For example, read in the quran the story of King Solomon in sura 27/20-44. He suddenly finds by hoopoe that a people worship sun etc and invites them to give their this belief up for islam or they will have to face his army.
Since there is lesson in the quran for those who follow it, the lesson here seems to be quite clear that if you can then stop people by force from having beliefs against islam regardless whereever they are on the earth or whether they bother you or not. Moreover notice the loss of temper of Solomon when he says, how he is going to deal with hoopoe. Solomon is not a king to muslims but a divine prophet, whose example must be followed.
Take the story of Abraham 21/51– 71 etc. He is hell bent on teaching idol worshipper a lesson. To make his point he breaks their idols into pieces thus defiles their holy shrine or religious holy place. Is this not a provocative act? Was it at all necessary to make the point Abraham made? Nonetheless muslim must follow Abraham, says the quran 60/4-6.
The point I am making here is that the quran teaches muslims to deliberately provoke people and start a fight where there is none just because others do not believe what muslims believe.
The question therefore arises whether islam is really religion of peace or of war? The answers from the quran seems to be that islam is religion of war. Abraham is enemy of those who do not believe like him, he hates them because of their wrong beliefs and he is the example the muslims are told to follow. All this proves that muslims are incapable of living in peace with anyone who holds different religious beliefs. If they are trying now, it is only because they are unable to get their way as things stand.
Not long ago hindus demolished the babri masjid in india, was that a good thing? I am sure it was not because something has been done long ago should not be disturbed ie let the by-gones be by-gone. But example is again that, Muhammad took over makkah and cleared all the idols from it ie about 360. The question is, was he right in doing that? Were makkan idols in ka’ba (the holy cube) worshipped only by makkans or did people come to makkah for pilgrimage from other places as well and so it was their shrine also? The quran tells that it was 9/1–, 22/25, 105/1-, 106/1- etc etc. Makkah was religious centre for many people. So there was no excuse for any such action in reaction to makkan actions even if they were brutal to muslims.
The problem is similar in Israel and Palestine conflict over Jerusalem. Muslims claim that ka’ba in Makkah was build by Abraham and belonged to them. There is no proof that that was the case. Moreover even if that was the case, the ka’ba was now taken over by pagans so it should have been left the way it was. Hindus also want to build Ram mandir in place of babri masjid, claiming it to be lord rama’a birth place. So if muslims were right in taking over kaba then hindus cannot be wrong in reclaiming what they claim is theirs. This is what I mean by religions rather than helping us solve our problems they add to them. I do not know how many more innocent lives will have to be lost in order to satisfy this religion based madness.
The hatred that islam creates between people in my views becomes very obvious if one reads the quran oneself. In verses I have quoted above, muslims are told to have nothing to do even with their very own relatives if they choose different beliefs or religion 9/24, 58/22, 60/1- etc etc. If we ourselves develop negative attitude towards other people then we cannot blame them for their reaction either, can we?
3) Islam allows slavery
Although muslims tell me that islam is all about brotherhood and equality, the quran and hadees paint another picture of islam ie it allowed slavery to continue as I understand it.
The quran states that all people originate from the very same parents 4/1, 49/13 etc etc. Also that none is better than the other except the ones who do god's will better.
Are all people equal before the law as far as islam is concerned? The answer seems to be, no. There is first of all discrimination between muslims and nonmuslims. Then between muslim men and muslim women. Then there is discrimination between muslim masters and muslim slaves.
I have already quoted the verses that divide people into two camps ie party of allah and party of satan. The party of allah is told to be tough on infidels 9/28, 67, 49/29 etc etc.
The ruler of muslims can only and only be a muslim 2/221, 4/34, 58-65, 24/51 etc etc. The ruler cannot be a muslim slave nor a muslim women.
A muslim man is allowed to wed four women at the same time and is allowed to change them at will 4/3,20. There is no limit on having slave girls. The wife obviously has no right to limit the number of her husband's se-xual partners ie wives and slave girls. So long as one can afford it he is free to do as one pleases. There is no restriction in the quran as regard buying and selling of slaves, male or female. Since a man can have as many partners as he wants by changing wives or slave girls for example, the se-xual morality in islam seems to be as good as nonexistent.
Now the question, how good the original muslims were, the quran clearly states the answer in 2/221, 4/25, 24/3 and elsewhere. These muslims were happy to keep their muslim sisters as slaves. I would not say anything more than that. Now people who could keep muslims as slaves (ie their own very brethren in faith) could not be expected to let go their nonmuslim slaves, could they? I am not saying that all muslims were like this but at least some were and that they were allowed to be so, so it was not their fault, was it? Moreover a man is allowed to beat up his wife by the quran and more easy for a man to beat up his slaves girl.
Here is al-bukhaari link for hadees and see what it says about slave girls as regard their faith ie were they believers or not?
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/046.sbt.html
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 716:
Narrated Marwan and Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:
When the delegates of the tribe of Hawazin came to the Prophet and they requested him to return their properties and captives. The Prophet stood up and said to them, "I have other people with me in this matter (as you see) and the most beloved statement to me is the true one; you may choose either the properties or the prisoners as I have delayed their distribution." The Prophet had waited for them for more than ten days since his arrival from Ta'if. So, when it became evident to them that the Prophet was not going to return them except one of the two, they said, "We choose our prisoners." The Prophet got up amongst the people and glorified and praised Allah as He deserved and said, "Then after, these brethren of yours have come to us with repentance, and I see it logical to return them the captives. So, whoever amongst you likes to do that as a favor, then he can do it, and whoever of you likes to stick to his share till we recompense him from the very first war booty which Allah will give us, then he can do so (i.e. give up the present captives)." The people unanimously said, "We do that (return the captives) willingly." The Prophet said, "We do not know which of you has agreed to it and which have not, so go back and let your leaders forward us your decision." So, all the people then went back and discussed the matter with their leaders who returned and informed the Prophet that all the people had willingly given their consent to return the captives. This is what has reached us about the captives of Hawazin. Narrated Anas that 'Abbas said to the Prophet, "I paid for my ransom and Aqil's ransom."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 717:
Narrated Ibn Aun:
I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn 'Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn 'Umar was in that army.
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 718:
Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:
I saw Abu Said and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Said said, "We went with Allah's Apostle, in the Ghazwa of Barli Al-Mustaliq and we captured some of the 'Arabs as captives, and the long separation from our wives was pressing us hard and we wanted to practice coitus interruptus. We asked Allah's Apostle (whether it was permissible). He said, "It is better for you not to do so. No soul, (that which Allah has) destined to exist, up to the Day of Resurrection, but will definitely come, into existence."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 721:
Narrated Al-Ma'rur bin Suwaid:
I saw Abu Dhar Al-Ghifari wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a cloak. We asked him about that (i.e. how both were wearing similar cloaks). He replied, "Once I abused a man and he complained of me to the Prophet . The Prophet asked me, 'Did you abuse him by slighting his mother?' He added, 'Your slaves are your brethren upon whom Allah has given you authority. So, if one has one's brethren under one's control, one should feed them with the like of what one eats and clothe them with the like of what one wears. You should not overburden them with what they cannot bear, and if you do so, help them (in their hard job)."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 722:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said, "If a slave is honest and faithful to his master and worships his Lord (Allah) in a perfect manner, he will get a double reward."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 723:
Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ashari:
The Prophet said, "He who has a slave-girl and teaches her good manners and improves her education and then manumits and marries her, will get a double reward; and any slave who observes Allah's right and his master's right will get a double reward."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 724:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "A pious slave gets a double reward." Abu Huraira added: By Him in Whose Hands my soul is but for Jihad (i.e. holy battles), Hajj, and my duty to serve my mother, I would have loved to die as a slave.
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 725:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "Goodness and comfort are for him who worships his Lord in a perfect manner and serves his master sincerely."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 726:
Narrated 'Abdullah:
The Prophet said, "If a slave serves his Saiyid (i.e. master) sincerely and worships his Lord (Allah) perfectly, he will get a double reward."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 727:
Narrated Abu Musa:
The Prophet said, "The Mamluk (slave) who worships his Lord in a perfect manner, and is dutiful, sincere and obedient to his Saiyid (master), will get a double reward."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 728:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "You should not say, 'Feed your lord (Rabbaka), help your lord in performing ablution, or give water to your lord, but should say, 'my master (e.g. Feed your master instead of lord etc.) (Saiyidi), or my guardian (Maulai), and one should not say, my slave (Abdi), or my girl-slave (Amati), but should say, my lad (Fatai), my lass (Fatati), and 'my boy (Ghulami)."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 729:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
The Prophet said, "If one manumits his share of a common slave (Abd), and he has money sufficient to free the remaining portion of the price of the slave (justly estimated), then he should free the slave completely by paying the rest of his price; otherwise the slave is freed partly. "
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 730:
Narrated 'Abdullah:
Allah's Apostle said, "Everyone of you is a guardian and is responsible for his charges. The ruler who has authority over people, is a guardian and is responsible for them, a man is a guardian of his family and is responsible for them; a woman is a guardian of her husband's house and children and is responsible for them; a slave ('Abu) is a guardian of his master's property and is responsible for it; so all of you are guardians and are responsible for your charges."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 731:
Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid:
The Prophet said, "If a slave-girl (Ama) commits illegal ***ual intercourse, scourge her; if she does it again, scourge her again; if she repeats it, scourge her again." The narrator added that on the third or the fourth offence, the Prophet said, "Sell her even for a hair rope."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 734:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "If somebody fights (or beats somebody) then he should avoid the face."
Many a time one will hear that islam brought slavery to an end and removed racism etc etc but one can clearly see that that is not true. Even if today islam had the upper hand, human rights will thrown out of the window and people will be forced to live by islam as dictated in the quran and hadees, for that is what islam really is.
Please remember that my point is that these books are not good enough to be attributed to all merciful god or his messenger, because according to my understanding they teach things which go against what humanity is all about. This is why I am in a dilemma ie in a catch 22 situation. Will I be doing the right thing by attributing such teachings to my creator, who is supposed to be all knowing and kind?
Again we are not judging islam in historic context but in context of its claim for divine origin. God would disregard what people think and do is right and send down his word for people to follow whether they like it or not. In case of the quran and the hadees, it seems the quran is playing in the hands of the prophet and the prophet is playing in the hands of the people who allegedly are his followers. For example, quran is taking into consideration peoples’ wrong desires rather than telling them straight to their face what is right and what is wrong as far as god is concerned.
So if slavery was wrong then god ought to tell the people so and forbid it right from the beginning. Let people then accept or reject his message at their will at their own risk. The way the quran is dealing with this situation is creating a two tear system that those people were allowed to get their way but we are not.
So one can see why I have problems with religions and scriptures because they raise serious questions in my mind rather than trying to help me solve the problem I am facing in living my daily life as a good human being.
The quran allows slavery but contains no clearcut verse to abolish it hence I am of the view that as far as the quran is concern slavery is fine. I hope my views are wrong and the quran true word of god but how would I know till some one with better knowledge explains that to me?
Regards and all the best.
1) Because God we are told is unique but no scriptures is found unique to be consistent with nature of such a god
2) Because I think the quran has been changed.
3) Because it teaches violence
4) Because it teaches people to discriminate against each other and be unfair to each other
5) Because it contains clear cut mistakes about various kinds of facts
Any rational person should be able to see that no allegedly divine religion can be proven something real or true. There is no proof nor anyone has been able to prove it as such. This is the reason that it comes under faith in faith or blind faith or as I call it superstition.
In our case (ie muslims) it is time to examine the quran itself for various problems within it as well as problematic issues in Islamic faith itself.
For example, it is claimed by muslim scholars and on their authority by muslim masses that the quran is the only perfect divine revelation that exists today on the face of the earth. The question is, is it really true?
The history of the quran is reported in the hadith books and the hadith books show quite a bit of variation as regard the collection of the quran and the different versions of the quran. The case is similar in both shia and sunni hadith books. In fact there has been debates between the two as to who is to blame for raising the issue of quran not being complete.
There have been written books on this issue both by muslims and nonmuslims as well. However, here is what we find in Bukhaari for example.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/061.sbt.html
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to 'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an. Then I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Abu Bakr replied, "By Allah, it is a good project." Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and 'Umar. So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is:
'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty..(till the end of Surat-Baraa' (At-Tauba) (9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with 'Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of 'Umar.
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 510:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur'an and I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their covenant with Allah.' (33.23)
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 511:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:
Abu Bakr sent for me and said, "You used to write the Divine Revelations for Allah's Apostle : So you should search for (the Qur'an and collect) it." I started searching for the Qur'an till I found the last two Verses of Surat At-Tauba with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari and I could not find these Verses with anybody other than him. (They were):
'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty ...' (9.128-129)
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 512:
Narrated Al-Bara:
There was revealed: 'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and those who strive and fight in the Cause of Allah.' (4.95)
The Prophet said, "Call Zaid for me and let him bring the board, the inkpot and the scapula bone (or the scapula bone and the ink pot)."' Then he said, "Write: 'Not equal are those Believers who sit..", and at that time 'Amr bin Um Maktum, the blind man was sitting behind the Prophet . He said, "O Allah's Apostle! What is your order For me (as regards the above Verse) as I am a blind man?" So, instead of the above Verse, the following Verse was revealed:
'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame etc.) and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah.' (4.95)
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 513:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas:
Allah's Apostle said, "Gabriel recited the Qur'an to me in one way. Then I requested him (to read it in another way), and continued asking him to recite it in other ways, and he recited it in several ways till he ultimately recited it in seven different ways."
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 514:
Narrated 'Umar bin Al-Khattab:
I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat Al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited in several different ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. I was about to jump over him during his prayer, but I controlled my temper, and when he had completed his prayer, I put his upper garment around his neck and seized him by it and said, "Who taught you this Sura which I heard you reciting?" He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me." I said, "You have told a lie, for Allah's Apostle has taught it to me in a different way from yours." So I dragged him to Allah's Apostle and said (to Allah's Apostle),
"I heard this person reciting Surat Al-Furqan in a way which you haven't taught me!" On that Allah's Apostle said, "Release him, (O 'Umar!) Recite, O Hisham!" Then he recited in the same way as I heard him reciting. Then Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed in this way," and added, "Recite, O 'Umar!" I recited it as he had taught me. Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed in this way. This Qur'an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever (way) is easier for you (or read as much of it as may be easy for you)."
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 515:
Narrated Yusuf bin Mahk:
While I was with Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said, "O mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Qur'an," She said, "Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Qur'an according to it, for people recite it with its Suras not in proper order." 'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from Al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire. When the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: 'Do not drink alcoholic drinks.' people would have said, 'We will never leave alcoholic drinks,' and if there had been revealed, 'Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 'they would have said, 'We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse.' While I was a young girl of playing age, the following Verse was revealed in Mecca to Muhammad: 'Nay! But the Hour is their appointed time (for their full recompense), and the Hour will be more grievous and more bitter.' (54.46) Sura Al-Baqara (The Cow) and Surat An-Nisa (The Women) were revealed while I was with him." Then 'Aisha took out the copy of the Qur'an for the man and dictated to him the Verses of the Suras (in their proper order) .
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 518:
Narrated Shaqiq:
Abdullah said, "I learnt An-Naza'ir which the Prophet used to recite in pairs in each Rak'a." Then Abdullah got up and Alqama accompanied him to his house, and when Alqama came out, we asked him (about those Suras). He said, "They are twenty Suras that start from the beginning of Al-Mufassal, according to the arrangement done be Ibn Mas'ud, and end with the Suras starting with Ha Mim, e.g. Ha Mim (the Smoke). and "About what they question one another?" (78.1)
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 521:
Narrated Masriq:
'Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned 'Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, 'Take (learn) the Qur'an from four: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai bin Ka'b.' "
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 522:
Narrated Shaqiq bin Salama:
Once 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud delivered a sermon before us and said, "By Allah, I learnt over seventy Suras direct from Allah's Apostle . By Allah, the companions of the Prophet came to know that I am one of those who know Allah's Book best of all of them, yet I am not the best of them." Shaqiq added: I sat in his religious gathering and I did not hear anybody opposing him (in his speech).
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 523:
Narrated 'Alqama:
While we were in the city of Hims (in Syria), Ibn Mas'ud recited Surat Yusuf. A man said to him), "It was not revealed in this way." Then Ibn Mas'ud said, "I recited it in this way before Allah's Apostle and he confirmed my recitation by saying, 'Well done!' " Ibn Mas'ud detected the smell of wine from the man's mouth, so he said to him, "Aren't you ashamed of telling a lie about Allah's Book and (along with this) you drink alcoholic liquors too?" Then he lashed him according to the law.
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 524:
Narrated 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) : By Allah other than Whom none has the right to be worshipped! There is no Sura revealed in Allah's Book but I know at what place it was revealed; and there is no Verse revealed in Allah's Book but I know about whom
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 525:
Narrated Qatada:
I asked Anas bin Malik: "Who collected the Qur'an at the time of the Prophet ?" He replied, "Four, all of whom were from the Ansar: Ubai bin Ka'b, Mu'adh bin Jabal, Zaid bin Thabit and Abu Zaid."
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 526:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
When the Prophet died, none had collected the Qur'an but four persons;: Abu Ad-Darda'. Mu'adh bin Jabal, Zaid bin Thabit and Abu Zaid. We were the inheritor (of Abu Zaid) as he had no offspring .
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 527:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: 'Umar said, Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he recites.' Ubai says, 'I have taken it from the mouth of Allah's Apostle and will not leave for anything whatever." But Allah said
In these reports, we can clearly see people at the time differing as to the collection of the quran in form of a book as well as correct version of the quran.
The strange thing is that despite believing in seven versions of the quran and the single version of the quran muslims do not see any contradiction.
Question arises, if only one version was necessary then why seven were revealed? Or if seven were necessary, why only one was kept in circulation?
Moreover, why seven version were revealed at all? Was it because Arabs used to speak different versions of Arabic? If so why choose a language that is yet to develop to become proper?
Even if we accept that variation was to compensate for variations in arabic language that people spoke at the time, the question remains, why not then the concern of people who spoke other languages was taken into account?
Beside the hadit clearly tells, usman the 3rd caliph burnt the copies of the quran that varied with the one he published.
Why would one burn the copies of an alleged divine book if there is nothing seriously wrong with them?
In fact there are reports as to longer and shorter versions of the quranic suras. We are again confused as to why there should be more than one version of the same sura, one shorter and the other longer. Some bring in the rule of abrogation to explain away this problem but they fail to realise that this theory has its own drawback. For example, why would god reveal anything that needs changing within the 23 years of the revelation? Would that not indicate that if the change in Arabia in 23 years requires change in the message of god then how about times before and after the quran and the wider world's circumstances?
All such points clearly show that the quran we have today is not exactly what it was that was allegedly revealed.
As we have seen the situation so far regarding the alleged holy scripture is quite unsatisfactory. Common sense throws doubt at such claims and the history of the scriptures is also very much doubtful.
Under such circumstances it will be wrong for me to put my faith 100% in such scriptures and allow them to take over my life or to kill other human beings in their name or be killed myself by others in their name. This is why I do not like wars in the name of religion. Dharma yuds by hindus,, crusades by christians or jihads by muslims are all one and the same thing ie killing of others in the name of their religion.
My argument is very simple, if god is good and all merciful being, can such scriptures as are alleged to be his word be really his word?
If one’s father is a really good man, is one right to attribute anything to him that does not fit his personality?
Christians think and so they claim that the holy bible is god's word, are they right? Muslims likewise think and claim that the holy quran is god's word, are they right?
The point is not that these books are god's words because they are miraculous etc etc etc...... but that are these books good enough to be attributed to such a unique being? Many people may not know but it is assumed that word god comes from word good ie god is called god because he is all good.
If we study the alleged divine scriptures, they contain mistakes, wrong ideas, systems and practices which people do not hesitate to attribute to god. Some may take action as they see fit in order to stop people from being critical of a religious scripture. They do not realise that believing in a book as revealed word of god is not as simple as they think. It is paramount that people do not attribute to god what is obviously not from god no matter who says it is.
In fact, we need to ask ourselves some serious questions eg if jesus says something about god that does not fit the nature of god, is he not to be ignored? Why not?
If muhammad attributes something to god that does not fit the being of god, should he be believed?
Likewise, if Muhammad is a prophet of god and a good man, should we accept anything that anyone attributes to such a good man in the name of hadith?
All this calls for very careful and very serious critical examination of such claims or attributes. If we must fear god as the quran suggests, is it not then yet more important that we do not attribute to god what cannot be proven to be from himself?
If this is the case then blind faith is no faith at all or is it? Are we doing the right thing by believing in any alleged divine scripture as god's word without satisfying ourselves that that is really the case? Or does it dissolve our individual responsibility once we are born in a religion?
Moreover is it enough to attribute anything anyone has written about any holy man or should we be seriously critical of it, for our whole being is at stake here?
These like questions force one to make up one's own mind oneself about any alleged heavenly scripture. It is these like questions that force one to be critical of any alleged divine scripture and take nothing for granted. Moreover god should be happy that one is doing his will or god having given us brains and making us human beings would count for nothing.
This leads me to criticism of the quran ie is the quran truly word of god or a hoax attributed to an imaginary god? I am using word imaginary because if the scripture proves to be false then god of this scripture is also a false. Only true god can give us a true scripture. In other words if we have imagined a god for ourselves for some reason (and there are plenty of reasons why we would do that) then we must also have imagined a scripture of him as well.
So the questions arise, what is quran, its structure and contents etc etc? Also what is islam and its structure etc etc?
Some people who do not question their faith out of respect should think about, who deserves our respect most? God or quran, God or Muhammad? Muhammad or hadith? Muhammad or ulema? Hadith or ulema? If the answer to first two questions is god then quran must be examine and Muhammad must be examined. Likewise in turn it is hadith must be examined and ulema must be examined and so on and so forth.
If questioning the authorities to find out the truth is being disrespectful then let us be disrespectful because the question is, are we being respectful by attributing wrong things to higher authorities? This is a catch 22 situation ie whether you question or you don't you are being disrespect either way. Who put us in this situation? Did we ourselves or was it god? If the answer is god then he knew all this did he not?
2) Concept Of Jihad And The Quran
For online quranic translations visit the following link.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION 2/256, 109/6 etc.
My understanding is that the quran commands its follower to make nonmuslims embrace islam by all means including force and violence.
Here is why I reached this conclusion.
A) The quran divides the world into two groups, believers and unbelievers. The believers are called the party of Allah and the unbelievers are called party of satan 4/76, 58/19-22 etc.
B) The quran clearly states that Allah has sent islam to overcome all other religions 9/33, 48/28, 61/9. Moreover it is promised that believers will overcome the unbelievers, perhaps, to give them the sense or encouragement that they should.
C) The ways and means of propagating islam are also stated in the quran eg exchanging ideas nicely to convince the other side 16/125, 25/63, 29/46, 31/18-19 etc etc. Also by insulting, provoking, threatening the other side 2/6-20, 170-171, 6/25, 39, 7/176, 179, 8/55, 59-67, 9/28, 34, 10/43, 21/51-69, 22/46, 73, 25/44, 27/20-44, 80, 31/9, 35/22, 43/40, 46/26, 47/12, 62/5, 63/4 etc etc.
The idea seems to be that when weak talk to people nicely to convince them. When no longer weak, just invite people to islam even by provoking them by insults. Should this result in an armed attack, be ready to defend. However, when strong just order infidels to turn muslims or all hell is going to break loose upon them.
In case of war, go for mass murder do not take captives till you have killed a good number of them and they are well humiliated. The captives are further humiliated by way of being looted and enslaved for good. Their women and children are humiliated by way of slavery. Their women have to sleep with anyone whoever can force himself upon them. I rather abstain from putting too much detail here, for people should read the holy quran and hadith for themselves in this regard and see what kind of battles were fought by muslims at the time and how they treated their enemies when they had overcome them.
The quran not only condones tribal warfare but takes it a step further in the wrong direction in a more organised way.
I am not looking for justifications of these action on the basis of history and historical context but from the perspective of divinity and divine messenger-ship. We can assume that other people were barbarian but purpose of islam was not to respond in kind but to turn them into sensible human beings. At least that is what is preached nowadays about islam. The quran and the hadees as well as Islamic history tell us a very confusing story.
Some stories are not worth posting they are so low in morality, even tribals used to deal with each other better than that.
My view is that muslim writers have been hyping up stories to create a better contrast for muslims as a better people. However, in reporting things, they made serious errors.
For example, most Islamic books would have us believe that people in Arabia in time of Muhammad were ignorant, worthless, barbarian and had no respect for life or liberty etc etc. Muhammad came and brought them out of this depth of immorality and darkness of ignorance etc etc.
We are also told that some of these people were literate and very sensible who were businessmen and produced very good pieces of literature. For example, when muslims talk about the challenges of the quran as to none could produce like it, they very proudly state that the scholars of Arabia at the time could not produce a single sura like that of the quran. So where do these scholars of Arabia suddenly pop out from? We are also told that makka was a centre of trade and commerce. This also means these people were very peaceful and progressive, for it is impossible for such things to happen unless right conditions exist for them. You cannot have good trade centre in middle of war torn city or country. If arabs were busy in tribal warfare then how did Muhammad get married into a jewish family? This indicates the fact that relationship between various tribes were really good or why would jews do business with arabs and give them jobs or even go for intermarriages?
To me it would seem that it were muslims to be blamed for whatever went wrong after the declaration of Muhammad’s prophethood. Somebody is scheming here and finger would points to the person or the group that has caused this disharmony in a people who are all living peacefully and going about their daily business.
It seems that muslims have been having designs right from the word go to dominate the world. The reason why islam spread so fast and wide is not that Muhammad managed to convince so many people about the truth of islam over night but that Arab world was caught by surprise. People who are living peacefully do not expect to be suddenly attacked from all sides. Once a few tribes joined together, it was not possible for individual tribes to combat them. And as the number grew it gave muslims a great advantage. Most of all it was an easy way to earn one’s livelihood ie by conquering and looting people and being praised for it.
The idea is very similar in some suicide bombing campaigns. Even useless people become heroes over night. This fact took ages for America to realise that because people praise these people for carrying out such acts, some really get the buzz out of dying for such causes. Imagine a young lad who is broke and so has no future and no girl would marry him, suddenly beautiful girls crying for him and shouting his name. I do not mean by this that all causes are useless and so are all those who take part in them but that this is a factor in this story.
Anyway lets go back, I am talking about problems with my understanding of islam ie in this case my problem with concept of jihad.
I am quite aware of the fact that some muslims take it to mean struggle in general or a defensive war not an offensive war in the name of islam. However, the sense I get after reading the quran and hadees is that in islam jihad is an offensive war as well. For example, read in the quran the story of King Solomon in sura 27/20-44. He suddenly finds by hoopoe that a people worship sun etc and invites them to give their this belief up for islam or they will have to face his army.
Since there is lesson in the quran for those who follow it, the lesson here seems to be quite clear that if you can then stop people by force from having beliefs against islam regardless whereever they are on the earth or whether they bother you or not. Moreover notice the loss of temper of Solomon when he says, how he is going to deal with hoopoe. Solomon is not a king to muslims but a divine prophet, whose example must be followed.
Take the story of Abraham 21/51– 71 etc. He is hell bent on teaching idol worshipper a lesson. To make his point he breaks their idols into pieces thus defiles their holy shrine or religious holy place. Is this not a provocative act? Was it at all necessary to make the point Abraham made? Nonetheless muslim must follow Abraham, says the quran 60/4-6.
The point I am making here is that the quran teaches muslims to deliberately provoke people and start a fight where there is none just because others do not believe what muslims believe.
The question therefore arises whether islam is really religion of peace or of war? The answers from the quran seems to be that islam is religion of war. Abraham is enemy of those who do not believe like him, he hates them because of their wrong beliefs and he is the example the muslims are told to follow. All this proves that muslims are incapable of living in peace with anyone who holds different religious beliefs. If they are trying now, it is only because they are unable to get their way as things stand.
Not long ago hindus demolished the babri masjid in india, was that a good thing? I am sure it was not because something has been done long ago should not be disturbed ie let the by-gones be by-gone. But example is again that, Muhammad took over makkah and cleared all the idols from it ie about 360. The question is, was he right in doing that? Were makkan idols in ka’ba (the holy cube) worshipped only by makkans or did people come to makkah for pilgrimage from other places as well and so it was their shrine also? The quran tells that it was 9/1–, 22/25, 105/1-, 106/1- etc etc. Makkah was religious centre for many people. So there was no excuse for any such action in reaction to makkan actions even if they were brutal to muslims.
The problem is similar in Israel and Palestine conflict over Jerusalem. Muslims claim that ka’ba in Makkah was build by Abraham and belonged to them. There is no proof that that was the case. Moreover even if that was the case, the ka’ba was now taken over by pagans so it should have been left the way it was. Hindus also want to build Ram mandir in place of babri masjid, claiming it to be lord rama’a birth place. So if muslims were right in taking over kaba then hindus cannot be wrong in reclaiming what they claim is theirs. This is what I mean by religions rather than helping us solve our problems they add to them. I do not know how many more innocent lives will have to be lost in order to satisfy this religion based madness.
The hatred that islam creates between people in my views becomes very obvious if one reads the quran oneself. In verses I have quoted above, muslims are told to have nothing to do even with their very own relatives if they choose different beliefs or religion 9/24, 58/22, 60/1- etc etc. If we ourselves develop negative attitude towards other people then we cannot blame them for their reaction either, can we?
3) Islam allows slavery
Although muslims tell me that islam is all about brotherhood and equality, the quran and hadees paint another picture of islam ie it allowed slavery to continue as I understand it.
The quran states that all people originate from the very same parents 4/1, 49/13 etc etc. Also that none is better than the other except the ones who do god's will better.
Are all people equal before the law as far as islam is concerned? The answer seems to be, no. There is first of all discrimination between muslims and nonmuslims. Then between muslim men and muslim women. Then there is discrimination between muslim masters and muslim slaves.
I have already quoted the verses that divide people into two camps ie party of allah and party of satan. The party of allah is told to be tough on infidels 9/28, 67, 49/29 etc etc.
The ruler of muslims can only and only be a muslim 2/221, 4/34, 58-65, 24/51 etc etc. The ruler cannot be a muslim slave nor a muslim women.
A muslim man is allowed to wed four women at the same time and is allowed to change them at will 4/3,20. There is no limit on having slave girls. The wife obviously has no right to limit the number of her husband's se-xual partners ie wives and slave girls. So long as one can afford it he is free to do as one pleases. There is no restriction in the quran as regard buying and selling of slaves, male or female. Since a man can have as many partners as he wants by changing wives or slave girls for example, the se-xual morality in islam seems to be as good as nonexistent.
Now the question, how good the original muslims were, the quran clearly states the answer in 2/221, 4/25, 24/3 and elsewhere. These muslims were happy to keep their muslim sisters as slaves. I would not say anything more than that. Now people who could keep muslims as slaves (ie their own very brethren in faith) could not be expected to let go their nonmuslim slaves, could they? I am not saying that all muslims were like this but at least some were and that they were allowed to be so, so it was not their fault, was it? Moreover a man is allowed to beat up his wife by the quran and more easy for a man to beat up his slaves girl.
Here is al-bukhaari link for hadees and see what it says about slave girls as regard their faith ie were they believers or not?
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/046.sbt.html
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 716:
Narrated Marwan and Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:
When the delegates of the tribe of Hawazin came to the Prophet and they requested him to return their properties and captives. The Prophet stood up and said to them, "I have other people with me in this matter (as you see) and the most beloved statement to me is the true one; you may choose either the properties or the prisoners as I have delayed their distribution." The Prophet had waited for them for more than ten days since his arrival from Ta'if. So, when it became evident to them that the Prophet was not going to return them except one of the two, they said, "We choose our prisoners." The Prophet got up amongst the people and glorified and praised Allah as He deserved and said, "Then after, these brethren of yours have come to us with repentance, and I see it logical to return them the captives. So, whoever amongst you likes to do that as a favor, then he can do it, and whoever of you likes to stick to his share till we recompense him from the very first war booty which Allah will give us, then he can do so (i.e. give up the present captives)." The people unanimously said, "We do that (return the captives) willingly." The Prophet said, "We do not know which of you has agreed to it and which have not, so go back and let your leaders forward us your decision." So, all the people then went back and discussed the matter with their leaders who returned and informed the Prophet that all the people had willingly given their consent to return the captives. This is what has reached us about the captives of Hawazin. Narrated Anas that 'Abbas said to the Prophet, "I paid for my ransom and Aqil's ransom."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 717:
Narrated Ibn Aun:
I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn 'Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn 'Umar was in that army.
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 718:
Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:
I saw Abu Said and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Said said, "We went with Allah's Apostle, in the Ghazwa of Barli Al-Mustaliq and we captured some of the 'Arabs as captives, and the long separation from our wives was pressing us hard and we wanted to practice coitus interruptus. We asked Allah's Apostle (whether it was permissible). He said, "It is better for you not to do so. No soul, (that which Allah has) destined to exist, up to the Day of Resurrection, but will definitely come, into existence."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 721:
Narrated Al-Ma'rur bin Suwaid:
I saw Abu Dhar Al-Ghifari wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a cloak. We asked him about that (i.e. how both were wearing similar cloaks). He replied, "Once I abused a man and he complained of me to the Prophet . The Prophet asked me, 'Did you abuse him by slighting his mother?' He added, 'Your slaves are your brethren upon whom Allah has given you authority. So, if one has one's brethren under one's control, one should feed them with the like of what one eats and clothe them with the like of what one wears. You should not overburden them with what they cannot bear, and if you do so, help them (in their hard job)."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 722:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said, "If a slave is honest and faithful to his master and worships his Lord (Allah) in a perfect manner, he will get a double reward."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 723:
Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ashari:
The Prophet said, "He who has a slave-girl and teaches her good manners and improves her education and then manumits and marries her, will get a double reward; and any slave who observes Allah's right and his master's right will get a double reward."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 724:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "A pious slave gets a double reward." Abu Huraira added: By Him in Whose Hands my soul is but for Jihad (i.e. holy battles), Hajj, and my duty to serve my mother, I would have loved to die as a slave.
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 725:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "Goodness and comfort are for him who worships his Lord in a perfect manner and serves his master sincerely."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 726:
Narrated 'Abdullah:
The Prophet said, "If a slave serves his Saiyid (i.e. master) sincerely and worships his Lord (Allah) perfectly, he will get a double reward."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 727:
Narrated Abu Musa:
The Prophet said, "The Mamluk (slave) who worships his Lord in a perfect manner, and is dutiful, sincere and obedient to his Saiyid (master), will get a double reward."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 728:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "You should not say, 'Feed your lord (Rabbaka), help your lord in performing ablution, or give water to your lord, but should say, 'my master (e.g. Feed your master instead of lord etc.) (Saiyidi), or my guardian (Maulai), and one should not say, my slave (Abdi), or my girl-slave (Amati), but should say, my lad (Fatai), my lass (Fatati), and 'my boy (Ghulami)."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 729:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
The Prophet said, "If one manumits his share of a common slave (Abd), and he has money sufficient to free the remaining portion of the price of the slave (justly estimated), then he should free the slave completely by paying the rest of his price; otherwise the slave is freed partly. "
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 730:
Narrated 'Abdullah:
Allah's Apostle said, "Everyone of you is a guardian and is responsible for his charges. The ruler who has authority over people, is a guardian and is responsible for them, a man is a guardian of his family and is responsible for them; a woman is a guardian of her husband's house and children and is responsible for them; a slave ('Abu) is a guardian of his master's property and is responsible for it; so all of you are guardians and are responsible for your charges."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 731:
Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid:
The Prophet said, "If a slave-girl (Ama) commits illegal ***ual intercourse, scourge her; if she does it again, scourge her again; if she repeats it, scourge her again." The narrator added that on the third or the fourth offence, the Prophet said, "Sell her even for a hair rope."
Volume 3, Book 46, Number 734:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "If somebody fights (or beats somebody) then he should avoid the face."
Many a time one will hear that islam brought slavery to an end and removed racism etc etc but one can clearly see that that is not true. Even if today islam had the upper hand, human rights will thrown out of the window and people will be forced to live by islam as dictated in the quran and hadees, for that is what islam really is.
Please remember that my point is that these books are not good enough to be attributed to all merciful god or his messenger, because according to my understanding they teach things which go against what humanity is all about. This is why I am in a dilemma ie in a catch 22 situation. Will I be doing the right thing by attributing such teachings to my creator, who is supposed to be all knowing and kind?
Again we are not judging islam in historic context but in context of its claim for divine origin. God would disregard what people think and do is right and send down his word for people to follow whether they like it or not. In case of the quran and the hadees, it seems the quran is playing in the hands of the prophet and the prophet is playing in the hands of the people who allegedly are his followers. For example, quran is taking into consideration peoples’ wrong desires rather than telling them straight to their face what is right and what is wrong as far as god is concerned.
So if slavery was wrong then god ought to tell the people so and forbid it right from the beginning. Let people then accept or reject his message at their will at their own risk. The way the quran is dealing with this situation is creating a two tear system that those people were allowed to get their way but we are not.
So one can see why I have problems with religions and scriptures because they raise serious questions in my mind rather than trying to help me solve the problem I am facing in living my daily life as a good human being.
The quran allows slavery but contains no clearcut verse to abolish it hence I am of the view that as far as the quran is concern slavery is fine. I hope my views are wrong and the quran true word of god but how would I know till some one with better knowledge explains that to me?
Regards and all the best.