Category Archives: Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam

Refuting Muhammad said Muslims to Tell Lie

21 Refuting Muhammad said muslims to tell lie

Abul Kasem said

Muhammad said muslims to tell lie.

Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should be truthful to each other.

There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. One of those circumstances is to gain the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.


And then he quoted few Ayah and Ahadeeth, This issue is replied here

 http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/47564/

 

Can he tell lies to his parents in order to increase their good deeds?
When I get some money from my father or mother, I give it in charity and keep a little. When I ask them for money they say, Where did your money go? I tell them a lie and say that I bought stuff with it. The reason why I tell this lie is that I want Allaah to increase their good deeds. Is it permissible for me to lie to them or should I tell them the truth?.

Praise be to Allaah.

The basic principle concerning telling lies is that it is one of the signs of the hypocrites, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: The signs of the hypocrite are three: when he speaks, he lies, when he makes a promise he breaks it, and when he is entrusted with something he breaks that trust. Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 32; Muslim, 89.

But there are some instances in which Islam permits lying, if that serves a greater purpose or wards off a greater harm:

These cases include the following:

1-     When a person is intermediating in order to bring about reconciliation between two disputing parties.

2-     When a man speaks to his wife, or a wife to her husband, concerning matters that will increase the love between them.

3-     War.

It was narrated from Umm Kulthoom bint Uqbah that she heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: He is not a liar who brings about reconciliation among people, conveys good words and says good things.

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2546; Muslim, 2605 

It was narrated that Asma bint Yazeed said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: Lies are not appropriate except in three cases: when a man speaks to his wife to please her, telling lies at times of war, and lying in order to bring about reconciliation between people. Shaykh al-Albaani said: it is hasan.

What you have mentioned is no excuse for telling lies to your family. If you are honest with them they will never be deprived of the reward for spending on you. And you can combine your familys spending on you and their giving in charity to the needy by encouraging them to spend for the sake of Allaah, with no need to tell lies about buying stuff when you have not done so.

We ask Allaah to correct your intention and set your affairs straight, and to reward you greatly for your desire to benefit your family.

And Allaah knows best.

(end quote from Islam Qa)

 

also see

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/105477/

Ruling on lies that do not harm anyone
What is the ruling on lies that will never harm anyone?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Lying is haraam in all cases, expect those which are exempted by the Lawgiver, and what is mentioned here is not one of those cases, because of the general meaning of the evidence, such as the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): O you who believe! Fear Allaah, and be with those who are true (in words and deeds) [al-Tawbah 9:119]. In al-Saheehayn and elsewhere it is narrated that Abd-Allaah ibn Masood (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: I urge you to be truthful, for truthfulness leads to righteousness, and righteousness leads to Paradise. A man will continue to be truthful and seek to speak the truth until he is recorded with Allaah as speaker of truth (siddeeq). And beware of lying, for lying leads to immorality and immorality leads to Hell; a man will continue to tell lies until he is recorded with Allaah as a liar. And it was narrated that Abd-Allaah ibn Masood also said: Lying is not appropriate whether in earnest or in jest. Recite if you wish (interpretation of the meaning): O you who believe! Fear Allaah, and be with those who are true (in words and deeds) [al-Tawbah 9:119]. Then he said: Do you find any concession allowing that to anyone?

And Allaah is the Source of strength. May Allaah send blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad and his family and companions. End quote.

Al-Lajnah al-Daaimah lil-Buhooth al-Ilmiyyah wal-Ifta (26/51).

Assalamualaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barkatahu (May Peace, Blessings & Mercy of Allah Be Upon You)

Article by Brother Asim ul Haq

The Article is in reply to series of allegations made by author in his book which can be accessed here: What Prophet Mohammed Did His Whole Life? Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Leave a comment

Refuting Muhammad Advocated Force Conversions into Islam

17. Muhammad advocated force conversions into Islam?


Muslims are commanded to fight unbelievers until they are either dead, converted to Islam, or in a permanent state of subjugation under Muslim domination. Allowing people of other faiths to live and worship independently of Islamic rule is not an option.

The Qur’an:

Sura (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” Suras 9 and 5 are the last “revelations” that Muhammad handed down.

Sura (9:5) “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them…” Prayer and charity are among the Five Pillars of Islam, as salat and zakat.


Reply

Abul Kasem is quoting same verse again and again, We already replied(from the article of Ansar al Adl) verse 9 of Surah Tauba, see replies here under

 

13. Verse 11: “Fight those who believe not in God…” (9:29)

9. Verse 8: “Fight the pagans wherever you see them…” (9:5)

http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=414ion=wel_islam&subsection=Misconceptions#18

 

Regarding Forced Converstions Islam is clear It is mentioned in Qur`an Surah al Bqarah ayah 256 “There is no Compulsion in Religion”

 

Commentary of Jalalyan says: There is no compulsion in, entering into, religion. Rectitude has become clear from error, that is say, through clear proofs it has become manifest that faith is rectitude and disbelief is error: this was revealed concerning the Ans?r [of Medina] who tried to compel their sons to enter into Islam; so whoever disbelieves in the false deity, namely, Satan or idols (t?gh?t, false deity, is used in a singular and plural sense), and believes in God, has laid hold of the most firm handle, the tight knot, unbreaking, that cannot be severed; God is Hearing, of what is said, Knowing, of what is done.(end quote)

 

Ibne Kathir Commented

There is no compulsion in religion), meaning, “Do not force anyone to become Muslim, for Islam is plain and clear, and its proofs and evidence are plain and clear. Therefore, there is no need to force anyone to embrace Islam. Rather, whoever Allah directs to Islam, opens his heart for it and enlightens his mind, will embrace Islam with certainty. Whoever Allah blinds his heart and seals his hearing and sight, then he will not benefit from being forced to embrace Islam.”(end quote)

 

Secondly Abul Kasem is leaving behind Crusaders.

 It is mentioned in “Tolerance and forced conversion during the Crusades by Josh Owens”

 During the crusades religion was the main focal point. Each religion thought that they were doing things the right way according to God. Both Muslims and Christians tolerated the opposite religion to a certain extent.

 However there was usually a hidden agenda. With the Muslims it was convert or pay us taxes, and with the Christians it seemed to be more, convert to Christianity or die. Christians really seem to be more violent than the Muslims when it comes to conversion.(end quote)

http://www.helium.com/items/288083-tolerance-and-forced-conversion-during-the-crusades

Even though I don’t believe fully in above article, but the thing is even Kuffar agreed that the reality is different.

 


Abul Kasem Quoted  
 
Sura (9:12) – (Continued from above) “But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion” This confirms that Muhammad is speaking of conversion to Islam.


Reply

Verse 12 is this one

[009:012] But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and attack your religion with disapproval and criticism then fight (you) the leaders of disbelief (chiefs of Quraish – pagans of Makkah) – for surely their oaths are nothing to them – so that they may stop (evil actions).

Now let us see what the verse 6 to 12 says

 [009:006] And if anyone of the Mushrikoon (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) seeks your protection then grant him protection, so that he may hear the Word of Allah (the Quran), and then escort him to where he can be secure, that is because they are men who know not.

[009:007] How can there be a covenant with Allah and with His Messenger for the Mushrikoon (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) except those with whom you made a covenant near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah)? So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqoon (the pious – see V.:).

[009:008] How (can there be such a covenant with them) that when you are overpowered by them, they regard not the ties, either of kinship or of covenant with you? With (good words from) their mouths they please you, but their hearts are averse to you, and most of them are Fasiqoon (rebellious, disobedient to Allah).

[009:009] They have purchased with the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah a little gain, and they hindered men from His Way; evil indeed is that which they used to do.

[009:010] With regard to a believer, they respect not the ties, either of kinship or of covenant! It is they who are the transgressors.

[009:011] But if they repent, perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat) and give Zakat, then they are your brethren in religion. (In this way) We explain the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) in detail for a people who know.

[009:012] But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and attack your religion with disapproval and criticism then fight (you) the leaders of disbelief (chiefs of Quraish – pagans of Makkah) – for surely their oaths are nothing to them – so that they may stop (evil actions).(end quote)

 

Subhan`Allah how beautiful are the verses, These verses are regarding those who broke peace treaty, see even then Allah says  if anyone of them seeks your protection then grant him protection, and hen Allah says escort him to where he can be secure. No where above Quranic ayahs says something regarding forced conversions.

 


Abul Kasem quoted
 
Sura (2:193) – “And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion be only for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers.” The key phrase is to fight until “religion be only for Allah.”


Reply by Brother Ansar al adl.

 

A classic and popular example of what Muslim scholars, like Dr. Jamal Badawi, call a cut and paste approach. Everything becomes so much easier for the Anti-Islamists when they remove the context. The solution for the Muslim is to simply replace the verse in its context:

 

2:190-194 Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loves not transgressors. And kill them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for persecution and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, kill them. Such is the reward of those who reject faith. But if they cease, God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression. The prohibited month, for the prohibited month, and so for all things prohibited, there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, transgress ye likewise against him. But fear (the punishment of) God, and know that God is with those who restrain themselves.

How many times do we see the above verse repeating the message to make it clear? These verse were revealed at a time when Muslims of Madinah were under constant attack from the Makkans. An example would be when the Makkans conducted the public crucifixion of the companion of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), Khubaib bin Adi. These would be classified as ‘terrorist activities’ according to the modern usage of the term. So what does this verse say in this context? “Fight in the cause of God those who fight you”, “unless they (first) fight you there” – the context of this verse applies to those who initiate the attack against Muslims. And even after they attack, the verse makes it clear: “But if they cease, God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” And it also makes clear the purpose for what Muslims fight: “fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God”. It is the duty of Muslims to defend humanity from oppression and persecution and to establish justice. Muslims believe that God has placed us here on earth as his deputy or viceroy, and thus, it is our duty to enjoin the good and forbid the evil, to establish peace and justice in the land. Dr. Maher Hathout writes the following on verses 2:190-194:

 These verses were applicable to a particular situation or if, hypothetically, the same situation was to be repeated Historically, fighting back against the aggressors was prohibited during the thirteen years of the Meccan period. After the migration to Medina and the establishment of the Islamic state, Muslims were concerned with how to defend themselves against aggression from their enemies. The aforementioned verses were revealed to enable them to protect the newly formed state by fighting in self-defence against those who fought them. However, the Quran clearly prohibits aggression. The verses explain that fighting is only for self-defence. Thus, a Muslim cannot commit aggression and kill innocent men, women, children, the sick, the elderly, monks, priests, or those who do not wish to fight. A Muslim is also mandated not to destroy plant life of livestock. (Hathout, Jihad vs. Terrorism; US Multimedia Vera International, 2002, p.49, emphasis added)

 The historical context is something that must always be considered where developing an understanding of Qur’anic verses. Without knowing the circumstances behind the revelation, one cannot apply the verse as accurately. Shaykh Salman Al-Oadah writes about the general principles in Jihad:

 

Jihad can never be fought for worldly gain, for conquest, or even for revenge. Muslims must only fight to protect the lives, property, and freedoms of people, especially their freedom to worship Allah when that freedom is forcibly attacked. They are never allowed to attack innocent people, even when they are themselves attacked by the countrymen of those innocents. Any people that go against this established principle of Islamic Law and murder civilians are fighting against Islam and everything that it stands for. It is ludicrous for them to call this fighting a jihd, a word that means striving in the cause of Islam. They are in fact murderers in the light of Islamic Law and should be treated as such. (SOURCE, emphasis added)

 

There are strict and detailed laws in Islam, which Muslims must follow carefully. A military Jihad must be performed under these regulations. Abdullah Yusuf Ali writes about verse 2:190:

 War is only permissible in self-defence, and under well-defined limits. When undertaken, it must be pushed with vigour, but not relentlessly, but only to restore peace and freedom for the worship of God. In any case strict limits must not be transgressed: women, children, old and infirm men should not be molested, nor trees and crops cut down, nor peace withheld when the enemy comes to terms. (Yusuf Ali, The Holy Quran, Text, Translation and Commentary )

He then re-iterates the general principles behind Jihad in his commentary on verse 2:191:

 In general, it may be said that Islam is the religion of peace, goodwill, mutual understanding, and good faith. But it will not acquiesce in wrong-doing, and its men will hold their lives cheap in defence of honour, justice, and the religion which they hold sacred. Their ideal is that of heroic virtue combined with unselfish gentleness and tenderness, such as is exemplified in the life of the Apostle. They believe in courage, obedience, discipline, duty, and a constant striving by all the means in their power, physical, moral, intellectual, and spiritual, for the establishment of truth and righteousness. (Yusuf Ali, The Holy Quran, Text, Translation and Commentary )

 This is the true focus behind Jihad, and Muslims must never lose this focus. Jihad is solely for the purpose of aiding humanity and bringing justice and freedom to the oppressed. Therefore, all actions must be in-line with this focus and the strict regulations governing Jihad. The focus is to defend, not destroy. One who focuses on the betterment and aid of humanity will realize that destruction will never achieve this. Abdul Majid Daryabadi writes extensively on verse 2:190:

 

2:190 And fight in the way of Allah those who fight you Violating the truce they themselves had signed. The Muslims, after having borne untold persecution with almost superhuman fortitude for years and years at the hands of the pagans of Makkah, are now for the first time enjoined to take to reprisals. For a full thirteen years the Muslims were subjected to relentless persecution in Mecca. The Prophet and his followers fled for life to Medina, but the enemy would not leave them alone in their refuge. They came to attack them within a year, and the first three battles were fought in the very locality which will whether the Prophet was an assailant or defendant (Headley, The Original Church of Jesus Christ and Islam, p. 155). The Makkans had signed a truce and were the first to break it. The words fight with those who fight you clearly show, firstly, that the Muslims were not the aggressors, and secondly, that those of the enemy who were not actual combatants children, women, monks, hermits, the aged and the infirm, the maimed, and the like had nothing at all to fear from the Muslim soldiery. It was in light of this express Divine injunction that the great Abu Bakr, the first Caliph, charged his troops into Syria, not to mutilate the dead, nor to slay old men, women, and children, nor to cut down fruit-trees, nor to kill cattle unless they were needed for food; and these humane precepts served like a code of laws of war during the career of Mohammadan conquest. (Bosworth Smith, Mohammed and Mohammedanism, p. 185). Has not Islam thus, in prescribing war against those who break Gods law, who challenge His righteous authority, and who fill the world with violence and injustice, made every concession short of the impossible? Has any code of military ethics been so chivalrous, so humane and so tender towards the enemy? The moral tone adopted by the Caliph Abu Bakr, in his instructions to the Syrian army, was, says a modern Christian historian, so unlike the principles of the Roman government, that it must have commanded profound attention from a subject people. Such a proclamation announced to Jews and Christians sentiments of justice and principles of toleration which neither Roman emperors nor orthodox bishops had ever adopted as the rule of their conduct (Finlay, Greece Under the Romans, pp. 367-368). (Daryabadi, The Glorious Quran, emphasis added)

 

Muhammad Asad explains verse 2:190 in the following manner:

This and the following verses lay down unequivocally that only self-defence (in the widest sense of the word) makes war permissible for Muslims. Most of the commentators agree in that the expression la ta’tadu signifies, in this context, “do not commit aggression”; while by al-mu’tadin “those who commit aggression” are meant. The defensive character of a fight “in God’s cause” – that is, in the cause of the ethical principles ordained by God – is, moreover, self-evident in the reference to “those who wage war against you”, and has been still further clarified in 22: 39 – “permission [to fight] is given to those against whom war is being wrongfully waged” – which, according to all available Traditions, constitutes the earliest (and therefore fundamental) Quranic reference to the question of jihad, or holy war (see Tabari and Ibn Kathir in their commentaries on 22: 39). That this early, fundamental principle of self-defence as the only possible justification of war has been maintained throughout the Quran is evident from 60: 8, as well as from the concluding sentence of 4: 91, both of which belong to a later period than the above verse. (Asad, The Message of the Quran, emphasis added)

 

And on verse 2:191, he states the following:

In view of the preceding ordinance, the injunction “slay them wherever you may come upon them” is valid only within the context of hostilities already in progress (Razi), on the understanding that “those who wage war against you” are the aggressors or oppressors (a war of liberation being a war “in God’s cause”). The translation, in this context, of fitnah as “oppression” is justified by the application of this term to any affliction which may cause man to go astray and to lose his faith in spiritual values (cf. Lisan al-Arab). (Asad, The Message of the Quran, emphasis added)

 

  • This extensive commentary on th is verse should sufficiently address all confusion and misconceptions that resulted from misquoting this verse.

 http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=414ion=wel_islam&subsection=Misconceptions#7

 


Abul Kasem quoted
 
Muslim (1:33) The Messenger of Allah said: “I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah…”


 Reply

 We can understand this hadith from other ahadeeth, because hadeeth is a commentry of another hadeeth, let us see how Prophet peace be uponhim practised

 

Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0032: It is narrated on the authority of Jabir that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded that I should fight against people till they declare that there is no god but Allah, and when they profess it that there is no god but Allah, their blood and riches are guaranteed protection on my behalf except where it is justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah, and then he (the Holy Prophet) recited (this verse of the Holy Qur’an):” Thou art not over them a warden” (lxxxviii, 22).

Ibne Kathir Commented : Thou art not over them a warden.) Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid and others said, “You are not a dictator over them.” This means that you cannot create faith in their hearts. Ibn Zayd said, “You are not the one who can force them to have faith.”

Allah says in Surah al e Imran 3:20

And if they argue with thee, (O Muhammad), say: I have surrendered my purpose to Allah and (so have) those who follow me. And say unto those who have received the Scripture and those who read not: Have ye (too) surrendered? If they surrender, then truly they are rightly guided, and if they turn away, then it is thy duty only to convey the message (unto them). Allah is Seer of (His) bondmen.

 


Abul Kasem quoted

Muslim (19:4294) – “When you meet your enemies who are polytheists [Christians…], invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them … If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them”


Reply

 

This is a misquotation, see full text

 Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4294:

It has been reported from Sulaiman b. Buraid through his father that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him to fear Allah and to be good to the Muslims who were with him. He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war, do not embezzle the spoils; do not break your pledge; and do not mutilate (the dead) bodies; do not kill the children. When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. Then invite them to migrate from their lands to the land of Muhairs and inform them that, if they do so, they shall have all the privileges and obligations of the Muhajirs. If they refuse to migrate, tell them that they will have the status of Bedouin Muilims and will be subjected to the Commands of Allah like other Muslims, but they will not get any share from the spoils of war or Fai’ except when they actually fight with the Muslims (against the disbelievers). If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them. When you lay siege to a fort and the besieged appeal to you for protection in the name of Allah and His Prophet, do not accord to them the guarantee of Allah and His Prophet, but accord to them your own guarantee and the guarantee of your companions for it is a lesser sin that the security given by you or your companions be disregarded than that the security granted in the name of Allah and His Prophet be violated When you besiege a fort and the besieged want you to let them out in accordance with Allah’s Command, do not let them come out in accordance with His Command, but do so at your (own) command, for you do not know whether or not you will be able to carry out Allah’s behest with regard to them.(end)

 

  • First thing to note Abul Kasem quoted “When you meet your enemies who are polytheists [Christians…], Christians is not in Arabic nor in the translation, secondly Prophet peace be upon him is talking about War and why abul kasem missed these wordings, do not embezzle the spoils; do not break your pledge; and do not mutilate (the dead) bodies; do not kill the children, thirdly even in War Prophet peace be upon him is saying before war “When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. ” after all these courses Prophet peace be upon him is saying that then fight in the name of Allah. Prophet peace be upon him himself said

 

..Allah’s Apostle in one of his military expeditions against the enemy, waited till the sun declined and then he got up amongst the people saying, “O people! Do not wish to meet the enemy, and ask Allah for safety, but when you face the enemy, be patient, and remember that Paradise is under the shades of swords.” Then he said, “O Allah, the Revealer of the Holy Book, and the Mover of the clouds and the Defeater of the clans, defeat them, and grant us victory over them.”(Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 266l)

 

  • So clearly he said Do not wish to meet the enemy. Then abul Kasem quoted Bukhari (8:387) which is already replied before that is under the hadeeth Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0033

 


Abul Kasem quoted
 
Bukhari (53:392) – “While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, “Let us go to the Jews” We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras. He said to them, “If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle.”


Reply

 Above hadith is regarding Jews of Khaybar (who tried to kill Prophet and were against Islam and Muslims), It is mentioned in Commentary of Sahih Bukhari Vol # 4 Page no: 524 by Muhammad Dawud Raaz (Rah)(Markazi Jamiyat Ahlul hadeeth hind), under the commentary of this hadith

 Prophet peace be upon him intended to expel Jews in his life but he died. Umar RadhiAllahanho expelled them in his rule due to their continuous betrayl and Conspiracies (against Islam and Muslims).

Prophet peace be upon him said Bukhari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 391:Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr:

The Prophet said, “Whoever killed a person having a treaty with the Muslims, shall not smell the smell of Paradise though its smell is perceived from a distance of forty years.”

Allah ordered Prophet peace be upon him in Surah 109 : Say: O disbelievers! I worship not that which ye worship; Nor worship ye that which I worship. And I shall not worship that which ye worship. Nor will ye worship that which I worship. Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.

 

Surah 16:125:  Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance.

 

  • Also note that Prophet peace be upon him never killed anyone with his own hand, except Ubayy ibn Kahlaf who tried to kill Prophet peace be upon him, It is mentioned in Fatwa no: 20181 of Islam qa

 

Al-Bukhaari (4073) and Muslim (1793) narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: The anger of Allaah is most intense against a man who is killed by the Messenger of Allaah for the sake of Allaah (on the battlefield).

 

Al-Nawawi said:

For the sake of Allaah excludes one whom he kills as a hadd punishment or by way of legal retaliation (qisaas), because whoever is killed by the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) on the battle was intending to kill the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

 

It is not known that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) killed anyone among the mushrikeen with his own hand apart from Ubayy ibn Khalaf.

 

That was narrated by Ibn Jareer and al-Haakim from Saeed ibn al-Musayyab and al-Zuhri (may Allaah have mercy on them). Ibn Katheer said in his Tafseer (2/296): its isnaad is saheeh.

 

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/20181/

Then abul kasem quoted Bukhari (2:24) which is already replied before that is under the hadeeth Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0033

 


Then He quoted  
 
Bukhari (59:643) – “Testify that none has the right to be worshipped except Allah, or else I will chop off your neck!” Words of a military leader that Muhammad sent on an expedition to destroy the local religion in Yemen.


Reply

This is full hadith

Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 643: Narrated Qais:

Jarir said “Allah’s Apostle said to me, “Won’t you relieve me from Dhul-Khalasa?” I replied, “Yes, (I will relieve you).” So I proceeded along with one-hundred and fifty cavalry from Ahmas tribe who were skillful in riding horses. I used not to sit firm over horses, so I informed the Prophet of that, and he stroke my chest with his hand till I saw the marks of his hand over my chest and he said, O Allah! Make him firm and one who guides others and is guided (on the right path).’ Since then I have never fallen from a horse. Dhul-l–Khulasa was a house in Yemen belonging to the tribe of Khatham and Bajaila, and in it there were idols which were worshipped, and it was called Al-Ka’ba.” Jarir went there, burnt it with fire and dismantled it. When Jarir reached Yemen, there was a man who used to foretell and give good omens by casting arrows of divination. Someone said to him. “The messenger of Allah’s Apostle is present here and if he should get hold of you, he would chop off your neck.” One day while he was using them (i.e. arrows of divination), Jarir stopped there and said to him, “Break them (i.e. the arrows) and testify that None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, or else I will chop off your neck.” So the man broke those arrows and testified that none has the right to be worshipped except Allah. Then Jarir sent a man called Abu Artata from the tribe of Ahmas to the Prophet to convey the good news (of destroying Dhu-l-Khalasa). So when the messenger reached the Prophet, he said, “O Allah’s Apostle! By Him Who sent you with the Truth, I did not leave it till it was like a scabby camel.” Then the Prophet blessed the horses of Ahmas and their men five times.

 

It is mentioned in Commentary of Sahih Bukhari Vol 5 Page 576 by Muhammad Dawud Raaz (Rah)(Markazi Jamiyat Ahlul hadeeth hind)

Prophet (peace be upon him) said this for house of an idol because in (Dhul khalsa) Kuffar and Polytheists made conspiracies against Islam, They made plans how to harm Prophet Kareem (peace be upon him)… They showed their enemity against Islam in every way, So to make the environment peaceful this was necessary. Islam never orders to dismantle the places of worship of other Religion and Nations in the time of Peace, During the time of Umar (RadhiAllahanho), He saved Churches of Dhimmi (one with whom we have a contract or treaty) Jews and Christians.(end quote)

 

Allah says [Quran 60:8-9]

Allah does not forbid you respecting those who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice.

 

It is only as regards those who fought against you on account of religion, and have driven you out of your homes, and helped to drive you out, that Allah forbids you to befriend them. And whosoever will befriend them, then such are the wrongdoers.

 


Abul Kasem quoted
 

Ibn Ishaq 959 – Then the apostle sent Khalid bin Walid to the Banu al-Harith and ordered him to invite them to Islam three days before he attacked them. If they accepted then he was to accept it from them, and if they declined he was to fight them. So Khalid set out and came to them, and sent out riders in all directions inviting the people to Islam, saying, ?If you accept Islam you will be safe.? So the men accepted Islam as they were invited. The text goes on to say that Khalid taught the al-Harith about Islam after their “conversion,” proving that it was based on fear of slaughter rather than a free and intelligent decision.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/013-forced-conversion.htm


 Reply

 Again his source is anti Islamic website, secondly leave a side authenticity of above narration let us see what Prophet peace be upon him said regarding Banu al Harith.

 

Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 133: Narrated Abu Usaid:

 The Prophet said, “The best of the Ansar’s families (homes) are those of Banu An-Najjar and then (those of) Banu ‘Abdul Ash-hal, then (those of) Banu Al-Harith bin Al-Khazraj and then (those of) Banu Sa’ida; nevertheless, there is good in all the families (houses) of the Ansar.” On this, Sad (bin Ubada) said, “I see that the Prophet has preferred some people to us.” Somebody said (to him), “No, but he has given you superiority to many.”(end)

 

Now see the hadith for the proof that Ansar were happy

Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 131:Narrated Zaid bin Al-Arqam: The Annwar said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Every prophet has his own followers and we have followed you. So will you invoke Allah to let our followers be considered from us (as Ansar too)?” So he invoked Allah accordingly.(end)

 

Banu Al Harith were Ansar’s and Imam Bukhari wrote whole Book on them in Sahih Bukhari “Merits of the Helpers in Madinah (Ansaar)”


He said

Social Drawback: Islam spread through Sufism is all crap. Its all their strategy to get time to increase their population. Muslims did all barbaric activity to convert non-muslims. The very base of ISLAM is to kill the non-muslim by anyway if he refuses to accept Islam.


Reply

 From where sufism came here?? Base of Islam is 5 Pillars

 

1) FAITH

2) PRAYER

3) THE ‘ZAKAT’

4) THE FAST

5) PILGRIMAGE (HAJJ)

 

see here: http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/pillars.shtml

 

Now a days fastest growing religion is Islam speciall in west and America, which Islamic force is their to force them??see lectures of Shaykh Khalid Yaseen Yusuf Estes and others

Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Leave a comment

Refuting Muhammad Promoted Hate for People of All Religion

15. Muhammad recommended hate for the people of all religion.

Then Abul Kasem quoted Surah Tauba verse 28,29 &30

 reply by brother Ansar al adl.

 Some people have falsely concluded from verse 9:29, that Muslims are commanded to attack all non-Muslims until they pay money. In fact, such an interpretation is completely false and contradicts authentic Islamic teachings. Commenting on this verse, Shaykh Jalal Abualrub writes:

 These Ayat (Quranic verses) stress the necessity of fighting against the People of the Scripture, but under what conditions? We previously established the fact that the Islamic State is not permitted to attack non-Muslims who are not hostile to Islam, who do not oppress Muslims, or try to convert Muslims by force from their religion, or expel them from their lands, or wage war against them, or prepare for attacks against them. If any of these offenses occurs, however, Muslims are permitted to defend themselves and protect their religion. Muslims are not permitted to attack non-Muslims who signed peace pacts with them, or non-Muslims who live under the protection of the Islamic State. (Abualrub, Holy Wars, Crusades, Jihad)

 

Likewise, the following fatwa points out that Muslims cannot attack a peaceful non-Muslim country:

Question: Is it an obligation of an Islamic state to attack the neighboring non-Muslim states and collect jizya from them? Do we see this in the example of the rightly guided Caliphs who fought against the Roman and Persian Empires without any aggression initiating from them?

 Answered by Sheikh Hn al-Jubayr, judge at the Jeddah Supreme Court :

If the non-Muslim country did not attack the Muslim one nor mobilize itself to prevent the practice and spread of Islam, nor transgress against mosques, nor work to oppress the Muslim people in their right to profess their faith and decry unbelief, then it is not for the Muslim country to attack that country. Jihd of a military nature was only permitted to help Muslims defend their religion and remove oppression from the people.

 The Persians and Romans did in fact aggress against Islam and attack the Muslims first.

 The Chosroe of Persia had gone so far as to order his commander in Yemen specifically to kill the Prophet (peace be upon him). The Romans mobilized their forces to fight the Prophet (peace be upon him), and the Muslims confronted them in the Battles of Mutah and Tabk during the Prophet’s lifetime.

May Allah guide us all. And May peace and blessing be upon our Prophet Muhammad. (SOURCE, emphasis added)

The above fatwa refers to the historical context in which the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) fought against other nations. The Prophet Muhammad did not initiate agression against anyone, rather he and his followers were under attack from all who sought to crush the new Islamic state. The first hostilities between the Muslims and the Roman empire began when the Prophet Muhammad’s messenger to the Ghassan tribe (a governate of the Roman empire), Al-Harith bin Umayr Al-Azdi, was tied up and beheaded (Al-Mubarakpuri, Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum, p. 383). The killing of a diplomat was an open act of war, and the Prophet Muhammad sent an armed force to confront the tribe, but the Roman empire brought in reinforcements and the resulting conflict, known as the Battle of Mut’ah, was a defeat for the Muslims. Only after this did subsequent battles between the Muslims and the Roman Empire occur, and the Muslims emerged victorious. Likewise, as mentioned in the above fatwa, hostiltiies between the Muslims and the Persians only began after the Persian emperor Chosroe ordered his governor in Yemen Badham, to kill the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, although his efforts were thwarted when the latter accepted Islam. Other non-muslim groups, such as those in Madinah, also initiated hostilities against the Muslims despite peace treaties as Shaykh Sayyid Sabiq writes:

As for fighting the Jews (People of the Scripture), they had conducted a peace pact with the Messenger after he migrated to Madinah. Soon afterwards, they betrayed the peace pact and joined forces with the pagans and the hypocrites against Muslims. They also fought against Muslims during the Battle of A`hzab , then Allah revealed[and he cites verse 9:29] (Sayyid Sabiq, Fiqhu as-Sunnah, Vol. 3, p. 80)

In light of the historical context of this verse, it becomes very clear that the verse was revealed in connection with agression initiated against Muslims. As Dr. Jamal Badawi very accurately concludes with regard to verse 9:29 and similar verses:

All of these verses, without exception, if studied carefully, address aggression and oppression committed against Muslims at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), whether by idolatrous Arabs, some of the Jewish tribes in Madinah, or by some Christians. (SOURCE)

Therefore, the command to fight in verse 9:29 relates to those non-muslims who commit agression and not those who are committed to live in peace. The verse is subject to certain conditions that were apparent when it was implemented in the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, as Shaykh Sayyid Sabiq writes:

What we have stated makes it clear that Islam did not allow the initiating of hostilities, except to: 1. repel aggression; 2. protect Islamic propagation; 3. deter Fitnah and oppression and ensure freedom of religion. In such cases, fighting becomes a necessity of the religion and one of its sacred ordainments. It is then called, Jihad. (Sayyid Sabiq, Fiqhu as-Sunnah, Vol. 3, p. 81)

The verse then proceeds to mention some issues relating to the Islamic state, and governing non-muslim citizens of the Islamic state. Dr. Maher Hathout comments on the regulations in verse 9:29:

Freedom of religion is an essential aspect in an Islamic state. One of the five pillars of Islam is zakat (almsgiving). The People of the Book (Christians and Jews) are not obliged to pay the Islamic zakat that is spent by the state for social necessities and state affairs as defined in the Quran (see 9:60). But they must pay other taxes to share in the state budget. If they refuse to pay this tax to the state and rebel against the state, then it is the obligation of the state to confront them until they pay it. This is what Caliph Abu Bakr did after the death of the Prophet, when some people refused to pay zakat. (Hathout, Jihad vs. Terrorism; US Multimedia Vera International, 2002, p.53)

The verse mentions Jizya, which is unfortunately misunderstood by some people. Like any nation, the Islamic government requires its citizens to pay taxes in return for its services. Since Muslims pay the Zakat, the non-muslim citizens are required to pay Jizya (for more information on Jizya, please refer to Jizya in Islam and Jizyah and non-muslim minorities). Dr. Monqiz As-Saqqar writes concerning the Jizya tax:

The sum of jizya was never large to the extent that the men were unable to pay. Rather, it was always available and reasonable. During the reign of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, jizya never exceeded one dinar annually and it never exceeded four dinars under the Umayyad rule. (SOURCE)

 

Shaykh Abu’l-Hasan Al-Mawardi (d. 1058CE) explicitly points out that the Jizya should be exacted in accordance with the means of the people, and the Imam should judge the conclude the amount to the satisfaction of the leaders of those being taxed:

 

The fuqaha (Jurists) differ as to the amount of the Jizya. Abu Hanifa considers that those subject to this tax are of three kinds: the rich from whom forty-eight dirhams are taken; those of average means from whom twenty four are taken, and the poor from whom twelve dirhams are taken: he thus stipulated the minimum and maximum amounts and prohibits any further judgement on behalf of those responsible for its collection. Malik, however, does not fix its minimum and maximum amount and considers that those responsible should make their own judgement as to the minimum and maximum. Ash-Shafi’i considers that the minimum is a dinar, and that it is not permitted to go below this while he does not stipulate the maximum, the latter being dependant on the ijtihad (judgement) of those responsible: the Imam, however, should try to harmonise between the different amounts, or to exact an amount in accordance with people’s means. If he has used his judgement to conclude the contract od jizyah to the satisfaction of the leaders of the people being taxed, then it becomes binding on all of them and their descendants, generation after generation, and a leader may not afterwards change this amunt, be it to decrease it or increase it. (Al-Mawardi, al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah, Ta-Ha Publishers Ltd. 1996, pp. 209-210)

 Hence, the laws of Islam forbid Muslims from opressing non-muslims and command them to treat others with justice and compassion. In fact, the Prophet Muhammad pbuh himself forbade Muslims from harming non-muslim citizens of an islamic state or any non-muslim with whom there was an agreement of peace, as he said,

 “The one who wrongs a covenanter or impairs his right or overworks him or forcibly takes something from him, I will be his prosecutor on the Day of Judgment. (Sunan Abi Dawud 170/3 no. 3052, Sunan an-Nasa’i 25/8 no. 2749, and verified by Al-Albani no. 2626).

  •  In conclusion, verse 9:29 commands Muslims to fight against only those who initiate agression as illustated by its historical context. Muslims may only fight under strict conditions, and are commanded to live peacefully with peaceful non-muslim neighbors.

 

Similar Narration

Bukhari: God’s Apostle said, I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, None has the right to be worshipped but God. (Volume 4, Book 52, Number 196)

 With regards to the narration, only part of it has been quoted, and the full text reads:

And the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “I have been ordered to fight the people until they testify that there is no deity worthy of worship other than Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, establish the prayer, and pay zakat, and if they do this, then their blood and money shall be protected from me, except by an Islamic right, and their account will be with Allah.

 

This narration lists some of the pillars of Islam that Muslims must adhere to. The fighting being ordained here refers to the enforcement of laws and regulations within an Islamic state. Just as modern governments enforce their legal policies, so to does the Islamic state. These legal policies refer to Muslims paying their Zakat (charity tax) and abiding by the laws in an Islamic state. Those who understood the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) the best, were his companions, and we can examine their application of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) to derive a better understanding. We find that after the death of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), many hypocrites who had pretended to be Muslim began to turn away and leave their religious duties, one example was Zakat (the charity tax). They wanted to compromise the commands of God. It was then that Abu Bakr, the First Caliph and the Caliph of that time, cited this narration to make it clear that a compromise would not be tolerated and he would fight them until they agreed to follow Islam in full. The fighting that resulted was known as the Riddah wars. Similarly, we can see that today’s governments would not tolerate it if a citizen refused to pay tax or abide by the laws of the country. If one lives in a state or country they must abide by the regulations to ensure a secure and healthy society. We should note that the ‘people’ referred to in this narration does not refer to all of humanity. As Shaykh Ahmed Ibn Taymiyyah says:

 

It refers to fighting those who are waging war, whom Allah has permitted us to fight. It does not refer to those who have a covenant with us with whom Allah commands us to fulfill our covenant. (Majmu` al-Fatawa 19/20)

 

Clearly, this narration does not refer to imposing Islam upon non-Muslims, since the Qur’an explicitly states:

 2:256 There is no compulsion in religion…

 Also, we have already dealt with the claims that this verse was abrogated under our discussion of verse 9:5. Once understood in their correct context, these verses and narrations become clear.

 http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=414&section=wel_islam&subsection=Misconceptions#13

 


Abul Kasem said  
 
Social Drawback: Riots are always initiated by muslims. We have seen car burning in France.


reply

 

Again see: http://www.soundofegypt.com/palestinian/adult/massacres.htm

 

and there are 100s of other Massacers by Non Muslims like Gujrat in India

Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Leave a comment

Refuting Muhammad Permitted Muslims to steal from NonMuslims

14. Muhammad permitted Muslims to steal from non-Muslims.

Above Claim is again a clear lie of Abul Kasem INSHA`ALLAH I will prove first let us see what he claimed

 


Summary Answer: Muslims may not steal from each other. In fact, Muhammad had people’s hands cut off for that. But the same is not true of unbelievers. Property rights for them exist only at the discretion of their Muslim rulers. Unsubmissive infidels frequently had their property stolen from them by Muhammad’s warriors, which sometimes included wives and children


Reply

 The basic Rule is a Muslim Can not steal from Non Mulims It is totally Prohibited, The only exception made by shareeah is the wealth of kaafirs who are waging war against the Muslims, That is killing them, Raping their Women etc see the evidence

 

It was narrated that al-Mugheerah ibn Shubah kept company with some people during the Jaahiliyyah. He killed them and took their wealth, then he came and entered Islam. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: As for your Islam, I accept it, and as for the wealth, I have nothing to do with it. According to a report narrated by Abu Dawood, As for your Islam, we accept it, and as for the wealth it is obtained through treachery, and we have no need of it.(Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2583; Abu Dawood, 2765; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 2403).

 

Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said: ????? ” ???? ????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ” ?? : ?? ????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ? ??????? ??? : ??? ?? ???   ??? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ? ??? ?????? ??????? ??? ??????? ? ???????? ?????? ??? ????? ??????? ??? ?? ?????? ? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????????? ????????? ? ???? ????? ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??????? .

The phrase and as for the wealth, I have nothing to do with it means, I will not touch it because it was obtained through treachery. What we learn from this is that it is not permissible to take the wealth of the kuffaar by treachery when they have trusted you and granted you safety, because when people accompany one another (when travelling), they do so on the basis of mutual trust, and that trust should not be betrayed, whether the other person is a Muslim or a kaafir. The wealth of the kuffaar is only permissible in the case of combat and war. Perhaps the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) let him keep the wealth in the hope that the people of its owner might become Muslim, then he could return their wealth to them. Fath al-Baari, 5/341

 

Al-Shaafai (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? .. ???? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?? ??? ?? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ????? ????????? ???? ????? ? ??? ????? ????? ????? :

 ????? ????? ????? .

 ??????? ??? ?? ?? ??? .

 ??????? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? .

 When a Muslim enters dar al-harb (the non-Muslim lands) on peaceful terms, and finds himself in position to take something of their wealth, it is not permissible for him to take it, whether it is a little or a lot, because if he is safe from them, they should be safe from him, and because it is not permissible for him to take anything from them when they have given him safety except what it is permissible for him to take from the wealth of the Muslims and ahl al-dhimmah (non-Muslims living under the protection of the Muslim state). Wealth may be forbidden for a number of reasons:

 

If the owner is a Muslim

if the owner is (a non-Muslim) living under the protection of the Muslim state

if the owner is one with whom there is a peace deal, until the deal expires; such people are considered to be like ahl al-dhimmah as far as the sanctity of their wealth is concerned, until the deal expires.  Al-Umm, 4/284

 

Al-Sarkhasi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: ???? ?????? ????????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? : ” ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???  ??????? ???? ?? ????? “? ??? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ? ??? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ? ?????? ??? ???? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? ?????? ???? ?????? ??? ??????? ????? ? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ? ???? : ” ??? ?????? ?????? ? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ” .

 It is not right for a Muslim who is on peaceful terms with them to betray them, because betrayal is haraam. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: Every betrayer will have a banner by his backside on the Day of Resurrection, by which his betrayal will be known. If he betrays them and steals their wealth, and brings it to the Muslim lands, it is not right for a Muslim to buy from him if he knows about that, because he has obtained it in an evil manner, and buying from him is encouraging him in that, which it is not right for the Muslim to do. The basic principle in this matter is the hadeeth of al-Mugheerah ibn Shubah (may Allaah be pleased with him), when he killed his companions and brought their wealth to Madeenah and became Muslim, and asked the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to take the khums of his wealth, and he said, As for your Islam, we accept it, and as for the wealth it is obtained through treachery, and we have no need of it. Al-Mabsoot, 10/96

 http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/14367/

 


Abul Kasem quoted  
 

Sura (5:38) – “As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.”

Sura (48:20) – “Allah promised you many acquisitions which you will take, then He hastened on this one for you and held back the hands of men from you, and that it may be a sign for the believers and that He may guide you on a right path.” Allah promises Muslims that they will profit materially in their war against unbelievers.


 Reply

 In first verse There is nothing which states stealing from Kuffar is allowed, second verse is talking about War

 Ibne Kathir Commented

Mujahid said that Allah’s statement, ??????????? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???????????????

 (Allah has promised you abundant spoils that you will capture,) refers to the spoils that Muslims earned up until this time, while,

 ?????????? ?????? ????????

 (and He has hastened for you this,) means, the conquest of Khaybar. Al-`Awfi reported that Ibn `Abbas said,

 ?????????? ?????? ????????

 (and He has hastened for you this,) means, “The peace treaty of Al-Hudaybiyyah.” Allah said,

 ???????? ???????? ???????? ?????????

 (and He has restrained the hands of men from you,) meaning, `no harm that your enemies had planned against you, both fighting and warfare, touched you. Allah also restrained the hands of men, whom you left behind close to your families and children, from harming them,’

 ???????????? ??????? ?????????????????

 (that it may be a sign for the believers,) with which they take heed and understand. Verily, Allah the Exalted and Most Honored shall help and protect the believers against all enemies, even though the believers are few in number. By doing so, the believers will come to know that Allah is truly the Knower of the consequences of all matters and that the best decisions are those which He prefers for His believing servants, even though these decisions might look unfavorable outwardly(end quote)

 


Abul Kasem said
 Sura (33:27) – “And He caused you to inherit their land and their houses and their wealth, and land ye have not trodden. Allah is ever Able to do all things.” Referring again to the property of unbelievers, which is given to those Muslims who defeat them.


 Reply

 Again above verse is regarding Banu Quraiza

 

Ibn Kathir commented under 33:26

We have already noted that when the Confederates came and camped outside Al-Madinah, Banu Qurayzah broke the covenant that existed between them and the Messenger of Allah . This happened by the agency of Huyay bin Akhtab An-Nadari, may Allah curse him, who entered their stronghold and would not leave their leader, Ka`b bin Asad, alone until he agreed to break the covenant. Among the things that he said to him was, “Woe to you! This is the opportunity for glory. The Quraysh and their company of men from various tribes, and the Ghatafan and their followers, have come to you, and they will stay here until they eliminate Muhammad and his companions.” Ka`b said to him, “No, by Allah, this is the opportunity for humiliation. Woe to you, O Huyay, you are a bad omen. Leave us alone.” But Huyay kept trying to persuade him until he agreed to his request. He laid down the condition that if the Confederates went away without doing anything, he ?Huyay? would join them in their stronghold and would share their fate. When Banu Qurayzah broke their covenant and news of this reached the Messenger of Allah , he and the Muslims were very distressed by that. (end quote)


Abul kasem quoted  
 

Bukhari (81:780) – The Prophet said, “The hand should be cut off for stealing something that is worth a quarter of a Dinar or more.”

Bukhari (81:792) – Narrated Aisha: “The Prophet cut off the hand of a lady, and that lady used to come to me, and I used to convey her message to the Prophet and she repented, and her repentance was sincere.”


 Reply

 This Rule is applicable for all

 Prophet Peace be upon him said, ?????? ?????? ?????????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????????? ????????? ??????? ????? ?????? ??????? ?????????? ?????????? ??????? ?????? ??????? ?????????? ????????? ???????? ????????? ???????? ????????? ??????? ???????? ???? ????? ????????? ?????? ????????? ???????? ?????????? ???????

 (Those who were before you were destroyed because when an honorable person among them would steal, they would leave him. But, when a weak man among them stole, they implemented the prescribed punishment against him. By Him in Whose Hand is my soul! If Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad stole, I will have her hand cut off.) Quoted by Ibne Kathir under Surah 5 verse 39

 

secondly, If the Muslim commits any sin, whether stealing or anything else, then repents before the matter is referred to the judge, then he is spared the punishment in that case, and it is not permissible to punish him, because Allaah says concerning banditry (interpretation of the meaning):

 The recompense of those who wage war against Allaah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.

 Except for those who (having fled away and then) came back (as Muslims) with repentance before they fall into your power; in that case, know that Allaah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful[al-Maaidah 5:33-34]

 see http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/7545/

 


Abul Kasem said

 Ibn Ishaq (764) – As for taking from unbelievers, perhaps the most illuminating example among many comes from the aftermath of the battle against the Khaybar as recorded by Muhammad’s earliest biographer. The Khaybar were a peaceful community of Jewish farmers who did not even know they were at war until Muhammad led his men against their town one morning, taking them by surprise and handily defeating them.

Not only did Muhammad take much of the town’s possessions and land, but he actually had the tribe’s treasurer, a man named Kinana, tortured until he gave up the location of hidden treasure. Muhammad then beheaded the man and “married” his traumatized widow, Safiyya (who passed through the hands of one of his lieutenant’s first due to the luck of the draw).


 Reply

 This is again a lie see replies by Brother Bassam Zawadi

 

a) Rebuttal to Silas’s Article “MUHAMMAD AND THE DEATH OF KINANA” by Bassam Zawadi

http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/rebuttal_to_silas_s_article__muhammad_and_the_death_of_kinana_

 

b “Safiyyah, the  Wife of Muhammad”

http://www.answering-christianity.com/bassam_zawadi/safiyyah_the_wife_of_the_prophet.htm

 


He quoted

Bukhari (44:668) – “We were in the company of the Prophet at Dhul-Hulaifa. The people felt hungry and captured some camels and sheep (as booty)…” Muhammad said that Allah would always provide sustenance for those who believe in him. Stealing from non-Muslims was a legitimate means of fulfilling His promise.


 Reply

 Above is again a lie because that was not stealing They already had war booty with them, see the hadith

 

Bukhari Volume 3, Book 44, Number 684: Narrated Abaya bin Rifaa:

My grandfather, Rafi bin Khadij said, “We were in the valley of Dhul-Hulaifa of Tuhama in the company of the Prophet and had some camels and sheep (of the booty). The people hurried (in slaughtering the animals) and put their meat in the pots and started cooking. Allah’s Apostle came and ordered them to upset the pots, and distributed the booty considering one camel as equal to ten sheep. One of the camels fled and the people had only a few horses, so they got worried. (The camel was chased and) a man slopped the camel by throwing an arrow at it. Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Some of these animals are untamed like wild animals, so if anyone of them went out of your control, then you should treat it as you have done now.’ ” My grandfather said, “O Allah’s Apostle! We fear that we may meet our enemy tomorrow and we have no knives, could we slaughter the animals with reeds?” The Prophet said, “Yes, or you can use what would make blood flow (slaughter) and you can eat what is slaughtered and the Name of Allah is mentioned at the time of slaughtering. But don’t use teeth or fingernails (in slaughtering). I will tell you why, as for teeth, they are bones, and fingernails are used by Ethiopians for slaughtering. (See Hadith 668)

 


Abul Kasem said
 Social Drawback: In non-Islamic countries huge number of Muslims involved in illegal activities.


Reply

 

He is speaking like Non Muslims were never involved in illegal activities, Let me give you some names

 

1. George W. Bush the biggest Terrorist who ordered to kill 1000s of Afghan and Iraqi Innocents

 

2. Alfonso Cano- Guerrilla Leaderof the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia

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

3. Joaqun Guzmn Loera Crime Lord

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joaqu%C3%ADn_Guzm%C3%A1n_Loera

4. Alimzhan Tokhtakhunov- Organized Crime and Figure Skating Fixing

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

5. Matteo Messina Denaro- Mafia Boss

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

and there are many others, Author never tried to reveal their crime, as for Muslims let us see the fatwa

 

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/7545/

 He has repented from stealing from the kuffaar

 Praise be to Allaah Who has honoured you by enabling you to repent, We ask Allaah to guide us all to the Straight Path and to make us steadfast in following it until death.

 You should note that it is not permissible for the Muslims to cheat anyone and take his money unlawfully, even if he is a kaafir.

 If the Muslim commits any sin, whether stealing or anything else, then repents before the matter is referred to the judge, then he is spared the punishment in that case, and it is not permissible to punish him, because Allaah says concerning banditry (interpretation of the meaning):

 The recompense of those who wage war against Allaah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.

 Except for those who (having fled away and then) came back (as Muslims) with repentance before they fall into your power; in that case, know that Allaah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful[al-Maaidah 5:33-34]

 And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: The one who repents from sin is like one who never sinned. And the one who did not sin cannot be punished.

 Al-Ikhtiyaaraat al-Fiqhiyyah, p. 510-526; al-Mughni, 12/484

 

It was narrated from Abd-Allaah ibn Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them both) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, after al-Aslami had been stoned, Avoid these immoral actions that Allaah has forbidden. Whoever does any of them, let him conceal that which Allaah has concealed, and let him repent to Allaah, for whoever tells us what he has done, we will carry out the ruling mentioned in the Book of Allaah on him. (Narrated by al-Haakim in al-Mustadrak alal-Saheehayn, 4/425; al-Bayhaqi, 8/330. This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by al-Haakim, Ibn al-Sakan and Ibn al-Mulaqqin).

 

See al-Talkhees al-Habeer, 4/57; Khalaasat al-Badr al-Muneer, by Ibn al-Mulaqqin, 2/303.

 

Based on this, you do not have to go to the authorities and tell them about your stealing, rather it is sufficient for you to repent sincerely. But you have to return the money to its owners, because your repentance is not valid otherwise. You do not have to tell them that this is money that you stole from them, especially if you are afraid that they will put you in prison. What matters is returning the money etc to its owners. So you could put it in an envelope, or give it to someone who will give it to them, etc.

 

You must also return the governments money, and the money of other people. If you do not know exactly how much the money was, then estimate what you think is most likely, i.e., pay until you are sure that you have done what you must do.

 

If you do not know who the owners of the money are, then you can give it in charity on their behalf.

Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Leave a comment

Refuting Muhammad Extorted Money from Other Religions

16. Muhammad extorted money from other religions.

Reply

 a) Is the Jizya Tax Oppressive? By Bassam Zawadi:  http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/is_the_jizya_tax_oppressive__

 

b) Tributary Taxes (Jizyah) in the Bible’s Old Testament: http://www.answering-christianity.com/jizyah_in_ot.htm

 

c) The Status of Non-Muslims In the Islamic State: http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/the_status_of_non_muslims_in_the_islamic_state

Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Leave a comment

Refuting Muhammad had 11 wives at one time

 

13. Muhammad had 11 wives at one time.

 


Abu Kasem quoted

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 268:Narrated Qatada:

Anas bin Malik said, “The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number.” I asked Anas, “Had the Prophet the strength for it?” Anas replied, “We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men).” And Sa’id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven).


 Reply

 

a) Read whole book “Why the Prophet Muhammad Married More Than_One by Ahmed Muhammad EL Howfy Ph.D”

http://islamic-replies.ucoz.com/Muhammad/Why_the_Prophet_Muhammad_Married_More_Than_One.pdf

 

b) http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/why_did_prophet_muhammad__peace_be_upon_him__have_more_than_four_wives__1

 

c) A beautiful book by Ibn al Hashmi The Islamaphobes Glass House, Refuting the Claim that Prophet Muhammad was a Pedophile. (see attachment: {attachments}

 

WikiIslam tried to reply this beautiful book here:  http://wikiislam.net/wiki/A_Refutation_of_’The_Islamophobe’s_Glass_House’

 

But They failed and Brother Ousman Ahmad Replied them here:  http://islamic-replies.ucoz.com/2/Rebut_WikiIslam_Refut_IslamophobeGlassHouse.html

 

Assalamualaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barkatahu (May Peace, Blessings & Mercy of Allah Be Upon You)

Article by Brother Asim ul Haq

The Article is in reply to series of allegations made by author in his book which can be accessed here: What Prophet Muhammad Did His Whole Life? Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Refuting Prophet Muhammad said Beat Children Who Do not Pray

Abul Kasem said

12. Muhammad told beat children who do not pray.

Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 2, Number 0494: Narrated As-Saburah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Command a boy to pray when he reaches the age of seven years. When he becomes ten years old, then beat him for prayer.

Social Drawback: Its a simple act to snatch the liberty to think. And encapsulate violence in children.


Reply

It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: Teach your children to pray when they are seven years old, and smack them if they do not do so when they are ten, and separate them in their beds.[Narrated by Abu Dawood, 495; classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami, 5868]

But the educator must be merciful, forbearing, easy-going and approachable, not foul-mouthed or unkempt, arguing in a manner that is better, far removed from insulting, rebuking and beating, unless the child is one of those who willfully disobey and rejects his fathers commands and neglects his duties and does haraam things; in that case it is better to use stern measures with him, without causing him harm.

Al-Minaawi said: For a father to discipline his child when he reaches the age of discernment [??] means that he should raise him with the characteristics of the righteous believers and protect him from mixing with evildoers; he should teach him the Quraan and good manners and the language of the Arabs, let him hear the Sunnah and the sayings of the Salaf and teach him the religious rulings that he cannot do without. He should warn him then smack him if he does not pray etc. That will be better for him than giving a saa in charity, because if he teaches him properly, his actions will be among his ongoing charity, whereas the reward for a saa of charity is limited, but that will last as long as the child lives. Discipline is the nourishment of the soul, and training it for the Hereafter.

O you who believe! Ward off yourselves and your families against a Fire (Hell)[al-Tahreem 66:6 interpretation of the meaning]

Protecting yourself and your family from it means reminding them of Hell. Discipline includes preaching, warning, threatening, smacking, detaining, giving and being kind. Disciplining one who is good and noble is different from disciplining one who is difficult and ignoble.[Fayd al-Qadeer, 5/257]

Smacking is a means of correcting the child; it is not something that it wanted in and of itself, rather it is resorted to if the child is stubborn and disobedient.There is a system of punishment in Islam, and there are many punishments in Islam, such as the hadd punishments for adultery, theft, slander, etc. All of these are prescribed in order to set the people straight and put a stop to their evil.Concerning such matters the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) advised parents to deter their children from doing wrong.It was narrated from Ibn Abbaas that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: Hang your whip where the members of the household can see it, for that will discipline them.[Narrated by al-Tabaraani, 10/248; its isnaad was classed as hasan by al-Haythami in Majma al-Zawaaid, 8/106, Al-Albaani said in Saheeh al-Jaami, 4022, it is hasan].

So raising children should be a balance between encouragement and warning. The most important element of all is making the environment in which the children live a good one, by providing the means whereby they may be guided; this means that their educators should be religiously committed, including their parents.One of the ways in which a parent may be successful in raising his children is to use a cassette player to play tapes of teachings, Quraan recitation, khutbahs and lessons of scholars, for there are many available.

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/10016/

Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Leave a comment

Refuting Muhammad said sick men heal by drinking camel urine

Abul Kasem said

11. Muhammad told sick persons to heal themselves by drinking camel urine.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 797:

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

A group of people from ‘Ukl (or ‘Uraina) tribe —-but I think he said that they were from ‘Ukl came to Medina and (they became ill, so) the Prophet ordered them to go to the herd of (Milch) she-camels and told them to go out and drink the camels’ urine and milk (as a medicine). So they went and drank it, and when they became healthy, they killed the shepherd and drove away the camels. This news reached the Prophet early in the morning, so he sent (some) men in their pursuit and they were captured and brought to the Prophet before midday. He ordered to cut off their hands and legs and their eyes to be branded with heated iron pieces and they were thrown at Al-Harra, and when they asked for water to drink, they were not given water. (Abu Qilaba said, “Those were the people who committed theft and murder and reverted to disbelief after being believers (Muslims), and fought against Allah and His Apostle”).

Social Drawback: Now Muslim usually tries to humiliate people of other religion that they drink Cow Piss , etc. But they are themselves following a similar way to medicate themselves.


Reply

let us see what science is doing.

a) What is Premarin(e)?

Premarin stands for Pregnant Mares’ Urine (PREgnant MARes’ urINe); PMU for short (we spell it both ways, with an “e”, PREgnant MARes’ urINE which is the older name used in Canada, and without — which is the more popular recent spelling, and the one that is a U.S. registered trademark).

Premarin (including Prempro, Premphase, Prempac, and Premelle) is a drug made up of conjugated estrogens obtained from the urine of pregnant mares — put out in many forms (pills, creams, injections, patches, vaginal rings) and is used to reduce the symptoms of menopause in women or women who have had a hysterectomy. It is also prescribed to nearly eliminate the risk of osteoporosis (the brittling of bones) and reduce the chance of heart disease in women over 50.

http://www.premarin.org/

Abul Kasem should make a rebuttle of premarin website.

b) Saudi doctor wins award for camel urine cancer cure

RIYADH Saudi inventors received eight awards in the ITEX 2009 exhibition held in Kuala Lumpur between 15 and 17 May, with one of the winning inventions – microparticles in camels urine to treat cancer by Dr. Faten Khorsheed from King Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah chosen as one of the six best out of 600 inventions presented to win the exhibitions Asia Cup.

Dr. Khalid Abdullah Al-Sebti, Deputy Education Minister and Secretary of the Mawhebah program to support talented persons, said the eight winning Saudi inventors reflected the scientific and technological development of the Kingdom and its progress in becoming a community of knowledge and economic advancement.

ITEX is an annual exhibition showcasing new inventions, technologies and products, with the aim of securing investment and partners in manufacturing and commercialization projects.

The exhibition displays inventions and innovations by universities, research institutions, and individual inventors from around the world. SPA

http://www.saudiwave.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=970:saudi-doc-wins-award-for-camel-urine-cancer-cure-&catid=95:health&Itemid=167

c) Camels could help cure humans By North Africa correspondent David Bamford

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1702393.stm

d) Camel urine a cure for cancer

Cancer cures do not generally conjure up visions of camels urine, but a Saudi doctor has just won a prestigious award for using it to do just that.

Faten Khorsheed, from King Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah, was chosen as having one of the six best innovations out of 600 entrants in the Asia Cup at the ITEX technology and education expo in Kuala Lumpur, the daily Saudi Gazette reported on Wednesday.

Khorsheed uses micro particles in camels urine to treat cancer, the newspaper said.

There are those that believe camels urine can help to slow the ageing process and increase beauty, but there has been little scientific evidence to back this up.

Khorsheed was one of eight winning Saudi inventors to scoop awards at the annual ITEX expo, the newspaper said.

Entrants stand to win awards for their innovations ranging from “bronze” up to “gold”.

http://en.news.maktoob.com/20090000003564/Camel_urine_a_cure_for_cancer/Article.htm

e) Nano-particles in Camels urine may help treat cancer

http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentID=2009071143333

f) A detailed Reply and a Must see

http://www.answering-christianity.com/urine.htm

g) http://www.islamawareness.net/FAQ/faq1000.html

h) http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/83423/

I) and Lastly It is mentioned inAsh-Shifa of Qadi Iyad, translated by Aisha Bewley, p 348-351SECTION 3:The Prophet’s states with respect to worldly matters

We will examine the Prophet’s worldly states with respect to his beliefs, reports and actions.As for worldly beliefs, one aspect of his state in this regard is that it was possible for him to believe something concerning the matters of this world based on one interpretation when the opposite was true, or to be subject to doubt or supposition regarding them. These matters are not the same as matters of the Shari’a.
R
afi’ ibn Khadij said that the Messenger of Allah came to Madina while they were pollinating the dates and asked, “What are you doing?” They told him and he said, “Perhaps it would be better not to do it.” So they left it and there were less dates. They mentioned that to him and he said, “I am a man. If I command you to do something in your deen, then do it. If I tell you something from opinion, I am but a man.”‘ Anas added, “You know better the affairs of your world.” Another variant has, “I had an opinion, so do not blame me for having an opinion.”
In the hadith from Ibn ‘Abbas we find, “I am a man. What I tell you from Allah is true. In what I say from myself, I am but a man. I can err and I can be right.” This is what he said about himself regarding his opinions about the affairs of this world. That is not the case with any words which came from him or his ijtihad when laying down the Shari’a or making a sunna.1

This Article is in reply to series of allegations made by author in his book which can be accessed here: What Prophet Mohammed Did His Whole Life?

Refutation Article by Brother Asim ul Haq

Assalamualaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barkatahu (May Peace, Blessings & Mercy of Allah Be Upon You)

Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Refuting Muhammad said Death : Converting to Other Religion

The Article is in reply to series of allegations made by author in his book which can be accessed here: What Prophet Mohammed Did His Whole Life?

Titles of these allegations against Prophet are mentioned below, Inshallah each allegation would be answered in individual article by titles mentioned below

10. Muhammad proscribed death for the Muslim who converts to another religion?


Abul Kasem said

10. Muhammad proscribed death for the Muslim who converts to another religion?

The Qur’an:

Sura (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them”



Reply by brother Ansar Al-‘Adl taken from: http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=414ion=wel_islam&subsection=Misconceptions#8

This verse has been misquoted like the previous verse, out of context. Here is the full passage:

4:88-91 Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? Allah hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, never shalt thou find the Way. They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): so take not friends from their ranks until they forsake the domain of evil in the way of God (from what is forbidden). But if they revert to [open] enmity, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks. Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (Of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people . If God had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (guarantees of) peace, then God hath opened no way for you (to war against them). Others you will find that wish to gain your confidence as well as that of their people: every time they are sent back to temptation, they succumb thereto; if they withdraw not from you nor give you (guarantees) of peace besides restraining their hands, seize them and slay them wherever ye get them; in their case We have provided you with a clear argument against them

So in the same manner as the first verse, this verse also only commands Muslims to fight those who practice oppression or persecution, or attack the Muslims. And in the event of a battle, the same laws of war are in place and a Muslim who transgresses limits should prepare for the punishment of God. In response to a question on verses 4:88-89, Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi quotes the verses in their full context and then asks the following:

Now tell me honestly, do these verses give a free permission to kill any one anywhere? These verses were revealed by God to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), at the time when Muslims were attacked by the non-Muslims of Makkah on a regular basis. They were frightening the Muslim community of Madinah. One may say using the contemporary jargon that there were constant terrorist attacks on Madinah and in this situation Muslims were given permission to fight back the terrorist. These verses are not a permission for terrorism but they are a warning against the terrorists. But even in these warnings you can see how much restraint and care is emphasized.

It is also important to note that the Qur’an clearly condemns murder. The Quran says about the prohibition of murder,

6:151 Take not life, which God hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus does He command you, that ye may learn wisdom. 17:33 Nor take life, which God has made sacred, except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, We have given his heir authority (to demand Qisas(retribution) or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the law) 5:32…if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people

  • So the Qur’an makes it very clear that Muslims cannot initiate an attack against others, unless there is an immediate threat of being attacked. The context of the quoted verses applies only to situations where the oppressors are killing Muslims. In this case, they have a right to defend themselves and others, especially the weak and oppressed.(end quote)



Abul Kasem quoted
Sura (9:11-12) – “But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail Our revelations for a people who have knowledge. And if they break their pledges after their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, then fight the heads of disbelief – Lo! they have no binding oaths – in order that they may desist.” This verse is speaking of infidels (ie. “slay the infidels wherever you find them” 9:5) who obviously became Muslim to escape the sword, but the Hadith make no distinction of how a Muslim came to be a Muslim. Apostasy is always punished by death.



Reply by Brother Ansar al Adl:

9:5 Kill the disbelievers wherever you find them.

This verse, often called “the verse of the sword”, has been misquoted in a manner similar to the previous verses. First, we shall provide the verse in its context:

9:5-6 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.

Having presented the verse in context, we can analyze it properly. Dr. Maher Hathout gives an explanation on the historical context of the verse:

This verse was revealed towards the end of the revelation period and relates to a limited context. Hostilities were frozen for a three-month period during which the Arabs pledged not to wage war. Prophet Muhammad was inspired to use this period to encourage the combatants to join the Muslim ranks or, if they chose, to leave the area that was under Muslims rule; however, if they were to resume hostilities, then the Muslims would fight back until victorious. One is inspired to note that even in this context of war, the verse concludes by emphasizing the divine attributes of mercy and forgiveness. To minimize hostilities, the Qur’an ordered Muslims to grant asylum to anyone, even an enemy, who sought refuge. Asylum would be granted according to the customs of chivalry; the person would be told the message of the Qur’an but not coerced into accepting that message. Thereafter, he or she would be escorted to safety regardless of his or her religion. (9:6). (Hathout, Jihad vs. Terrorism; US Multimedia Vera International, 2002, pp.52-53, emphasis added)

Therefore, this verse once again refers to those pagans who would continue to fight after the period of peace. It clearly commands the Muslims to protect those who seek peace and are non-combatants. It is a specific verse with a specific ruling and can in no way be applied to general situations. The command of the verse was only to be applied in the event of a battle. As Abdullah Yusuf Ali writes:

The emphasis is on the first clause: it is only when the four months of grace are past, and the other party show no sign of desisting from their treacherous design by right conduct, that the state of war supervenes – between Faith and Unfaith. (Yusuf Ali, The Holy Quran, Text, Translation and Commentary, emphasis added)

If the pagans would not cease their hostilities towards the Muslims, then they were to be fought, especially since they were living in the land of an Islamic state. Dr. Zakir Naik writes concerning this verse:

This verse is quoted during a battle. …We know that America was once at war with Vietnam. Suppose the President of America or the General of the American Army told the American soldiers during the war: “Wherever you find the Vietnamese, kill them”. Today if I say that the American President said, “Wherever you find Vietnamese, kill them” without giving the context, I will make him sound like a butcher. But if I quote him in context, that he said it during a war, it will sound very logical, as he was trying to boost the morale of the American soldiers during the war. …Similarly in Surah Taubah chapter 9 verse 5 the Qur’an says, “Kill the Mushriqs (pagans) where ever you find them”, during a battle to boost the morale of the Muslim soldiers. What the Qur’an is telling Muslim soldiers is, don’t be afraid during battle; wherever you find the enemies kill them. Surah Taubah chapter 9 verse 6 gives the answer to the allegation that Islam promotes violence, brutality and bloodshed. It says:

”If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure that is because they are men without knowledge.” [Al-Qur’an 9:6]

The Qur’an not only says that a Mushriq seeking asylum during the battle should be granted refuge, but also that he should be escorted to a secure place. In the present international scenario, even a kind, peace-loving army General, during a battle, may let the enemy soldiers go free, if they want peace. But which army General will ever tell his soldiers, that if the enemy soldiers want peace during a battle, don’t just let them go free, but also escort them to a place of security? This is exactly what Allah (swt) says in the Glorious Qur’an to promote peace in the world. (SOURCE, emphasis added)

Dr. Naik makes some very interesting observations about the verse. Indeed, it is truly amazing how Islam-haters will ignore God’s infinite mercy in their attempt to malign Islam. God has always given human beings a way out of any suffering, and has only ordained fighting as a last resort. Muslim scholars have written much commentary on these Qur’anic verses explaining the historical context in such great detail so that there may be no misconceptions. We have quoted extensively from various commentators on these verses and there is no need to repeat the same material again. We will provide one more commentary before moving on.

Professor Shahul Hameed writes on verse 9:5: This is a verse taken from Surah At-Tawba. This chapter of the Quran was revealed in the context when the newly organized Muslim society in Madinah was engaged in defending themselves against the pagan aggressors. The major question dealt with here is, as to how the Muslims should treat those who break an existing treaty at will. The first clause in the verse refers to the time-honored Arab custom of a period of warning and waiting given to the offenders, after a clear violation. That is, they will be given four months time to repair the damage done or make peace. But if nothing happens after the expiry of these forbidden months, what should be done? This is what the present verse says. According to this verse, fighting must be resumed until one of the two things happens: Either the enemy should be vanquished by relentless fighting. That is what is meant by {then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem [of war]}; or they should repent, establish prayers and pay zakah, etc. This is one of those verses of the Quran which are likely to be misunderstood, if quoted out of context. We must understand that this fighting was against a people who forced the Prophet and his companions to leave not only their own homes but all their property and even their hometown of Makkah to Madinah. Once the Muslims were organized into a community in those lawless times, the rules to be followed by the Muslims were clearly laid down, even in the matter of war. Since Islam is a comprehensive system, no human activity could be ignored. And given the nature of mankind, we cannot imagine a situation where fighting is completely ruled out either. As can be seen, the above injunctions on fighting is not on an individual level, but only in the case of a society that strives to flourish and thrive as a nation. But even here the norms are clear: fighting is only in self defence or for the establishment of justice; and always fighting is the last option. And no one is allowed to transgress the limits set by God. (SOURCE, emphasis added)

Ibn al-`Arabi, in his commentary on the Quran, writes:

It is clear from this that the meaning of this verse is to kill the pagans who are waging war against you. (Ahkam al-Quran: 2/456, emphasis added)

Shaykh Sami al-Majid also makes some very interesting points in his discussion on this verse:

If we look at the verses in Srah al-Tawbah immediately before and after the one under discussion, the context of the verse becomes clear. A few verses before the one we are discussing, Allah says:

There is a declaration of immunity from Allah and His Messenger to those of the pagans with whom you have contracted mutual alliances. Go then, for four months, to and fro throughout the land. But know that you cannot frustrate Allah that Allah will cover with shame those who reject Him. [Srah al-Tawbah: 1-2]

In these verses we see that the pagans were granted a four month amnesty with an indication that when the four months were over, fighting would resume. However, a following verse exempts some of them from the resumption of hostilities. It reads:

Except for those pagans with whom you have entered into a covenant and who then do not break their covenant at all nor aided anyone against you. So fulfill your engagements with them until the end of their term, for Allah loves the righteous. [Srah al-Tawbah: 4]

So when Allah says: But when the forbidden months are past, then fight the pagans wherever you find them, and seize them and beleaguer them and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) we must know that it is not general, since the verse above has qualified it to refer to the pagan Arabs who were actually at war with the Prophet (peace be upon him) and those who broke their covenants of peace. This is further emphasized a few verses later where Allah says:

Will you not fight people who broke their covenants and plotted to expel the Messenger and attacked you first? [Srah al-Tawbah: 13] (SOURCE)

Therefore, the context of the verse within the Surah makes it clear that this refers to those who are persistent in their hostilities and attacks against Muslims, and it is applied in battle only. We recommend that one reads Shaykh Sami Al-Majid’s full article entitled There is no Compulsion in Religion.

Abrogated?

The next issue with this verse concerns abrogation. It has been claimed by some that this verse 9:5 has abrogated all the peaceful verses in the Qur’an. However, this claim results from a misunderstanding of some Qur’anic concepts. In the Qur’an there is naskh and there is also takhsees. Naskh is the abrogation of a ruling by a ruling that was revealed after it. Naskh occurs in matters of Islamic law. Takhsees on the other hand refers to specification, where one verse restricts the application of another verse, or specifies the limits not mentioned in the other verse. As Shaykh Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi writes:

Specification involves one verse limiting or restricting a general ruling found in another verse, whereas naskh involves abrogating the first verse in toto (i.e., it is not applied in any circumstances or conditions). (Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the Quraan;UK Al-Hidaayah Publishing and Distribution, 1999, p. 233)

Shaykh Qadhi also explains that one of the conditions for naskh is that the two conflicting rulings apply to the same situation under the same circumstances, and hence there is no alternative understanding of the application of the verses. As he states:

Therefore, if one of the rulings can apply to a specific case, and the other ruling to a different case, this cannot be considered an example of naskh. (Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the Quraan;UK Al-Hidaayah Publishing and Distribution, 1999, p. 237)

Therefore, verse 9:5 can in no way be considered an example of naskh since it is only a ruling applied to a very specific situation and circumstances. There is a lot of confusion surrounding some verses labeled as cases of naskh because the early Muslims used to use the word naskh to refer to takhsees as well. Therefore, some Muslims failed to realize that some of these cases labeled by early Muslims as ‘naskh’ were cases of takhsees. This is why some early Muslim scholars are quoted who have classified this verse as a case of ‘naskh’. One should realize that they used the term naskh to refer to a broader range of meanings, including takhsees. As Dr. Jamal Badawi writes:

Any claim of naskh must be definitive, not based on mere opinion or speculation. It should be noted that earlier Muslims used the term naskh to refer also to takhsees or specifying and limiting the ruling than abrogating it. (SOURCE, emphasis added)

Shaykh Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi specifically addresses the confusion about verse 9:5, and after citing the different claims he concludes:

It can be seen from the examples and categories quoted that, in reality, most of these verses cannot be considered to have been abrogated in the least. Some of them merely apply to situations other than those that they were revealed for. Almost all of these ‘mansookh’ (abrogated) verses can still be said to apply when the Muslims are in a situation similar to the situation in which the verses were revealed. Thus, the ‘Verse of the Sword’ in reality does not abrogate a large number of verses; in fact, az-Zarqaanee concludes that it does not abrogate any! (fn. Az-Zarqaanee, v.2, pps.275-282) (Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the Quraan;UK Al-Hidaayah Publishing and Distribution, 1999, p. 254)

Shaykh Sami Al-Majid also states the same thing in his article: Some people especially some contemporary non-Muslim critics of Islam have tried to claim that this verse abrogates the verse Let there be no compulsion in religion. They argue that the generality of this statement implies that every unbeliever who refuses to accept Islam must be fought. They support their allegation by pointing out that this verse is one of the last verses to be revealed about fighting. However, this verse in no way abrogates the principle in Islamic Law that there is no compulsion in religion. It may be general in wording, but its meaning is quite specific on account of other verses of the Qurn that are connected with it as well as on account of a number of pertinent hadth. (SOURCE)

Shaykh Jamal Al-Din Zarabozo also deals with this issue in his writings on the verse “There is no compulsion in religion”. He mentions the view that this verse has been abrogated as then states:

Al-Dausiri rejects this statement because of the following: A verse cannot abrogate another verse unless it completely removes the ruling of the earlier verse and there is no way to reconcile the contradictory meanings of the verses. (Zarabozo, There is No Compulsion in Religion, Al-Basheer)

  • This was the view of the great scholars and mufasireen (Qur’anic commentators) both classical and recent, like Ash-Shanqeeti or Ibn Jarir At-Tabari. Shaykh Muhammad S. Al-Awa also comments on this issue in his discussion on the puunishment for apostasy:

At the same time, one can say that the death penalty for apostasy especially when it is considered as a hadd (prescribed) punishment contradicts the Qur’anic principle [law] in Surah II, verse 256, which proclaims “No compulsion in religion.” Ibn Hazm, to avoid this criticism, claimed that this verse had been abrogated and that compulsion is allowed in religion; consequently, according to him, the punishment for apostasy does not contradict the Qur’an (fn. Muhalla, vol. XI, p. 195).However, this claim is invalid, since Qur’anic scholars have established the abrogated verses and this verse is not among them (fn. Suyuti, Itqan, vol. II, p. 22-24). Accordingly, one can say with the Encyclopaedia of Islam that “In the Qur’an the apostate is threatened with punishment in the next world only.” (fn. Heffening, Encyclopaedia of Islam, vol. III, p. 736 under “Murtadd”). (El-Awa, Punishment in Islamic Law; US American Trust Publications, 1993, p. 51, emphasis added)

Therefore, when we discuss the merciful and loving verses of the Qur’an and we receive a claim that they have been abrogated by the specific verses concerning battle, we can dismiss such a claim as mere speculation and invalid. Peace and justice are fundamentals of the religion of Islam and can never be removed from it.

http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=414ion=wel_islam&subsection=Misconceptions#9



Abul Kasem said
Other verses that seem to support the many Hadith demanding death for apostates are Sura (2:217), Sura (9:73-74), Sura (88:21), Sura (5:54), and Sura (9:66).



These are verses

a) [002:217] They ask you concerning fighting in the Sacred Months (i.e. st, th, th and th months of the Islamic calendar). Say, “Fighting therein is a great (transgression) but a greater (transgression) with Allah is to prevent mankind from following the Way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, to prevent access to Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah), and to drive out its inhabitants, and Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion (Islamic Monotheism) if they can. And whosoever of you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever.”

Ibne Kathir wrote: (…and Al-Fitnah is worse than killing.) means, trying to force the Muslims to revert from their religion and re-embrace Kufr after they had believed, is worse with Allah than killing.’ Allah said:

(And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion (Islamic Monotheism) if they can.)

So, they will go on fighting you with unrelenting viciousness.

Ibn Ishaq went on: When the Qur’an touched this subject and Allah brought relief to the Muslims instead of the sadness that had befallen them, Allah’s Messenger took possession of the caravan and the two prisoners. The Quraysh offered to ransom the two prisoners, `Uthman bin `Abdullah and Hakam bin Kaysan. Allah’s Messenger said:

(We will not accept your ransom until our two companions return safely. ) meaning Sa`d bin Abu Waqqas and `Utbah bin Ghazwan, “For we fear for their safety with you. If you kill them, we will kill your people.” Later on, Sa`d and `Utbah returned safely and Allah’s Messenger accepted the Quraysh’s ransom for their prisoners. As for Al-Hakam bin Kaysan, he became Muslim and his Islam strengthened. He remained with Allah’s Messenger until he was martyred during the incident at Bir Ma`unah (when the Prophet sent seventy Companions to Najd to teach them Islam, but Banu Sulaim killed them all except two). As for `Uthman bin `Abdullah, he went back to Makkah and died there as a disbeliever.(end quote)

So above verse is about Forcing Muslims to revert from their religion and re-embrace Kufr, let us see other verses

b) [009:073] O Prophet (Muhammad SAW)! Strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them, their abode is Hell, – and worst indeed is that destination.

[009:074] They swear by Allah that they said nothing (bad), but really they said the word of disbelief, and they disbelieved after accepting Islam, and they resolved that (plot to murder Prophet Muhammad SAW) which they were unable to carry out, and they could not find any cause to do so except that Allah and His Messenger had enriched them of His Bounty. If then they repent, it will be better for them, but if they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful torment in this worldly life and in the Hereafter. And there is none for them on earth as a Walee (supporter, protector) or a helper.

Reason behind revealing Ayah Hypocrites try to kill the Prophet

Ibne Kathir Commented

Allah said next, [?????????? ????? ???? ??????????]

(and they resolved that which they were unable to carry out) It was said that this Ayah was revealed about Al-Julas bin Suwayd, who tried to kill his wife’s son when he said he would inform the Messenger of Allah [about Al-Julas’ statement we mentioned earlier]. It was also said that it was revealed in the case of `Abdullah bin Ubayy who plotted to kill the Messenger of Allah . As-Suddi said, “This verse was revealed about some men who wanted to crown `Abdullah bin Ubayy even if the Messenger of Allah did not agree. ,It was reported that some hypocrites plotted to kill the Prophet , while he was at the battle of Tabuk, riding one night. They were a group of more than ten men. Ad-Dahhak said, “This Ayah was revealed about them.” (end quote)

Surely If some people are trying to kill abul kasem, he will never say no problem, let them kill me. let us see next reference provided by Abul Kasem

He provided reerence of:

c) [088:021] So remind them (O Muhammad (Peace be upon him)), you are only a one who reminds.

Above ayah has nothing to do with topic, maybe abul kasem just copied and pasted, his next refrence is 5:54

Brother Ansar Al Adl replied

d) 5:54 Allah will bring a people whom He loveth and who love Him, humble toward believers, stern toward disbelievers, striving in the way of Allah, and fearing not the blame of any blamer. Such is the grace of Allah which He giveth unto whom He will. Allah is All-Embracing, All-Knowing. 48:29 Mohammed is Allah’s apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another

Non-Muslims think that this verse tells Muslims to be harsh and cruel to non-Muslims. Let us first provide a better translation:

48:29 Muhammad is the apostle of Allah. and those who are with him are strong against disbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward.

  • The Arabic word “ashidda” does not mean ruthless, but strong and firm. Ruthless is an unacceptable translation. Translations of ashidda:
  • Pickthall: hard; Yusuf Ali: strong; Daryabadi: stern; Khan-Hilali: severe; F. Malik: strong; Shakir: firm of heart; Arberry: hard; Irving: strict
  • Also, the disbelievers being referred to in these verses are the those who persecuted and attacked the Muslims. Shaykh Fawzee Al-Atharee said the following:

And similarly the disbeliever, if he has good character with us and good manners with us and good way and treatment with us, then we have good manners with him, good behaviour with him, good way with him and good treatment of him. And if his manners are bad and his behaviour is bad [i.e. abusive and cruel], then we treat him with accordance to how he is treating us. This is something permissible in the legislation. But the Prophet s.a.w.s. has indicated very clearly in all the narrations that have been brought and throughout his life, that there must be a matter of balance and to be just. And that is in dealing with the people of disbelief and also in dealing with those who have faith.

The Muslims were commanded to stand up for their religion and defend themselves against the persecution of the disbelievers. Again, if we examine the historical context, we also find that this is referring to those who attacked the Muslims continuously. So verses apply in a situation similar to the historical context. Since this verse mentions the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and praises their path, let us examine some narrations about the companions. Musab bin Umair was a notable companion of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). He was sent to Madinah to share the message of Islam with the people living there. One incident of his related as follows:

Once Musab and Sad were sitting near a well in an orchard of the Zafar clan. With them were a number of new Muslims and others who were interested in Islam. A powerful notable of the city, Usayd ibn Khudayr, came up brandishing a spear. He was livid with rage. Sad ibn Zararah saw him and told Musab: “This is a chieftain of his people. May God place truth in his heart.” “If he sits down, I will speak to him,” replied Musab, displaying all the calm and tact of a great daiy. The angry Usayd shouted abuse and threatened Musab and his host. “Why have you both come to us to corrupt the weak among us? Keep away from us if you want to stay alive.” Musab smiled a warm and friendly smile and said to Usayd: “Won’t you sit down and listen? If you are pleased and satisfied with our mission. accept it and if you dislike it we would stop telling you what you dislike and leave.” “That’s reasonable,” said Usayd and, sticking his spear in the ground, sat down. Musab was not compelling him to do anything. He was not denouncing him. He was merely inviting him to listen. If he was satisfied, well and good. If not, then Musab would leave his district and his clan without any fuss and go to another district. Musab began telling him about Islam and recited the Quran to him. Even before Usayd spoke, it was clear from his face, now radiant and expectant, that faith had entered his heart. He said: “How beautiful are these words and how true! What does a person do if he wants to enter this religion?” “Have a bath, purify yourself and your clothes. Then utter the testimony of Truth (Shahadah), and perform Salat. Usayd left the gathering and was absent for only a short while. He returned and testified that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. (SOURCE)

Another example is found in the treatment of Thumamah Ibn Uthal, who was a notorious criminal who had killed many Muslim travelers. Because of this, the Prophet Muhammad declared him a wanted criminal who was to be captured or killed. Soon after, when he was traveling for pilgrimage, some Muslims caught him and took him to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Prophet recognized him and had him kept in the Masjid (mosque) with food and even ordered his own camel to be milked for him. They treated him like a guest rather than a war criminal! The Prophet Muhammad asked Thumamah what he had to say for himself, to which he replied “If you want to kill in reprisal, you can have someone of noble blood to kill. If, out of your bounty, you want to forgive, I shall be grateful. If you want money in compensation, I shall give you whatever amount you ask.” The Prophet Muhammad freed him and allowed him to leave. The very same day, Thumamah returned and declared his acceptance of Islam to the Prophet Muhammad. So we find that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his companions displayed the best character and attitude towards all people and this is what drew so many people to Islam. As the God says in the Qur’an:

3:159. And by the Mercy of God, you dealt with them gently. And had you been severe and harsh-hearted, they would have ran away from about you; so pass over (their faults), and ask (God’s) Forgiveness for them; and consult them in the affairs. Then when you have taken a decision, put your trust in Allh, certainly, Allh loves those who put their trust (in Him).

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was commanded by God to bring people to the teachings of Islam through the beautiful character that Muslims must show. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) conveyed this message to others by saying:

  • He who is not merciful to others, will not be treated mercifully. (Muslim, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 42)

And there are numerous examples one could quote which illustrate the kind and loving nature of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

  • Narrated Abu Huraira: A disbelieving Bedouin urinated in the mosque, and the people rushed to beat him. Allah’s Apostle ordered them to leave him, let him finish and pour a bucket or a tumbler (full) of water over the place where he has passed urine. The Prophet then explained to the Bedouin calmly, “This is a place of worship, in it is the worship of God and the reading of Qur’an.” After the Bedouin had left, the Prophet then said to his companions, ” You have been sent to make things easy (for the people) and you have not been sent to make things difficult for them.” (Muslim, Book 2, Number 559 and Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 149)

This narration, on its own, is sufficient to refute the claim that Islam is intolerant. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) did not show any anger or resentment to a non-Muslim who urinated in the Muslims place of worship! So Islam teaches gentleness in all things. As the Prophet Muhammad said:

  • Whoever is deprived of gentleness is deprived of all good. (Muslim, Book 32, Number 6270 & Abu Dawood, Book 41, Number 4791)

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) always displayed tolerance and compassion in his dealings with people, including Non-Muslims. Dr. M. Hamidullah explains the following points:

When the Prophet Mohammed settled down in Medina, he found there complete anarchy, the region having never known before either a State or a king to unite the tribes torn by internecine feuds. In just a few weeks, he succeeded in rallying all the inhabitants of the region into order. He constituted a city state, in which Muslims, Jews, pagan Arabs and also probably a small number of Christians, all entered into a statal organism by means of a social contract. The constitutional law of this first ‘Muslim’ State – which was the confederacy as a sequence of the multiplicity of the population groups – has come down to us in toto, and we read therein not only in clause 25: “to Muslims their religion, and to Jews their religion,” or, “that there would be benevolence and justice,” but even the unexpected passage in the same clause 25: “the Jews . . . are a community (in alliance) with – according Ibn Hisham and in the version of Abu-‘Ubaid, a community (forming part) of – the believers (i.e., Muslims).” The very fact that, at the time of the constitution of this city-state, the autonomous Jewish villages acceded of their free will to the confederal State, and recognized Muhammad as their supreme political head, implies in our opinion that the non-Muslim subjects possessed the right of votes in the election of the head of the Muslim State, at least in so far as the political life of the country was concerned. (Hamidullah, Introduction to Islam, paragraphs 414-416)

  • During the life of Prophet Muhammad, there was a Jewish synagogue in Madinah and an educational institute known as Bait Al-Midras. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) preserved and protected both of them.
  • The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) also honored a group of Christians of najran from Yemen, when they visited his mosques in Madinah.
  • The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) held interfaith discussions with them and they prayed in the Mosque in the Christian fashion while the Muslims prayed in the Islamic tradition.
  • The Prophet Muhammad’s tolerance is also illustrated in the following narration: Once the Prophet was seated at some place in Madinah, along with his Companions. During this time a funeral procession passed by. On seeing this, the Prophet stood up. One of his Companion remarked that the funeral was that of a Jew. The Prophet replied, Was he not a human being? (Bukhari, Muslim)

If every human being in this world saw the various ethnicities and cultures with these eyes, the world would flourish in peace and harmony. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) set an example for his companions to follow in the way he showed respect and kindness to Non-Muslims. Dr. Farida Khanam also points out the following incidents:

In the present world, everyones thinking, tastes, aptitude, likes and dislikes can never exactly coincide. For many reasons, differences do arise in this world. But then, what is the permanent solution to the problem? The solution lies in tolerance, called iraz in Arabic. The Prophets entire life served as a perfect example of this principle. According to his wife, Aisha, “He was a personification of the Quran.” That is to say, the Prophet molded his own life in accordance with the ideal pattern of life which he presented to others in the form of the Quran. He never beat a servant, or a woman, or anyone else. He did, of course, fight for what was right. Yet, when he had to choose between two alternatives, he would take the easier course, provided it involved no sin. No one was more careful to avoid sin than he. He never sought revengeon his own behalffor any wrong done to him personally. Only if Gods commandments had been broken would he mete out retribution for the sake of God. It was such conduct which gained the Prophet universal respect. In the early Meccan period when the antagonists far exceeded the Prophets companions in number, it often happened that when the Prophet would stand to pray, his detractors would come near him and whistle and clap in order to disturb him, but the Prophet did not even once show his anger at such acts. He always opted for the policy of tolerance and avoidance of confrontation… When the opposition became very strong the Prophet left Mecca for Medina. But his antagonists did not leave him in peace. They began to attack Medina. In this way a state of war prevailed between the Muslims and non-Muslims. Since the Prophet avoided war at all costs, he strove to bring about a peace agreement between him and the Meccans. After great efforts on his part, the non-Muslims agreed to the finalizing of a 10-year peace treaty, which was drafted and signed at the al-Hudaybiyyah. While the al-Hudaybiyyah treaty was being drafted, the Meccans indulged in a number of extremely provocative acts. For instance, the agreement mentioned the Prophets name as Muhammad the Messenger of God. They insisted that the phrase the messenger of God should be taken out, and be replaced simply by Muhammad, son of Abdullah. The Prophet accepted their unreasonable condition and deleted the appellation with his own hands. Similarly, they made the condition that if they could lay their hands on any Muslim they would make him a hostage, but if the Muslims succeeded in detaining any non-Muslim, they would have to set him free. The Prophet even relented on this point. For the restoration of peace in the region, the Prophet accepted a number of such unjustifiable clauses as were added by the enemy. In this way he set the example of peace and tolerance being linked with one another. If we desire peace, we must tolerate many unpleasant things from others. There is no other way to establish peace in society. (SOURCE)

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) also extended the hand of friendship to Christians as well. He maintained good ties with the Christian Negus of Abyssinia throughout his life. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) even selected Non-Muslims as ambassadors. One such example was Amr ibn Umaiyah Ad-Damri. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) sent a message to the Monks of Saint Catherine in Mount Sinai, saying the following: ”

This is a message written by Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, far and near, we are behind them. Verily, I defend them by myself, the servants, the helpers, and my followers, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be changed from their jobs, nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they (Christians) are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate. No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, this is not to take place without her own wish. She is not to be prevented from going to her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation is to disobey this covenant till the Day of Judgment and the end of the world.”

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) also advised his companion Mu’adh ibn Jabal by saying: No Jew is to be annoyed because of their Judaic faith.

We must also examine the Prophet Muhammad’s teachings towards neighbors:

Abu Huraira (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “By Allah, he is not a believer! By Allah, he is not a believer! By Allah, he is not a believer.” It was asked, “Who is that, O Messenger of Allah?” He said, “One whose neighbor does not feel safe from his evil”. (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)

”He who believes in God and the Last Day should honour his guest, should not harm his neighbor, should speak good or keep quiet.” (Bukhari, Muslim)

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) also clearly specified that a Non-Muslim neighbor should receive this excellent treatment:

”Whoever hurts a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys God.” (Bukhari)

”He who hurts a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state, I am his adversary, and I shall be his adversary on the Day of a Judgment.” (Bukhari)

It is fascinating to note that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was so vocal in his support of good treatment towards humanity that he would even be prepared to stand on the side of the Non-Muslims against the Muslims who did not follow his teachings. This is true justice and this is what lead to the peace and prosperity that Islam brought into the world. The excellent character of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) has been noted by many Non-Muslim historians as well, and in fact anyone who has studied his life carefully has been amazed at the golden character of this human being. Washington Irving notes in his book ‘Mahomet and His Successors’:

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. (Irving, Mahomet and His Successors)(end quote from load Islam)

http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=414ion=wel_islam&subsection=Misconceptions#15

e) Abul Kasem’s last and final reference 9:66 let us see the context

[009:065] If you ask them (about this), they declare: “We were only talking idly and joking.” Say: “Was it at Allah (? ?? and His Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger (SAW) that you were mocking?”

[009:066] Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after you had believed. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others amongst you because they were Mujrimoon (disbelievers, polytheists, sinners, criminals, etc.).

[009:067] The hypocrites, men and women, are from one another, they enjoin (on the people) Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief and polytheism of all kinds and all that Islam has forbidden), and forbid (people) from Al-Maroof (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam orders one to do), and they close their hands (from giving (spending in Allahs Cause) alms, etc.). They have forgotten Allah, so He has forgotten them. Verily, the hypocrites are the Fasiqoon (rebellious, disobedient to Allah).

Above verses are regarding the hypocrites and they are rebellious. There is nothing wrong in above ayah.


Abul Kasem said
Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Leave a comment

Refuting Muhammad said no friendshp with Pagan Christian Jew

The Article is in reply to series of allegations made by author in his book which can be accessed here: What Prophet Mohammed Did His Whole Life?

Titles of these allegations against Prophet are mentioned below, Inshallah each allegation would be answered in individual article by titles mentioned below

9. Muhammad say no to friendship with the disbelievers Pagans, Christians and Jews.

Reply

And he quoted few ayahs, All the ayahs are already replied here INSHA`ALLAH


a) Can Muslims Befriend the Disbelievers? By Br Bassam Zawadi: http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/can_muslims_befriend_the_disbelievers_

b) Can Christians Befriend Non-Christians? BY Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/can_christians_befriend_non_christians_


c) Clarification of the important rule: it is haraam to take kaafirs as close friends and protectors nhttp://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/2179


d) Does Islam Forbid Befriending Non-Muslims? By Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaEAskTheScholar&cid=1119503543362


e) Do Muslims Hate non-Muslims? by Shaykh Muhammad Iqbal Nadvi: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1119503545526&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaEAskTheScholar


f) Is it haram to take non-Muslims as friends? by Abdul Malik Mujahid: http://www.dawanet.com/concepts/nonmuslimfriend.asp


g) Quoting Fatwa from Islamonline

In his response to the question, Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, President of the Fiqh Council of North America, states:

The Qur’an does not say that non-Muslims cannot be Muslims’ friends, nor does it forbid Muslims to be friendly to non-Muslims. There are many non-Muslims who are good friends of Muslim individuals and the Muslim community. There are also many good Muslims who truly and sincerely observe their faith and are very friendly to many non-Muslims at the same time.

Islam teaches us that we should be friendly to all people. Islam teaches us that we should deal even with our enemies with justice and fairness. Allah says in the Qur’an in the beginning of the same Surat Al-Madah: [O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah as witnesses to fair dealings and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just, that is next to piety. Fear Allah, indeed Allah is well-acquainted with all that you do.] (Al-Madah 5 :8)

In another place in the Qur’an, Allah Almighty says:

[Allah forbids you not with regard to those who fight you not for your faith, nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them. For Allah loves those who are just. Allah only forbids you with regard to those who fight you for your faith, and drive you out of your homes and support others in driving you out, from turning to them for protection (or taking them as wali). Those who seek their protection they are indeed wrong- doers.] (Al-Mumtahinah 60: 8-9)

Moreover, Allah Almighty has described Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) as “a mercy” to the worlds. He was a sign of Allah’s Mercy to all, Muslims as well as non-Muslims. In his kindness and fair treatment he did not make any difference between the believers and non-believers. He was kind to the pagans of Makkah and fought them only when they fought him. He made treaties with the Jews of Madinah and honored the treaties until they broke them.

He (peace and blessings be upon him) is reported to have received the Christians of Najran with kindness in his Masjid in Madinah. They argued with him about Islam, but he returned them with honor and respect. There are many examples from his life that show that he was the friendliest person to all people.


In the verse you quoted, the word “Awliya” is used. It is a plural and its singular is “wali”. The correct translation of the word “”wali”” is not “friend” but it is someone who is very close and intimate. It is also used to mean “guardian, protector, patron, lord and master”.

In the Qur’an this word is used for God, such as [Allah is the Protector (or Lord and Master) of those who believe. He takes them out from the depths of darkness to light] (Al- Baqarah 2: 257)

There are many other references in the Qur’an that give this meaning. The same word is also sometimes used in the Qur’an for human beings, such as [And whosoever is killed unjustly, We have granted his next kin “wali” the authority (to seek judgement or punishment in this case)] (Al-Isra’ 17 :33)

The correct translation of the verse in Surat Al-Maidah is: [O you who believe! Do not take Jews and Christians as your patrons. They are patrons of their own people. He among you who will turn to them for patronage is one of them. Verily Allah guides not a people unjust.] (Al-Ma’dah 5: 51)

It is obvious that Jews patronize the Jews and Christians patronize the Christians, so why not Muslims patronize Muslims and support their own people. This verse is not telling us to be against Jews or Christians, but it is telling us that we should take care of our own people and we must support each other.

In his Tafsir, (Quran exegesis) Imam Ibn Kathir has mentioned that some scholars say that this verse (i.e. the one you referred to) was revealed after the Battle of Uhud when Muslims had a set back. At that time, a Muslim from Madinah said, “I am going to live with Jews so I shall be safe in case another attack comes on Madinah.” And another person said, “I am going to live with Christians so I shall be safe in case another attack comes on Madinah.” So Allah revealed this verse reminding the believers that they should not seek the protection from others, but should protect each other. (See Ibn Kathir, Al-Tafsir, vol. 2, p. 68)

Muslims are allowed to have non-Muslims as friends as long as they keep their own faith and commitment to Islam pure and strong. You are correct in pointing out that a Muslim man is also allowed to marry a Jewish or Christian woman. It is obvious that one marries someone for love and friendship. If friendship between Muslims and Jews or Christians was forbidden, then why would Islam allow a Muslim man to marry a Jew or Christian woman? It is the duty of Muslims to patronize Muslims. They should not patronize any one who is against their faith or who fights their faith, even if they were their fathers and brothers. Allah says: [O you who believe! Take not for protectors (awliya’) your fathers and your brothers if they love unbelief above faith. If any of you do so, they are indeed wrong-doers.] (Al-Tawbah 9: 23)

In a similar way, the Qur’an also tells Muslims that they should never patronize the non-Muslims against other Muslims. However, if some Muslims do wrong to some non-Muslims, it is Muslims’ duty to help the non-Muslims and save them from oppression. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said that he himself will defend a Dhimmi living among Muslims to whom injustice is done by Muslims. But Islam also teaches that Muslims should not seek the patronage of non-Muslims against other Muslims. They should try to solve their problems among themselves. Allah Almighty says, [Let not the Believers take the unbelievers as their patrons over against the Believers] (Aal-‘Imran 3: 28)

He Almighty also says: [O you who believe! Take not for patrons unbelievers rather than Believers. Do you wish to offer Allah an open proof against yourselves?] (An-Nisaa 4:144)(end quote)


Now some ahadeeth Regarding Making Friends

  • Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:The likeness of a righteous companion and an evil companion is that of one who carries musk and one who works a bellows. With the one who carries musk, either he will give you some or you will buy from him or you will notice a pleasant fragrance from him. With the one who work a bellows, either he will burn your clothes or you will notice a foul odour from him.Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5534; Muslim, 2628, from Abu Moosa al-Ashari, may Allaah be pleased with him).  
  • Narrated by Abu Dharr HE SAID: I heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say, five days before he died, I declare before Allaah that I have no khaleel from among you, for Allaah has taken me as a khaleel as He took Ibraaheem as a khaleel. But if I were to have taken anyone from among my ummah as a khaleel, I would have taken Abu Bakr as a khaleel. But those who came before you used to take the graves of their Prophets and righteous men as places of worship. Do not take graves as places of worship, for I forbid you to do that.Narrated by Muslim, 532.
  • Al-Haafiz Ibn haJar said in Commentary of Saheeh Bukhari, Fathul Bari:.

The khaleel is a sincere friend whom one takes as a close friend because love for him takes deep root in ones heart. There was some scholarly dispute as to whether khillah (close friendship) is of a higher status than mahabbah (love) or vice versa.Fath al-Baari, 3/57

  • Allah says: Friends on that Day will be foes one to another except Al-Muttaqoon (the pious)[al-Zukhruf 43:67]

 



Abu Kasem said
Social Drawback: If you see an extremely polite muslim then be confirmed that he knows Islam very well. Because in every non muslim country muslim play this game unless they do not get the power in their hand. Just to keep non-muslims in darkness that muslims are good people and are very friendly. But actually they just want to get their feet stronger so that they can eradicate the non-muslim from that area.


Reply

A mere claim and nothing else.


Article Author: Islam Defender Asim Ul Haq

Continue reading

Posted in Refuting Allegations by Abul Kasem against Islam, Refuting Anti-Islamic Websites | Leave a comment