By Umar

 

 

Ali Sina's "Debates"

 

Part One

 

In this part of our essay, we will refute Ali Sina's arguments in the "debates" he had with Muslims Insha'Allah.

 

However, before we begin, it is important to note that most of these "debates" that Ali Sina have aren't even proper debates. In these debates, no sources are cited; it is just exchange of thoughts, and no refutations.

 

 

Freedom of Faith in Islam:

 

Zain vs. Sina

 

In the beginning of this debate, Ali Sina goes on to attack the issue of apostasy in Islam. He writes:

 

You say in Islam people are free to choose their religion. I beg to disagree. I am not going to talk about the practice of the Muslims because this will give you the chance to say Muslims are not following the true Islam. We all know that in no Islamic country Muslims are allowed to leave their religion and become Murtad. We know that the penalty of apostasy in Islam is death and we know that if someone is caught preaching his religion to a Muslim he could be put to death. Just ask how many Baha'is or Qadianis have been executed because they left Islam to embrace these religions. Just ask how many people in Pakistan were killed for converting to Christianity. Just ask how many Sunnis and Shiites were murdered because the followers of each group call the members of other group heretics. I am not going to talk about the practices of the Muslims. But I am curious to know in which Islamic country Muslims are allowed to investigate the truth of other religions and leave Islam without fearing for their lives. We know that in Saudi Arabia , anyone who converts to other religions will lose his head. In fact if you are caught with a copy of the Bible you are in deep troubles.  

Let us see what Shaykh ?Abd-Allaah ibn Jibreen says about freedom of faith in Islam:  

"if your wife leave Islam and "if she does not repent then the ruling of Allaah should be carried out on her, which is execution, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Whoever changes his religion [leaves Islam], execute him."  

Muhammad Iqbal Siddiqi, a popular Pakistani writer on Islam and Islamic law,  in his book The Penal Law of Islam claims that:

". . . the sayings and doings of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), the decision and practice of the Caliph Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him), the consensus of the opinion of the Companions of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and all the later Muslim jurists, and even certain verses of the Holy Qur'an all prescribe capital punishment for an apostate. [Muhammad Iqbal Siddiqi, The Penal Law of Islam, (Lahore: Kazi Publications, 1979) p. 97]  

In several verses Muhammad makes it clear that the apostates will be severely punished in the other world.

Sura 16:106-107, 109  

"Anyone who after accepting faith in Allah utters unbelief except under
Compulsion .. Allah will not guide those who reject faith. Without doubt, in the hereafter they will perish."  

Sura 88: 23-4                                                                                                                                                                   

"But if any turn away and reject God, God will punish him with a mighty Punishment".  

Sura  3: 86-91 emphasizes that on apostates rests "the curse of God, of His angels and of all mankind." And their penalty will not be lightened. Then adds:  

3:90 "But those who reject faith after they  accepted it and then go on adding to their defiance of faith never will their repentance be accepted; for they are those who have (of set purpose) gone astray.
91. As to those who reject faith and die rejecting never would be accepted from any such as much gold as the earth contains though they should offer it for ransom.  For such is (in store) a penalty grievous and they will find no helpers."

You may think that these are penalties in the other world. But not so! Muhammad ordered the immigrants to kill their own peer if they return back to Mecca and said:

4: 89 "if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,

Now this does not give any impression that the choice of religion in Islam is free. Dear Zain, you and I know perfectly that you are lying when you say "It is every Muslim's responsibility to research and investigate beliefs and religions upon reaching puberty to find out what is the true religion he/she would wish to pursue."  

We both know this is not what Islam teaches and this is not how Islam is practiced. So how about dropping that game of deception and being honest to each other? You can play these games with the gullible westerners but not with me.  

A few hadith will make this point much more clearer.  

Bukhari9,83,17
Narrated 'Abdullah:
Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."  

(Sahih Bukhari 4.260)
Narrated Ikrima:
Ali burnt some people [hypocrites] and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "  

see also Sahih Bukhari 9,84,57:  

The following is another Islamic site that unabashedly says:

"The punishment for apostasy (riddah) is well-known in Islaamic Sharee'ah. The one who leaves Islaam will be asked to repent by the Sharee'ah judge in an Islaamic country; if he does not repent and come back to the true religion, he will be killed as a kaafir and apostate, because of the command of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): "Whoever changes his religion, kill him." (Reported by al-Bukhaari, 3017).

http://thetruereligion.org/apostatepunish.htm  

So, Muslims are free to investigate the truth of other religions only though Islamic sources and at the end they MUST accept Islam as or face death. They are not allowed to own or read a Bible or the sacred books of other religions. They are free to investigate these religions by asking about them from their Imams. 

 

Response:

 

First of all, to be exact, an apostate is only punished when he creates fitnah among the Muslim Ummah; this is according to the scholars of Islam:

"Moreover, it is incorrect to say that everyone who leaves Islam is automatically killed. Thus, if an apostate causes no harm to the Muslim community and does not call for spreading hostility towards Islam, he is not to be punished, rather he is to be advised kindly and wisely to let him know the true image of Islam."

And,

We can conclude that the issue of the penalty prescribed for apostasy is dependent on the public interest of the nation. Therefore, there is no harm in ignoring the apostasy of an individual as long as he or she does not harm the nation. On the other hand, if a group of apostates endangers the security and interests of the Muslim community, then the Muslim ruler should consider them to be a danger and threat to society.

That quote is located here.

Further reading on the issue of apostasy located in the following links:

http://www.islamonline.net/English/contemporary/2006/04/article01.shtml

http://www.islamicperspectives.com/Apostasy1.htm

Secondly, apostasy in Islam is like treason. When you leave Islam, you abandon the Muslim Ummah, and when you call for hostility against Islam, then you have committed a serious crime. It is hilarious to note that Ali Sina is quick to criticize the Muslims for giving a capital punishment to apostates who threaten the Muslim community, yet he forgets that at one point in the UK, a person who commited treason was to be executed. Ali Sina then says:

You may think that these are penalties in the other world. But not so! Muhammad ordered the immigrants to kill their own peer if they return back to Mecca and said:

4: 89 "if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,

Let us read the verse in context:

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 God (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, 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).

(Sura 4 Ayats 89-90)

It is obvious from the above verses that verse 89 is talking about the people who break their covenants with the Muslims, as this translation by Dr. Munir Munshey makes clear:

The hypocrites wish that you would reject faith just like they have. Then, you will (descend down to their level and) be equal to them. Therefore, do not choose them as friends unless they (emigrate and) leave their homes in the path of Allah. If they revert (to open hostility), then seize and slay them wherever you see them. Do not take them as friends or protectors, nor as helpers,

And the Late Muhammad Asad translates it as:

They would love to see you deny the truth even as they have denied it, so that you should be like them. Do not, therefore, take them for your allies until they forsake the domain of evil  for the sake of God; and if they revert to [open] enmity, seize them and slay them wherever you may find them. And do not take any of them  for your ally or giver of succour,

 

Further down in the page we find:

You disturbingly call for acts of violence and persecution of Muslims and Islam because you believe Islam is about violence and terrorism yet it endorses not such measures. If you previously hated hatred, violence and oppression you have simply become what you hate.

 (Note from Author: Ali Sina lies below saying he is not for violence, while he open calls for all Muslims to be deported from the West calling them "brain-dead".)

No, I am not for violence. But I firmly believe we need to grab the Muslims' attention. The best way to do that is to treat them the way their holy book says non Muslims should be treated. Muslims will not wake up unless they are given a taste from their own medicine.  Here is a sample of the constitution I am proposing to be adopted in Dar al Harb.

8:12 We will cast terror into the hearts of Muslims. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.  

3:28, Let not the non-Muslims take for friends or helpers the Muslims.  

8:65, Rouse the non-Muslims to the fight against Muslims.

9:5,  Then fight and slay the Muslims wherever ye find them,

9:14, Fight the Muslims, and God will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame.

9:23, O ye the non-Muslims take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love Islam.

9:28, O ye the non-Muslims! Truly the Muslims are unclean.

9:123, O ye non-Muslims! fight the Muslims who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you.

47:4, Therefore, when ye meet the Muslims, smite at their necks; At length.      

Is that very cruel? Is that violent and inhumane? Does that bother you? Tell me why? Why these beautiful divine verses are offensive to you? Please tell me why you don't like them.

 

Response:

 

We will deal with the verses above Insha'Allah, and see if they really promote terror:

Sura 8 Ayat 12

Let us quote the Ayat in context:

Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."

This because they contended against God and His Apostle: If any contend against God and His Apostle, God is strict in punishment.

Thus (will it be said): "Taste ye then of the (punishment): for those who resist God, is the penalty of the Fire.

"O ye who believe! When ye meet the Unbelievers in hostile array, never turn your backs to them.

(Sura 8 Ayats 12-15)

 

These Ayats are also very clear, and that they refer to when the Muslims are in battle. Specifically the Battle of Badr. One must remember that the battle of Badr was a result of the Quraish persecuting the Muslims:

 

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, God is most powerful for their aid;-

(They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, "our Lord is God". Did not God check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of God is commemorated in abundant measure. God will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily God is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will).

(Sura 22 Ayats 39-40)

 

Ali Sina is probably trying to make note of how it says "smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them".

 

Well what does Ali Sina expect?? Does Ali Sina expect for a soldier to enter the battle wearing a kids glove, and to not fight and defend his religion??

 

If this is the case, then something is seriously wrong with Ali Sina's thinking!

 

 

Sura 3 Ayat 28:

 

The believers should not take as friends the unbelievers in preference to the believers _ unless they sense (and suspect) harm (and harassment) from the unbelievers. Whoever does that shall have nothing from Allah at all. Allah cautions you to beware of Him! Towards Allah is your final destination.

 

La yattakhithi almu/minoona alkafireena awliyaa min dooni almu/mineena waman yafAAal thalika falaysa mina Allahi fee shay-in illa an tattaqoo minhum tuqatan wayuhaththirukumu Allahu nafsahu wa-ila Allahi almaseeru

 

 

Another Ayat which is Sura 5 Ayat 51, which basically says the same thing:

 

O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily God guideth not a people unjust.

 

Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo la tattakhithoo alyahooda waalnnasara awliyaa baAAduhum awliyao baAAdin waman yatawallahum minkum fa-innahu minhum inna Allaha la yahdee alqawma alththalimeena

 

The Arabic word used in both Ayats, is awliyaa. An explanation of this word is given here:

 

The first point to be noted is that, in the verse above, the word Awliya is often incorrectly translated as friends (Awliya is the plural and its singular is wali and the concept is walaah). As a result, many people are under the misconception that this verse commands Muslims to distance themselves from Non-Muslims and to avoid friendship with them. This is far from the truth, as we shall see after examining the meaning of the word Awliya. The Qur'an says:

3:122 ...Allah was their WALI (protector), and in Allah should the faithful (Ever) put their trust.

This verse indicates that a wali is one in whom trust is placed for protection, as the Qur'an always declares God the protector, wali, of the righteous. As Dr. Saeed Ismail Sieny concludes his discussion on Walaah by writing:

As we have discovered above, the root of the word "al-walaah" does not include love, support, etc., and that the core meaning rests on guardianship. (Sieny, The Relationship Between Muslims and Non-Muslims; Toronto, Al-Attique Publishers Inc., 2000, p. 102, emphasis added)

And Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi writes:  

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: 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 judgment or punishment in this case)."(Al-?Isra' :33)
(SOURCE emphasis added)

It becomes clear that the word Awliya cannot be taken as simply referring to friendship, as it contains a much more complex meaning, including dependence and guardianship. Therefore, a more accurate translation of the verse would be:

5:51 O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your protectors: They are but protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

Therefore, the referred verse does not prohibit friendship with Non-Muslims at all. Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi writes:

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 Surah Al-Ma'dah:

"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-Ma'dah :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: 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. (SOURCE)

And as Muhammad Asad writes:

As regards the meaning of the "alliance" referred to here, see 3:28, and more particularly 4: 139 and the corresponding note, which explains the reference to a believer's loss of his moral identity if he imitates the way of life of, or-in Qur'anic terminology-"allies himself" with, non-Muslims. However, as has been made abundantly clear in 60: 7-9 (and implied in verse 57 of this Surah), this prohibition of a "moral alliance" with non-Muslims does not constitute an injunction against normal, friendly relations with such of them as are well-disposed towards Muslims. It should be borne in mind that the term wall has several shades of meaning: "ally", "friend", "helper", "protector", etc. The choice of the particular term - and sometimes a -combination of two terms-is always dependent on the context. (Asad, The Message of the Qur'an, emphasis added)

The second point to note is that although this verse makes a general statement, the ruling is specific and is to be applied in a context similar to the historical context. Shaykh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi wrote about this topic extensively in response to a similar question:

[The answer to this is that these verses are not unconditional, to be applied to every Jew, Christian, or non-Muslim. Interpreting them in this manner contradicts the injunctions of the Qur'an which enjoin affection and kindness to the good and peace-loving peoples of every religion, as well as the verses which permit marriage to the women of the People of the Book, with all that Allah says concerning marriage

and He has put love and mercy between you" (30:21)

and the verse concerning the Christians:

 And thou wilt find those who say, 'Surely we are Christians,' to be nearest to them (the Muslims in affection...(5:82)

The verses cited above [verse 5:51] were revealed in connection with those people who were hostile to Islam and made war upon the Muslims. Accordingly, it is not permissible for the Muslims to support or assist them - that is, to be their ally- nor to entrust them with secrets at the expense of his own religion and community. This point is explained in other verses, in which Allah, The Most High, says:

They will spare nothing to ruin you; they yearn for what makes you suffer. Hatred has been expressed by their mouths, but what their hearts conceal is still greater. Thus have We made clear to you the revelations (or signs), if you possess understanding. Ah! You love them, but they do not love you.(3:118-119)

This ayah throws light on the character of such people, who conceal great enmity and hatred against the Muslims in their hearts and whose tongues express some of the effects of such hostility. (Al-Qaradawi, Al-Halal Wal Haram Fil Islam; US American Trust Publications, 1994, p. 340, emphasis added)

As Shaykh Qaradawi mentioned, verse 5:11 cannot possibly be taken as a prohibition of friendship since the Qur'an allows Muslim men to marry women from the People of the Book:

5:5 . virtuous women of the believers and the virtuous women of those who received the Scripture before you are lawful for you.

 And the Qur'an describes the relationship of marriage to be a relationship with the deepest bond of love:

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

Also note that the Qur'an says:

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 "Birr" with them and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice. Allah only forbids you respecting those who made war upon you on account of [your] religion, and drove you forth from your homes and backed up [others] in your expulsion, that you make friends with them, and whoever makes friends with them, these are the unjust.

The word "birr" is the same word used to describe a Muslim's relationship with their parents which is considered the most sacred blood relationship in Islam. Therefore, Muslims are clearly commanded to deal with peaceful non-Muslims is a friendly and peaceful manner. The third point is that the specific groups being referred to in this verse were those hostile to Islam, and not all Jews and Christians in general. Concerning the historical context, the verse was revealed during a time when the Muslims were being attacked from many directions, including the Christian Roman empire and the Jews of Madinah. The Muslims had originally made a pact with the Jews of Madinah, but they were betrayed twice. So in this context, the Qur'an was telling the believers to be cautious in dealings with such enemies who oppose Islam, and not to trust them as protectors. As Jasser Auda writes:

It was revealed in certain historic circumstances, in which there was a war between the infant Islamic state on different occasions on four different fronts: the Romans, the Persians, the pagans of Arabia, and the Jews of Madinah. So, the historic context of the revelation of this verse is a situation of war between Muslims and the People of the Book (Jews, internally in Madinah, and Christians, through a Roman crusade). So, yes, Muslims were not allowed to make friends with the enemies who were fighting them and wishing to eliminate them from the face of the earth. Some Muslims say that since the verse has this historic context, then it is part of history and no longer applies. This is not correct! It is true that the verse has a history behind it, but this does not mean that it is no longer relevant. It is totally relevant but only in a context similar to the historic context. So today Muslims are not to make friends with Jews or Christians (or followers of any other religion for that matter) if they try to kill Muslims, kick them out of their homes, etc. (SOURCE)

The Qur'anic verse is relevant in a similar context to the historical context. A Muslim cannot take Jews or Christians or anyone as protectors if they oppose their religion and its teachings. The Muslims are encouraged to rely on each other for support. Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi writes:

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, (Qur'an 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) (SOURCE)[/

The groups prohibited for Muslims to take as protectors are described in the Qur'an:

The Holy Qur'an, 60:1 O ye who believe! Take not my enemies and yours as protectors,- offering them (your) love, even though they have rejected the Truth that has come to you, and have (on the contrary) driven out the Prophet and yourselves (from your homes), (simply) because ye believe in Allah your Lord! If ye have come out to strive in My Way and to seek My Good Pleasure, (take them not as friends), holding secret converse of love (and friendship) with them: for I know full well all that ye conceal and all that ye reveal. And any of you that does this has strayed from the Straight Path. 60:2 If they were to get the better of you, they would behave to you as enemies, and stretch forth their hands and their tongues against you for evil: and they desire that ye should reject the Truth.

So the Qur'an forbids taking those as protectors who expel the Muslims from their homes and who would betray and attack as soon as the opportunity arises. Those who have no respect for a Muslim's beliefs and desire that the Muslim leaves their faith - they cannot be taken as protectors. This is the correct interpretation based on the context of the verse. To conclude, we once again quote Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi:

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 : 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 Muslim's 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. (SOURCE)

Islam is a religion of peace and compassion, therefore it requires its adherents to act in the best possible manner to other human beings. Verse 5:51 does not refer to friends, but protectors, and the historical context reveals that this verse prohibits Muslims from seeking the protection and allegiance of those who are hostile to the Islamic faith. It is not a reference to all Non-Muslims, as the scholars of Islam have clarified.

 

Secondly, the Holy Qur'an makes very clear who a Muslim should make friends with:

 

O ye who believe! take not for friends and protectors those who take your religion for a mockery or sport,- whether among those who received the Scripture before you, or among those who reject Faith; but fear ye God, if ye have faith (indeed). (Sura 5 Ayat 57)

 

 

Sura 8 Ayat 65:

 

O Apostle! rouse the Believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of the Unbelievers: for these are a people without understanding.

 

 

This verse also was revealed during a battle. Normally, in a battle, the commander would boost his soldiers morale, and tell them to fight the enemy, he wouldn't sit down and do nothing! Hence, this Ayat tells the Holy Prophet (S) to rouse the believers to fight, and to be patient, as the Muslims will win the war!

 

There is absolutely no problem in the verse whatsoever. There is only a problem when one sees it through the eyes of the Islamic "expert" Ali Sina!

 

 

Sura 9 Ayat 5:

 

 

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 God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

 

Ali Sina is laying emphasis on that particular part of the Ayat, where it says to fight the Pagans, probably trying to say it means combatants and non-combatants alike. However, the Holy Qur'an refutes such a theory, saying:

 

Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (Sura 2 Ayat 190)

 

Two things to point out here are:

 

1)      Fight those who fight you

2)      Do not transgress the limits

 

Point 1 obviously means to fight the combatants. To understand point 2 more clearly, we will quote from the First Caliph Abu Bakr, and what he said to his army while bidding them farewell on their expedition to the Syrian borders:

 

"Do not commit treachery, nor depart from the right path. Do not mutilate, nor kill a child, nor aged man, or woman. Do not destroy a palm tree, nor burn it with fire and do not cut any fruitful tree. You must not slay any of the flock or herds or the camels, save for your subsistence. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic service: leave them to what they have devoted their lives. You are likely to find likewise people who will present to you meals of many kinds. You may eat: but do not forget to mention the name of Allah"

 

(Source: Al-Tabari, Tarikh al-Rasul wa al-Muluk Edited by M.J. je Geo (E.J. Brill, 1897-1901), Series I, vol. IV, p.1580 as cited by Abdul Hameed Siddiqui in Jihad in Islam, p. 39)

 

Secondly, let us quote Sura 9 Ayat 5 in context:

 

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 God 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 God; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.

How can there be a league, before God and His Apostle, with the Pagans, except those with whom ye made a treaty near the sacred Mosque? As long as these stand true to you, stand ye true to them: for God doth love the righteous.

How (can there be such a league), seeing that if they get an advantage over you, they respect not in you the ties either of kinship or of covenant? With (fair words from) their mouths they entice you, but their hearts are averse from you; and most of them are rebellious and wicked.

The Signs of God have they sold for a miserable price, and (many) have they hindered from His way: evil indeed are the deeds they have done.

In a Believer they respect not the ties either of kinship or of covenant! It is they who have transgressed all bounds.

But (even so), if they repent, establish regular prayers, and practise regular charity,- they are your brethren in Faith: (thus) do We explain the Signs in detail, for those who understand.

But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and taunt you for your Faith,- fight ye the chiefs of Unfaith: for their oaths are nothing to them: that thus they may be restrained.

Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Apostle, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is God Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe! (Sura 9 Ayats 5-13)

 

It is evident from the above Ayats that the Holy Qur'an is telling us to:

 

1)      Stand true to our oaths

2)      Fight the people who have violated their oaths, or treaties with you

 

How this is violent and inhumane is beyond us!

 

 

Sura 9 Ayat 14:

 

 

We have already discussed it above. Allah SWT tells the believers to fight the people who broke their covenants with the Muslims.

 

Unlike the non-Muslims, the Muslims are told to be true to their covenants:

 

Fulfill the Covenant of God when ye have entered into it, and break not your oaths after ye have confirmed them; indeed ye have made God your surety; for God knoweth all that ye do.

And be not like a woman who breaks into untwisted strands the yarn which she has spun, after it has become strong. Nor take your oaths to practise deception between yourselves, lest one party should be more numerous than another: for God will test you by this; and on the Day of Judgment He will certainly make clear to you (the truth of) that wherein ye disagree.

If God so willed, He could make you all one people: But He leaves straying whom He pleases, and He guides whom He pleases: but ye shall certainly be called to account for all your actions.

And take not your oaths, to practise deception between yourselves, with the result that someone's foot may slip after it was firmly planted, and ye may have to taste the evil (consequences) of having hindered (men) from the Path of God, and a Mighty Wrath descend on you. (Sura 16 Ayats 11-14)

 

 

Sura 9 Ayat 23:

 

 

O ye who believe! take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love infidelity above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong.

 

 

Only Allah SWT knows why Ali Sina thinks this verse is violent and inhumane!

 

 

Sura 9 Ayat 28:

 

 

O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will God enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for God is All-knowing, All-wise.

 

Let's allow Muhammad Asad to explain to Ali Sina what does najas in this sentence mean:

 

The term najas ("impure") occurs in the Qur'an only in this one instance, and carries an exclusively spiritual meaning (see Manar X, 322 ff.). To this day, the bedouin of Central and Eastern Arabia-who, contrary to the modern town-dwellers, have preserved the purity of the Arabic idiom to a high degree-describe a person who is immoral, faithless or wicked as najas. "The Inviolable House of Worship" (al-masjid al-haram) is, of course, the Ka`bah and, by implication, the whole of the territory of Mecca: which explains the next sentence.(Quran Ref: 9:28 )

 

The Ayat in discussion makes clear that the Pagans, as well as any non-Muslim cannot enter Makkah, as Makkah is a Holy Place for Muslims only. However, besides this, there are still scholars who hold the opinion that non-Muslims can enter Makkah:

 

Title

Can a Non-Muslim Enter the Mosque?

 

Question

Dear scholars, As-Salamu `alaykum. What is the Islamic ruling if non-Muslims enter mosques to do restoration, to deliver speeches, or to learn more about Islam? Jazakum Allah Khayran.

 

Date

06/Jun/2006

 

Name of Counsellor

`Atiyyah Saqr, Muhammad Saleh Al-Munajjid

 

Topic

Places of Prayer (Mosques)

 

 

Answer

 

 

Wa`alykum As-Salaamu Warahmatullahi Wabarakaatuh.

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

Brother, may Allah reward you abundantly for your interest in knowing the teachings of your religion, Islam! Thanks for the question you posed, it's very interesting and reflects your care about the Muslim community.

It is noteworthy that Islam encourages tolerance and peaceful co-existence between Muslims and non-Muslims. If non-Muslims enter a mosque to deliver speeches that may lead to a better understanding, then it is welcomed and religiously recommended. Islam is the religion of constructive dialogue in the fullest sense. The history of Muslims is a very good example of this.

In this regard, Sheikh `Atiyyah Saqr, former head of Al-Azhar Fatwa Committee, points out the opinions of Muslim jurists on the issue as follows:

Allah Almighty says, (O ye who believe! The idolaters only are unclean. So let them not come near Al-Masjid Al-Haram (at Makkah) after this their year. If ye fear poverty (from the loss of their merchandise) Allah shall preserve you of His bounty if He will. Lo! Allah is Knower, Wise.) (At-Tawbah 9: 28)

And He says, (O ye who believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye know that which ye utter, nor when ye are polluted, save when journeying upon the road, till ye have bathed.) (An-Nisaa' 4: 43)

Relying on these verses, the majority of Muslim Jurists, including those from the Maliki, Shafi`i and other schools of fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence), maintain that the polytheists are not allowed to enter the Sacred Mosque in Makkah. However, they state that there is nothing wrong if Christians and Jews enter it. They state that this ruling applies to the Holy Mosque in Makkah as well as its precincts. Abu Hanifah, however, views that even a polytheist can enter the Holy Mosque in Makkah as long as he will not stay or reside there. He interpreted impurity to mean spiritual impurity (shirk).

As for other mosques than the Holy Mosque in Makkah, the Madinan jurists forbade non-Muslims from entering them because non-Muslims are regarded by the Qur'an as impure. Imam Ahmad is reported to have said that they can only enter these mosques with the permission of Muslims. This is supported by the report that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) permitted the people of At-Ta'if to stay in the mosque prior to their embracing Islam. He also received the Christians of Najran in his mosque in Madinah. When the time of their prayer was due, they prayed in the mosque towards the eastern direction. Thereupon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said (to his Companions), "Leave them (to perform prayer)."

Under the title ?A Polytheist Entering the Mosque', Al-Bukhari, in his Sahih mentioned that Thamamah ibn Athal (despite that he was a polytheist) was tied up in the mosque.

In Fath al-Bari, Ibn Hajar mentioned that there are different opinions concerning this issue. The Hanafi jurists gave unconditional permission while the Maliki scholars and al-Mazni are reported to have forbidden it absolutely. The Shafi`i scholars differentiated between the Holy Mosque and other mosques. There is an opinion that the permission is restricted to the People of the Book but this is refuted by the case of Thamamah mentioned above.

Sheikh M. S. Al-Munajjid, a prominent Saudi Islamic lecturer and author, states:

It is forbidden for Muslims to allow any non-Muslim to enter Al-Masjid Al-Haram in Makkah and its sacred precincts, because Allah says: (O ye who believe! The idolaters only are unclean. So let them not come near Al-Masjid Al-Haram (at Makkah) after this their year. If ye fear poverty (from the loss of their merchandise) Allah shall preserve you of His bounty if He will. Lo! Allah is Knower, Wise.) (At-Tawbah 9: 28)
Concerning other mosques, some Muslim jurists maintain that it is permissible for non-Muslims to enter them because there is nothing to indicate the unlawfulness of such act; others say that it is not permissible, by analogy to the case of Al-Masjid Al-Haram.

The correct view is that it is permissible if it serves the interests of Shari`ah or meets a valid need, such as if a non-Muslim needs to enter a mosque to hear something that may encourage him to embrace Islam, or because he needs to drink water, or the like. This is pursuant to the way of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) on this issue; he tied up (his prisoner) Thamaamah ibn Athal Al-Hanafi in the mosque before he became a Muslim, and the delegations of Thaqif and the Christians of Najran stayed in the mosque before they embraced Islam. Actually, many benefits were accrued from this: they were able to hear the speeches and sermons of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to see people praying and reciting the Qur'an, etc. (Fatawa Al-Lajnah Al-Da'imah - The Standing Committee for Islamic Research and Ifta')

Therefore, if non-Muslims seek permission to enter the mosque in order to see how Muslims perform prayer, there is nothing wrong in that, as long as they have nothing with them that could defile the mosque, and their women are not dressed in a provocative fashion, or any other reason that bars them from entering the mosque. So they can enter and sit behind the Muslims to see how they pray.

Based on the above Fatwas, we can say that non-Muslims, including Christians and Jews, are allowed to enter mosques, but they should abide by the following conditions:

1- Non-Muslims are allowed to enter mosques - other than the Sacred Mosque in Makkah - with a prior permission of Muslims.

2- They must have a sound reason for entering the mosque.

3- They should respect the decorum of the mosque and keep in mind that it is a sacred place of worship.

4- Both men and women are not allowed to uncover their `Awarah (parts of the body which should not be exposed in front of others) when entering the mosque.

With regard to the issue of restoration, we can say that Muslims should have the priority in carrying out such work, unless it is necessary to seek the help of non-Muslims. There must be a need to seek their help, especially in issues related to mosques.

 

(Online Source)

 

 

Sura 9 Ayat 123:

 

O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

 

Again, "unbelievers" in context would mean those who fight against the Muslims. To make things more clear, Mahmud Shaltut writes in his treatise "Qur'an and Fighting":

 

"Some people who were bent on disparaging Islam did not go beyond the ostensible interpretation of ". fight the unbelievers that are near to you." and pretended that the Islamic religion ordered to fight the unbelievers in general, regardless of whether they had commited aggression or not, until they had been converted to Islam. They said that this rule was founded on this verse. However, the meaning of the word "unbelievers" in this and similar verses is: "those hostile polytheists who fight the Muslims, commit aggression against them, expel them from their homes and their property and practice persecution for the sake of religion." The morals of these polytheists have been discussed in the opening verses of Surat al-Tawba. The word "people" in the tradition: "I have been ordered to fight the people" should be understood in the same manner. "

 

(Source: Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam by Rudolph Peters, p. 78 Markus Wiener Publishers Princeton)

 

It is important to note however, that war can also cease if the enemy inclines towards peace:

 

But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (Sura 8 Ayat 61)

 

 

Sura 47 Ayat 4:

 

Ali Sina purposely cuts of the rest of the Ayat, while only deceitfully quotes this part of the Ayat "..Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks", only he replaced the word "unbelievers" with "Muslims". Yet, when you quote the full Ayat, you will find it to be quite the contrary as to how Ali Sina depicts it:

 

Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been God's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of God,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

 

 

Thus, this verse says two important things related to this discussion:

 

1)      When you fight the Unbelievers, destroy them ("smite at their necks" can be figurative for destroying their enemies, as when someone chops off the head of another person, the headless person cannot retaliate, as he has been destroyed. Thus, the Holy Qur'an is saying to destroy your enemy. However, even if we take it literally, there is still no problem, as a soldier cannot enter into a battle wearing a kids glove, on the contrary one must kill the enemy combatants to win the war).

2)      After the enemy is in control, and the war is over, you have two choices

A-    Release your prisoners without ransoming them

B-    Ransom your prisoners in exchange for Muslim prisoners

 

Again, this verse is by no means inhumane; none of these verses are inhumane. They only look bad when you look at them through Ali Sina's eyes!

 

 

He Wrote:

 

You fail to recognize that the true Islam was not spread by the sword, Prophet Muhammad never did not even allow the firing of the first shot in a battle situations and even damaging green and wildlife needlessly are considered to be sins!

Really? Are you actually so uniformed of the history of Islam and its expansion or you think I am? Do you know the wars of Muhammad were called Qazwah and do you know that Qazwah means sudden attack or ambush? All the wars of Islam were aggressive. If you really don't know the history of Islam, please get some education before debating with me. If you know, please stop this game of deception. Take a look as these hadiths.  

Narrated Anas:
The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, "Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned." Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives, She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet. The Prophet made her manumission as her 'Mahr'. (Sahih Bukhari V.5 B.59 N.512)

"Narrated Ibn Aun:
I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn 'Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn 'Umar was in that army." Volume 3, Book 46, Number 717  

It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be burnt and cut. These palms were at Buwaira. Qutaibah and Ibn Rumh in their versions of the tradition have added: So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed the verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks, it was with the permission of Allah so that He may disgrace the evil-doers" (lix. 5).Muslim 019, 4324:

"It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) caused the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be cut down and burnt. It is in this connection that Hassan (the poet) said: It was easy for the nobles of Quraish to barn Buwaira whose sparks were flying in all directions. in the same connection was revealed the Qur'anic verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks." 59:5   Muslim 019, 4325

 

Response:

 

For one thing, the wars the Holy Prophet (S) fought in were called Ghazwat,

 

Now, coming to the battles cited by Ali Sina, we will now discuss why the Holy Prophet (S) fought these battles:

 

 

The Battle of Khaibar:

 

Ali Sina posts the hadith of the Holy Prophet (S) attacking Khaibar, to try and make look Khaibar innocent, however he forgets this part of the hadith "...Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned." Therefore, one can already conclude from the Prophet (S) words that indeed Khaibar was a HOSTILE nation to the Muslims.

 

Secondly, Islamic biographers have said this about Khaibar:

 

 

"The Jews of Khaibar were hatching plots against Islam in collusion with the Ghatafan and also keeping themselves well-informed of the affaris at Medina through the hypocrites, who had always encouraged them to hope that the Muslims could never get better of them.

 

 The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had a wish to come to an agreement with these people, and with this end in view, he had sent ?Abdullah Ibn Rawaha. But the Jews were an unrelenting and a suspicious lot; more-over the hypocrites were always goading them. In the meantime, the arch-hypocrite ?Abdullah Ibn ?Ubayy Ibn Salul, sent them word that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was planning an attack; but that they had nothing to fear, because the Muslims were a handful of men without arms, and did not count much. Having received this message the Jews sent Kinana and Hawdha Ibn Qais to the Ghatafan asking them to join them in the attack on Medina and promising to them half the yield of the oasis. The Ghatafan according to a report, accepted these terms.

 

The Banu Fazara, an offshoot of the Ghatafan were very powerful. Hearing that the Jews of Khaibar were preparing for an attack against the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), they came to Khaibar and offered to fight the Muslims along with them. On receipt of this news, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) wrote to the Banu Fazara to desist from helping the Jews of Khaibar and promised to give them their share after the conquest of Khaibar. But the Banu Fazara refused."

 

(Source: Sirat Un Nabi by Allama Shibli Nu'Mani rendered into English by M. Tayyib Bakhsh Budayuni, Vol. II, p. 159, Kazi Publications Lahore Pakistan)

 

 

Bani Mustaliq:

 

 

Allama Shibli Nu'Mani says:

 

"The Bani Mustaliq, a branch of the Khuza'a, inhabited the place known as Murisi, which was nine marches away from Medina. Harith Ibn Dirar, the chief of the tribe, acting on his own initiative or at the instigation of the Quraish, made preparations for an attack on Medina. On receipt of information the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) sent Zaid Ibn Khusaib for further enquiry. Zaid, on his return confirmed the report, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) order his Companions to get prepared for a battle."

 

(Source: Ibid, p.100-101)

 

 

Banu Nadir:

 

"Amr Ibn Umayya had killed two men belonging to the tribe of Amir, and their blood money had not so far been paid off. A part of it, by virtue of a treaty was to be paid by the Jews of the Bani Nadir. To demand this, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) himself went to the Bani Nadir. They agreed to pay but secretly directed a man to reach the second storey and to throw from above a stone, on the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). A Jew, Amr Ibn Hajash by name, reached the upper story with this intention. The Prophet was at that time standing at the foot of the wall below the upper storey. He sensed the evil intention and returned to Medina.

 

 As already mentioned, the Quraish had sent to the Jews of the Banu Nadir to kill Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) or they would themselves be exterminated. The Banu Nadir being already hostile, this message from the Quraish served as an impetus. They invited the Prophet to come with thirty men to meet their religious scholars, promising that if on hearing him, the divines would declare him to be true, they would not hesitate to accept him as a prophet. As they had already planned a revolt, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) asked them to sign a bond before he could trust them. To this they did not agree. Now the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) visited the tribe of the Bani Quraiza and asked them to renew the treaty which they readily did. But this example set by their co-religionists could not induce the Banu Nadir to come to terms. Again they asked the Prophet to come to them with three men, and they would also call three divines; and if these declared their faith in his Prophethood they would follow suit. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) agreed. But in the way he learnt from a reliable source that the Jews were waiting for him, girded with swords, to kill him as he arrived.

 

There were various causes for the rebellious attitude of the Bani Nadir. They were well-entrenched in strong forts which defied capture. Moreover, Abdullah Ibn Ubbay had encouraged them with a message telling them not to surrender for the Bani Quraiza would join them and he would be coming with 2,000 men for their help. The Qur'an says:

 

"Behold thou not those who dissemble saying unto their brethren who disbelieve among the people of the Book; If ye are driven forth we shall surely go forth with you, and we shall not ever obey anyone in your respect, and if ye are attacked, we shall surely succour you. And Allah beareth witness that surely they are liars.' (59:11)

 

But the expectations of the Banu Nadir came to naught. The Banu Quraiza did not help them and the hypocrites could not come to their aid against the Muslims."

 

(Source: Ibid, p. 95-96)

 

Mahmud Shaltut writes in his treatise on the "Qur'an and Fighting":

 

"The Jews break their pledge. The Jews had not been able to purify their hearts from the filth of rancour and envy. God's continuous favours to His Prophet and his faithful companions kindled the fire of antagonism in their hearts, which induced them to break the pledges they had concluded with the Messenger. This was done by Banu Qaynuqa, Banu al-Nadir and Banu Qurayza. They all insulted the Messenger and defied the believers at a time when he had to keep the number of his adversaries as small as possible and to restrict the domain of fighting."

 

(Source: Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam by Rudolph Peters, p. 96-97)

 

Although Khaibar is not listed among the Jewish Tribes, common sense only shows that Khaibar did indeed betray the Muslims by planning to attack Medina.

 

 

 

He Wrote:

 

I did glance at Islam and the Quran, not quickly but very meticulously and I reject it as a cult of terror and barbarity. I believe it is you who need to take a look at it. I am sure, that like most Muslims you have never read the Quran in its entirety and have not read any book on the history of Muhammad and the expansion of Islam. Your knowledge is second hand and superficial. Just like all other Muslims, you started writing your rebuttal before reading the debates that I had with other Muslims and just like the majority of them you don't know the Quran, the hadith or the history of Islam.  I respond as I read and the reason I decided to respond to you is because you are a polite person. Had I read your entire message and realizing you have no knowledge of Islam and have not even read much from this site, I would not have responded.

If you don't want to read this site, that is okay. But shouldn't you read at least your own holy book before challenging me to debate? This debate is not even fair. Please increase your knowledge of Islam so we can have some meaningful debate.  

Regards  

Ali Sina

 

Response:

 

 

We need not say anything more. A person like Ali Sina asks a Muslim to study Islamic history, yet he himself is very ignorant of the Life of the Holy Prophet (S)!

 

 

In the service of the One True God Allah SWT, and in Memory of our Beloved Messenger, Prophet Muhammad (S)!

 

May Allah SWT continue to send prayers and peace, forever and always, upon the one he has loved the best from among all of the creation!

 

 

And truly Allah SWT Knows Best!

 

 (Part 2 to follow up Insha'Allah)

 

www.muslim-responses.com