Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

His life, his examples and his psychology
User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

kerenabiz wrote:
skynightblaze wrote: I already showed you that we have authentic ahadith which show muhammad supported those who criticized him so trusting what Ali sina brought from the early historians shouldnt be a problem.
You don't bring the authentic sources to support Ali Sina's charge against prophet Muhammad (PBUH) regarding the killing of Abu Afak and Asma' bint Marwan, thus how can they are used to answer and appease my protest toward Ali Sina's charge?

Let's supposed Andrew is a murder, he has murdered A and B, then some people accuse he also killed C and D. But the proofs of the charge of C and D killing are not reliable and flaw. Does Andrew has to be punished for C and D death albeit there is no valid and solid proof to imprison him? This the way your logic works Skynightblaze, Andrew must be jailed because he's proven a murder of A and B!
skynightblaze wrote: More ever lets for a second assume Ali Sina;s sources are faulty now would you care to answer why quran should be believed when isnad of quran are also hearsay?
Is this your debate style? resorting to red-herring mister?
He's saying that if you want to play this game, then the same can be said about the Quran as well. Why is the Quran reliable when it's merely the claim of one man and nobody else heard Gabriel?? What's to say that Muhammad didn't make it all up just like you claim that some of the hadiths are made up?? At least their is a certain amount of truth and corroboration in the hadiths, but there's no corroboration in the Quran, only one man's claims. Let's face it, when the hadith says what you would like it to say, that hadith is reliable, but when it says something you don't want it to say, then that hadith is unreliable. This is a silly game where you lie to yourself and create your own reality for yourself that is suitable to your sensibilities. It's so obvious. Do you understand the meaning of the word "objective"?? Do they teach that in the school system you went to?
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by The Cat »

Skenderbeg wrote: 1) Just like the Quran was collected by Mohammed's followers after his death so were hadiths
2) FROM THE QURAN - 4:24
3) Most hadiths are in line with the Quran
1) Koran was memorized first hand, almost on the spot. Hadiths were collected in earnest two centuries after.
Ever heard of the Chinese Whispers' demonstration?

2) Slavery isn't anymore. Right hand possessions were superseded by common sense, thus updating the Koran.

3) Wrong. Many hadiths contradict their holy book, let alone contradicting themselves.
See for example: http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/ ... _quran.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by skynightblaze »

kerenabiz wrote: You don't bring the authentic sources to support Ali Sina's charge against prophet Muhammad (PBUH) regarding the killing of Abu Afak and Asma' bint Marwan, thus how can they are used to answer and appease my protest toward Ali Sina's charge?
Well now let me ask you the same question. You classify those stories of Ishaq and Tabari as unreliable because they lack soundness of isnad and hence my question to you why do we need isnads to be sound especially when you can take quran as authentic without the soundness of isnad ? IF quran can be reliable without the isnads why cant stories of Ishaq and Tabari be reliable?

This question is very much relevant.
kerenabiz wrote: Let's supposed Andrew is a murder, he has murdered A and B, then some people accuse he also killed C and D. But the proofs of the charge of C and D killing are not reliable and flaw. Does Andrew has to be punished for C and D death albeit there is no valid and solid proof to imprison him? This the way your logic works Skynightblaze, Andrew must be jailed because he's proven a murder of A and B!
I am not saying Andrews should be punished for murder of C and D. What I am saying is when we know Andrews has murdered A and B and coincidentally we also hear stories about he murdering C and D then there is a good chance for him doing so and hence we cant declare the stories completely as "unreliable". Thats the only thing I want to say. You somehow want to sweep the stories under carpet and I know why.

Now you came here to show us that Muhammad was an innocent man and he never murdered people for criticizing him and I know why you refraining from bringing the ahadith i quoted into discussion.Why don't you comment on the ahadith I quoted?. Even they prove the same thing i.e. muhammad supported murder of those who criticized him. Do you have an answer for them?

now do you accept that Muhammad murdered people who criticized him after looking at the ahadith?
skynightblaze wrote: More ever lets for a second assume Ali Sina;s sources are faulty now would you care to answer why quran should be believed when isnad of quran are also hearsay?
Is this your debate style? resorting to red-herring mister?[/quote]

Fine. I have explained the significance of why discussion of quran is relevant here and not irrelevant.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by skynightblaze »

The Cat wrote:
Skenderbeg wrote: 1) Just like the Quran was collected by Mohammed's followers after his death so were hadiths
2) FROM THE QURAN - 4:24
3) Most hadiths are in line with the Quran
1) Koran was memorized first hand, almost on the spot. Hadiths were collected in earnest two centuries after.
Ever heard of the Chinese Whispers' demonstration?
Same can be said about quran too. 15-20 years time is also sufficient for people to forget. 15-20 years are also sufficient for some pieces of quran to be lost in history. Its not possible that stones or leaves on which quran was written stayed intact after 15-20 years.
The Cat wrote: 2) Slavery isn't anymore. Right hand possessions were superseded by common sense, thus updating the Koran.
Quran sanctions slavery and quran cannot update itself because it claims itself to be a word till the judgment day.
The Cat wrote: 3) Wrong. Many hadiths contradict their holy book, let alone contradicting themselves.
See for example: http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/ ... _quran.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Those which contradict the quran can be discarded but how does that mean all the ahadith are false? Also you assume here that quran is more reliable than ahadith. Quran is 1 man show and ahadith atleast have multiple people to confirm. There are plenty of ahadith which are confirmed by multiple narrators and hence ahadith have a more chance to be accurate rather than quran.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

Here are some authentic hadiths because, unlike the Quran, they are corroborated across multiple sources which makes it more likely that they are true.
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?" The Prophet said, "Yes," Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, "You may say it." Then Muhammad bin Maslama went to Kab and said, "That man (i.e. Muhammad demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you." On that, Kab said, "By Allah, you will get tired of him!" Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Now as we have followed him, we do not want to leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be. Now we want you to lend us a camel load or two of food." (Some difference between narrators about a camel load or two.) Kab said, "Yes, (I will lend you), but you should mortgage something to me." Muhammad bin Mas-lama and his companion said, "What do you want?" Ka'b replied, "Mortgage your women to me." They said, "How can we mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the 'Arabs?" Ka'b said, "Then mortgage your sons to me." They said, "How can we mortgage our sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people's saying that so-and-so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you." Muhammad bin Maslama and his companion promised Kab that Muhammad would return to him. He came to Kab at night along with Kab's foster brother, Abu Na'ila. Kab invited them to come into his fort, and then he went down to them. His wife asked him, "Where are you going at this time?" Kab replied, "None but Muhammad bin Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Na'ila have come." His wife said, "I hear a voice as if dropping blood is from him, Ka'b said. "They are none but my brother Muhammad bin Maslama and my foster brother Abu Naila. A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed." Muhammad bin Maslama went with two men. (Some narrators mention the men as 'Abu bin Jabr. Al Harith bin Aus and Abbad bin Bishr). So Muhammad bin Maslama went in together with two men, and sail to them, "When Ka'b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when you see that I have got hold of his head, strip him. I will let you smell his head." Kab bin Al-Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing perfume. Muhammad bin Maslama said. " have never smelt a better scent than this. Ka'b replied. "I have got the best 'Arab women who know how to use the high class of perfume." Muhammad bin Maslama requested Ka'b "Will you allow me to smell your head?" Ka'b said, "Yes." Muhammad smelt it and made his companions smell it as well. Then he requested Ka'b again, "Will you let me (smell your head)?" Ka'b said, "Yes." When Muhammad got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions), "Get at him!" So they killed him and went to the Prophet and informed him. (Abu Rafi) was killed after Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf."
Sahih Bukhari 5:59:369
t has been narrated on the authority of Jabir that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Who will kill Ka'b b. Ashraf? He has maligned Allah, the Exalted, and His Messenger. Muhammad b. Maslama said: Messenger of Allah, do you wish that I should kill him? He said: Yes. He said: Permit me to talk (to him in the way I deem fit). He said: Talk (as you like). So, Muhammad b. Maslama came to Ka'b and talked to him, referred to the old friendship between them and said: This man (i. e. the Holy Prophet) has made up his mind to collect charity (from us) and this has put us to a great hardship. When be heard this, Ka'b said: By God, you will be put to more trouble by him. Muhammad b. Maslama said: No doubt, now we have become his followers and we do not like to forsake him until we see what turn his affairs will take. I want that you should give me a loan. He said: What will you mortgage? He said: What do you want? He said: Pledge me your women. He said: You are the most handsome of the Arabs; should we pledge our women to you? He said: Pledge me your children. He said: The son of one of us may abuse us saying that he was pledged for two wasqs of dates, but we can pledge you (cur) weapons. He said: All right. Then Muhammad b. Maslama promised that he would come to him with Harith, Abu 'Abs b. Jabr and Abbad b. Bishr. So they came and called upon him at night. He came down to them. Sufyan says that all the narrators except 'Amr have stated that his wife said: I hear a voice which sounds like the voice of murder. He said: It is only Muhammad b. Maslama and his foster-brother, Abu Na'ila. When a gentleman is called at night even it to be pierced with a spear, he should respond to the call. Muhammad said to his companions: As he comes down, I will extend my hands towards his head and when I hold him fast, you should do your job. So when he came down and he was holding his cloak under his arm, they said to him: We sense from you a very fine smell. He said: Yes, I have with me a mistress who is the most scented of the women of Arabia. He said: Allow me to smell (the scent on your head). He said: Yes, you may smell. So he caught it and smelt. Then he said: Allow me to do so (once again). He then held his head fast and said to his companions: Do your job. And they killed him.
Sahih Muslim 19:4436
Ka’b’s body was left prostrate [humbled in submission]. After his fall, all of the Nadir Jews were brought low. Sword in hand we cut him down. By Muhammad’s order we were sent secretly by night. Brother killing brother. We lured him to his death with guile [cunning or deviousness]. Traveling by night, bold as lions, we went into his home. We made him taste death with our deadly swords. We sought victory for the religion of the Prophet.
Ishaq 368
We carried Ka’b’s head and brought it to Muhammad during the night. We saluted him as he stood praying and told him that we had slain Allah’s enemy. When he came out to us we cast Ashraf’s head before his feet. The Prophet praised Allah that the poet had been assassinated and complimented us on the good work we had done in Allah’s Cause. Our attack upon Allah’s enemy cast terror among the Jews, and there was no Jew in Medina who did not fear for his life.
Tabari VII 97, See Also Ishaq 368
[Ka`b bin al-Ashraf said] "Is this true? Did Muhammad actually kill these whom these two men mention? These are the nobles of the Arabs and kingly men; by God, if Muhammad has slain these people it were better to be dead than alive."

When the enemy of God became certain that the news was true he left the town and went to Mecca to stay with al-Muttalib who was married to `Atika. She took him in and entertained him hospitably. He began to inveigh against the apostle and to recite verses in which he bewailed the Quraysh who were thrown into the pit after having been slain at Badr.

Then he composed amatory verses of an insulting nature about the Muslim women. The apostle said - according to what Abdullah Burda told me, "Who will rid me of Ibnu'l-Ashraf?" Maslama said, "I will deal with him for you, O apostle of God, I will kill him." He said, "Do so if you can." So Maslama returned and waited for three days without food or drink, apart from what was absolutely necessary. When the apostle was told of this he summoned him and asked him why he had given up eating and drinking. He replied that he had given him an undertaking and he did not know whether he could fulfil it. The apostle said, "All that is incumbent upon you is that you should try." He said, "O apostle of God, we shall have to tell lies." He answered, "Say what you like, for you are free in the matter."
Thereupon he and Silkan [Abu Na'ila], and Abbad, and Harith, and Abu `Abs b. Jabr conspired together and sent Silkan to the enemy of God, Ka`b, before they came to him. He talked to him some time and they recited poetry one to the other, for Silkan was fond of poetry. Then he said, "O Ibn Ashraf, I have come to you about a matter which I want to tell you of and wish you to keep secret." "Very well", he replied. He went on, "The coming of this man is a great trial to us. It has provoked the hostility of the Arabs, and they are all in league against us. The roads have become impassable so that our families are in want and privation, and we and our families are in great distress." Ka`b answered, "By God, I kept telling you, O Ibn Salama, that the things I warned you of would happen." Silkan said to him, "I want you to sell us food and we will give you a pledge of security and you deal generously in the matter." He replied, "Will you give me your sons as a pledge?" He said, "You want to insult us. I have friends who share my opinion and I want to bring them to you so that you many sell to them and act generously, and we will give you enough weapons for a good pledge." Silkan's object was that he should not take alarm at the sight of weapons when they brought them. Ka`b answered, "Weapons are a good pledge."
Thereupon Silkan returned to his companions, told them what has happened, and ordered them to take their arms. Then they went away and assembled with him and met the apostle.
Thaur b. Zayd told me the apostle walked with them as far as Gharqad. Then he sent them off, saying, "Go in God's name; O God help them." So saying, he returned to his house. Now it was a moonlight night and they journeyed on until they came to his castle, and Abu Na'ila called out to him. He had only recently married and he jumped up in the bedsheet, and his wife took hold of the end of it and said, "You are at war, and those who are at war do not go out at this hour." He replied, "It is Abu Na'ila. Had he found me sleeping he would not have woken me." She answered, "By God, I can feel evil in his voice." Ka`b answered, "Even if the call were for a stab a brave man must answer it."
So he went down and talked to them for some time, while they conversed with him. then Abu Na'ila said, "Would you like to walk with us to Shi`b al-`Ajuz, so that we can talk for the rest of the night?" "If you like", he answered, so they went off walking together; and after a time Abu Na'ila ran his hand through his hair. Then he smelt his hand, and said, "I have never smelt a scent finer than this." They walked on farther and he did the same so that Ka`b suspected no evil. Then after a space did it for the third time and cried, "Smite the enemy of God!" So they smote him, and their swords clashed over him with no effect. Maslama said, "I remembered my dagger when I saw that our swords were useless, and I seized it. Meanwhile the enemy of God had made such a noise that every fort around us was showing a light. I thrust it into the lower part of his body, then I bore down upon it until I reached his genitals, and the enemy of God fell to the ground. Harith had been hurt, being wounded either in his head or in his foot, one of our swords having stuck him. We went away, passing by the Umayya and then the Qurayza and then both until we went up the Harra of Urayd. Our friend Harith had lagged behind, weakened by loss of blood, so we waited for him for some time until he came up, following our tracks. We carried him and brought him to the apostle OT the end of the night. We saluted him as he stood praying, and he came out to us and we told him that we had killed God's enemy. He spat upon our comrade's wounds, and both he ad we returned to our families. Our attack upon God's enemy cast terror among the Jews, and there was no Jew in Medina who did not fear for his life."
Sirat Rasulallah, page 365
Much much more assasinations of others can be found here where I got these from
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Had ... bin_Ashraf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

skynightblaze wrote: Those which contradict the quran can be discarded
Not necessarily because the Quran even contradicts itself and even admits it.

Shakir 2:106
Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?

And BTW, how does God do better the next time?? :lol: Communications clearly means communications from Allah. He couldn't get it perfect the first time?? Look at how obviously hokey this is and everyone simply ignores it. Amazing.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

The Cat wrote: 2) Slavery isn't anymore. Right hand possessions were superseded by common sense, thus updating the Koran.
How can common sense replace the letter for letter dictation of God which was specifically designed to make all things clear and be a final instruction for all mankind and all times?? I can't believe you could possibly say something like that. You're obviously reasonably intelligent so how can you invent this BS for yourself?
Last edited by Muhammad bin Lyin on Sat Jul 09, 2011 6:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

skynightblaze wrote: Also you assume here that quran is more reliable than ahadith. Quran is 1 man show and ahadith atleast have multiple people to confirm. There are plenty of ahadith which are confirmed by multiple narrators and hence ahadith have a more chance to be accurate rather than quran.
You're not going to get an answer to that and they will hide behind the claim of it being a red herring or whatever overly used coined phrase they can pull out of their pocket. Their entire argument degrades into nothing but silliness and wishful thinking designed to appease their sensibilities. Yes, people are quite capable of lying to themselves if they need to.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by The Cat »

skynightblaze wrote:1) Did those skills suddenly disappear when narration of ahadith started?? Same should apply to ahadith too.

2) The quote says that Ibn Umar and Thabit memorized portions of quran and not the complete quran and hence how would umar and Thabit guarantee accurate transmission of quotes collected from memories of other companions?They can vouch for the verses which they remembered but what about those which were not remembered?

3) Its also true that not every single verse of the quran was verified by 2 testimonies . The ahadith i quoted says that 9:128-129 was found with a particular companion named Khuzaima and thabit directly added 9:128-129 directly to the quran without further confirming with anyone. Now where are the 2 testimonies here for 9:128-129? Thabit obviously didn't know the verse otherwise he wouldn't ask any companion. The verse 9:128-129 made its way in the quran because of Khuzaima's testimony. Lo ! quran cannot be trusted
1) See the Chinese Whispers demonstration.

2-3) Thanks for admitting that 99.9% were corroborated ENOUGH. 9.128-129 may be questionable, that's all.
skynightblaze wrote:Btw are you sure that Mutawatir texts are reliable and can be trusted? I am asking you because we find mention of Mecca in the mutawatir ahadith.
I have no real problem with the wording 'Mecca'. Then again, it surely wasn't where it is now. That's my point of contention. Get it now?
viewtopic.php?p=150476#p150476" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
skynightblaze wrote:Anyway even If we assume that 95% bukhari ahadith are ahaad type, we still have some ahadith which are repeated by multiple narrators in Bukhari.... If your criteria to judge something on 2 witnesses is correct then Muhammad was a criminal and ahadith with multiple testimonies that show muhammad as a criminal can safely be taken as true. I guess my job is done!
The criteria of 2 witnesses (2.282; 5.106; 65.2) is still required in all Islamic court's decisions. It's a basic.
Bukhari, Muslim and the other so-called 'sahih' collectors, in not doing accordingly, are Koranically illegal !!!

As I've said to you, many times, the mutawatir criteria is only valid at the first step of scrutiny.
The fact that 3 different versions of the Last Sermon exist suffice to be skeptical for them too.
viewtopic.php?p=150791#p150791" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
viewtopic.php?p=150810#p150810" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
viewtopic.php?p=150474#p150474" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
viewtopic.php?p=148804#p148804" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
skynightblaze wrote:some of the events of Tabari and Ishaq match with Bukhari for e.g the murder of Kab Ashraf.
And Bukhari isn't reliable either. You've got to know the historical development of the hadiths.
How come that the long researched Muwatta of Ibn Malik ignores the so-called 'sahih' hadiths?
http://www.submission.org/had-corruption.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.free-minds.org/bukhari" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.forpeoplewhothink.org/Topics ... ature.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.rim.org/muslim/hadith.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Sc ... uation.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
etc, etc
skynightblaze wrote:Bukhari 6.509 doesnt say what you are trying to tell us. Where does it say anything about following your conscience?
Btw If you look at the ahadith then you will see plenty of occasions where word of muhammad was the authority.
1) What did Abu Bakr, Umar and Ibn Thabit, defying the example of Muhammad, followed if not their conscience?

2) For the XXXth time, hadiths themselves can't have any religious (fiqh, sharia) authority.
skynightblaze wrote:It might have been normal for muslims because early muslims were criminals. It wasn't normal for non muslims otherwise pagans would have killed muhammad the day he started bothering them.Muhammad could live in Mecca for years together peacefully. You have to show me that even amongst non muslims such acts were the norm of the day or else you are refuted. I also said that Ahadith require us to take muhammad as an example even today and hence its perfectly fine if I judge muhammad by standards of today.
You are trying to avoid the logical fallacy of Presentism with yet another fallacy: Moving the goalposts, or Raising the bar.

Since raiding and looting was a custom -for all nomads in general-, it was the norm. As shown in the collecting of the Koran, Muhammad
wasn't The example to follow (we wouldn't have the Koran likewise). Referring to 33.21, he was only exemplary in ''looking unto Allah''...

93.7: Did He not find thee wandering and direct (thee) ?
The Arabic 'Dallan' translated here by 'wandering' is much stronger than that. It means 'pervert', 'filthy' or 'abject'!

For the XXXxth time: The hadiths being of sacrilegious sacredness, not exemplary by all accounts, aren't themselves to be followed.
Of course, we must discern between law-binding hadiths... from those of purely historical value, to be judged on their own merits.
skynightblaze wrote:Charlatans lie and contradict themselves. Muhammad was certainly not of any exemplary character even though he claimed himself to be. Its even obvious from the quran.All the books that talk about muhammads life indicate that he was a third grade criminal which includes even the quran upto some extent.
And the Koran agrees with you, he's far from being an example as a person.

A plain warner (innama negates everything else) and NOT a warder:
15.89; 17.93; 17.105; 18.110; 22.49; 27.92; 29.50; 67.8-9, 67.26.

He's nothing new:
5.99; 7.188; 16.35; 29.18; 41.43; 42.7; 46.9; 72.21.

No intercession from him:
2.48; 2.123; 2.152; 3.144; 4.48; 4.79; 4.113; 6.51; 10.35-36; 14.22; 39.44-45; 42.21; 46.9.

Muhammad erred and sinned: 33.37; 9.43; 93.7; 42.52.
Such a person is no religious authority by himself.
skynightblaze wrote:I said quran indirectly makes a mention of Shahada.
You didn't check the link, did you?:
http://www.submission.org/true-shahada.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Or this other one:
http://www.quran-islam.org/main_topics/ ... 91%29.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's basically a perversion, first relying on the Jewish Shema, since ALL the prophets are to be followed alike.
To single out Muhammad is just as perverse as putting any other prophet above the others.

Then, on the contrary, the Shahada DIRECTLY contravenes many specific Koranic injunctions:

3.84: We make no distinction between any of them...
18.110: Say: I am only a mortal like you. My Lord inspireth in me that your God is only One God. And whoever hopeth
for the meeting with his Lord, let him do righteous work, and make none sharer of the worship due unto his Lord.
skynightblaze wrote:Quran clearly alludes to sayings of muhammad in 2:151 because its specifically says that Muhammad is supposed to teach new things and not just the scripture.
Clearly, as per 4.105 and 5.44-49, Muhammad was called to judge among the People of the Book,
about their concerns, from their own scripture. Not even by the Koran, which was the 'new thing'.
skynightblaze wrote:AS a matter of fact muslims have been commanded to follow Muhammad.
Where? All we read is obey this messenger, just like Muslims are to obey each and every other one.

If a king send a sealed message to one of his vassal through a messenger, this person hasn't much importance by himself.
The vassal certainly isn't going to 'follow' this messenger or he'd be seditious to the king! The vassal will follow the message.


NB. I have found out that the Koran destroys about 90% of all the dreaded sharia, and all of nowadays Muhammadanism.
Thus my point is to use it as much as I can, walking a mile in Muslim's shoes. When I entered the Blue Mosque in Istanbul,
I took off my shoes in respect for their traditions. I'm still kind of doing it: I'm not going to shout in their own temple.

End of my participation herein.
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

Cat, how does common sense "update" the last and perfect letter for letter dictation of Allah that was designed to make things clear for all mankind, for all times? And we both know you're not going to answer that, but I thought I would ask, for a second time, anyway. You are so full of it and when someone catches you, you merely pretend they never asked you anything. How do you lie to yourself like this?? Why is it so important to you to have to do so?
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

The Cat wrote: It's basically a perversion, first relying on the Jewish Shema, since ALL the prophets are to be followed alike.
To single out Muhammad is just as perverse as putting any other prophet above the others.
How come you disagree so much with a very well respected and renowned scholar of Islam who spent his life studying it??

http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=9&tid=20980" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth among the People of the Scripture, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.) Therefore, when People of the Scriptures disbelieved in Muhammad , they had no beneficial faith in any Messenger or what the Messengers brought. Rather, they followed their religions because this conformed with their ideas, lusts and the ways of their forefathers, not because they are Allah's Law and religion. Had they been true believers in their religions, that faith would have directed them to believe in Muhammad , because all Prophets gave the good news of Muhammad's advent and commanded them to obey and follow him. Yet when he was sent, they disbelieved in him, even though he is the mightiest of all Messengers. Therefore, they do not follow the religion of earlier Prophets because these religions came from Allah, but because these suit their desires and lusts. Therefore, their claimed faith in an earlier Prophet will not benefit them because they disbelieved in the master, the mightiest, the last and most perfect of all Prophets .
Last edited by Muhammad bin Lyin on Sat Jul 09, 2011 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by skynightblaze »

Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:
skynightblaze wrote: Those which contradict the quran can be discarded
Not necessarily because the Quran even contradicts itself and even admits it.

Shakir 2:106
Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?

And BTW, how does God do better the next time?? :lol: Communications clearly means communications from Allah. He couldn't get it perfect the first time?? Look at how obviously hokey this is and everyone simply ignores it. Amazing.
Cannot agree more. Actually quran contradicts itself many times and if quran is a fraud then its also possible that quran is wrong and ahadith is true.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by skynightblaze »

The Cat wrote:Thanks for admitting that 99.9% were corroborated ENOUGH. 9.128-129 may be questionable, that's all.
I never said that.There is no proof that quran has been corroborated enough. If Umar and Thabit didnt know the complete quran then we cannot say quran has been corroborated. Rest of your post is repetition and I think I have already addressed them and it makes no sense to repeat the same arguments.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by skynightblaze »

The Cat wrote:How come that the long researched Muwatta of Ibn Malik ignores the so-called 'sahih'
hadiths?
I missed this one. The above claim is false. malik Muwatta was considered by Bukhari. I had showed you a link from answering islam before.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

skynightblaze wrote:
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:
skynightblaze wrote: Those which contradict the quran can be discarded
Not necessarily because the Quran even contradicts itself and even admits it.

Shakir 2:106
Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?

And BTW, how does God do better the next time?? :lol: Communications clearly means communications from Allah. He couldn't get it perfect the first time?? Look at how obviously hokey this is and everyone simply ignores it. Amazing.
Cannot agree more. Actually quran contradicts itself many times and if quran is a fraud then its also possible that quran is wrong and ahadith is true.
I'm sure some of the hadiths are a little inaccurate or there are some embellishments, but most of them are probably true. You have to understand, these people believed that if they lied about Muhammad and disgraced him, they're going to hell for sure. So while there might be some slightly improper memories or embellishments, most of it is probably true, especially when it comes from multiple sources. On the other hand, the Quran comes only from Muhammad. How can one assume that Muhammad would never lie, especially when he clearly changed his mind and abrogated past statements to meet new circumstances as they unfolded? That's precisely what liars often do. They change their story. Does the creator of the universe change his story?? Does he give out imperfect statements and then provides new ones that are better? It's absolutely crazy and yet it's right there in the Quran itself. The Quran even acknowledges it's doing this because Muhammad had to because people could clearly and easily see the changes. And what's the excuse for this?? Surprisingly, THERE IS NONE, only the statement that Allah knows all things which does absolutely nothing to explain why he changes his mind within a few years in the very same book. How much more obvious can it be?? As Ayesha once innocently quipped, oh prophet of Allah, your revelations always seem to come at just the right time. :lol:
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by skynightblaze »

Muhammad Bin Lyin wrote: I 'm sure some of the hadiths are a little inaccurate or there are some embellishments, but most of them are probably true. You have to understand, these people believed that if they lied about Muhammad and disgraced him, they're going to hell for sure.
Correct. This is one of the good reasons as to why muslims after muhammad would not lie.Even if the writers of these books were corrupt its impossible that their lies were promoted for last 12 centuries unless they are backed up majority of corrupt muslims who had complete authority and power. If majority of muslims were corrupt why should anyone trust quran? A person who is a hardcore corrupter would first target the main book i,e, quran. Its laughable to say that the corrupt person left quran alone and only focused on ahadith for corruption even when he had the power to do so.

Muhammad Bin Lyin wrote: So while there might be some slightly improper memories or embellishments, most of it is probably true, especially when it comes from multiple sources. On the other hand, the Quran comes only from Muhammad. How can one assume that Muhammad would never lie, especially when he clearly changed his mind and abrogated past statements to meet new circumstances as they unfolded? That's precisely what liars often do. They change their story. Does the creator of the universe change his story?? Does he give out imperfect statements and then provides new ones that are better? It's absolutely crazy and yet it's right there in the Quran itself. The Quran even acknowledges it's doing this because Muhammad had to because people could clearly and easily see the changes. And what's the excuse for this?? Surprisingly, THERE IS NONE, only the statement that Allah knows all things which does absolutely nothing to explain why he changes his mind within a few years in the very same book. How much more obvious can it be?? As Ayesha once innocently quipped, oh prophet of Allah, your revelations always seem to come at just the right time. :lol:
These people are dishonest. I debated with MEsmorial regarding abrogation in the quran. Now these people will go to any extent to invent new excuses. They claim here that quran is talking about previous scriptures and not about itself. Its ridiculous and disgusting as to see as to how much human mind can make itself go to defend a crap ideology.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

skynightblaze wrote:They claim here that quran is talking about previous scriptures and not about itself.
Funny how a respected scholar understood it very differently

http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=2&tid=3975" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The First Abrogation in the Qur'an was about the Qiblah

`Ali bin Abu Talhah related that Ibn `Abbas narrated: The first abrogated part in the Qur'an was about the Qiblah. When Allah's Messenger migrated to Al-Madinah, the majority of its people were Jews, and Allah commanded him to face Bayt Al-Maqdis. The Jews were delighted then. Allah's Messenger faced it for ten and some months, but he liked to face the Qiblah of Ibrahim (Ka`bah in Makkah). He used to supplicate to Allah and look up to the sky (awaiting Allah's command). Allah then revealed:

[قَدْ نَرَى تَقَلُّبَ وَجْهِكَ فِي السَّمَآءِ]

(Verily, We have seen the turning of your (Muhammad's) face towards the heaven), until,

[فَوَلُّواْ وُجُوهَكُمْ شَطْرَهُ]

(turn your faces (in prayer) in that direction.)

The Jews did not like this ruling and said:

[مَا وَلَّـهُمْ عَن قِبْلَتِهِمُ الَّتِى كَانُواْ عَلَيْهَا قُل لّلَّهِ الْمَشْرِقُ وَالْمَغْرِبُ]

("What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah (prayer direction) to which they used to face in prayer.'' Say (O Muhammad), "To Allah belong both, east and the west.'') (2:142)

Allah said:

[فَأَيْنَمَا تُوَلُّواْ فَثَمَّ وَجْهُ اللَّهِ]

(. ..so wherever you turn (yourselves or your faces) there is the Face of Allah) (2:115),

and:

[وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الْقِبْلَةَ الَّتِى كُنتَ عَلَيْهَآ إِلاَّ لِنَعْلَمَ مَن يَتَّبِعُ الرَّسُولَ مِمَّن يَنقَلِبُ عَلَى عَقِبَيْهِ]

(And We made the Qiblah (prayer direction towards Jerusalem) which you used to face, only to test those who followed the Messenger (Muhammad ) from those who would turn on their heels (i.e., disobey the Messenger).) (2:143)
And even if their excuse was true and it was talking about past scriptures, it still doesn't solve a very bad problem. in 2:106, communications means communications from Allah, so it still says that Allah gave out better communications than he originally did. BIG PROBLEM and yet none of them see it. Well, actually, they do, but they have an uncanny ability to lie to themselves in their desperation. I find less abrogation in the hadiths than in the Quran because they were probably honest people afraid to lie about Muhammad and reporting to the best of their knowledge and/or memory, whereas Muhammad was lying and changing his edicts to meet whatever current circumstances arose.
Last edited by Muhammad bin Lyin on Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by skynightblaze »

@Mbl

Opinions of scholars will be disregarded by these quran alone muslims. They will claim that quran doesnt say so and ofcourse it has no basis at all . I would trust an early muslim scholar because he knew better than any of us as he was close to Muhammad. EVen the tafsir of Ibn abbas would document this abrogation. Now Ibn abbas lived during Muhammads time.

There is one more point here. Quran never explicitly said that quran was an exception to this verse of abrogation. The verse merely says we abrogate our communications and since quran is also an communication of Allah hence this verse by default would also be applicable to quran. Had quran been exception to this , quran would have said so. WE can expect atleast that much of clarity from one who claims to receive revelations from God.
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
skynightblaze
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by skynightblaze »

Muhammad Bin Lyin wrote:And even if their excuse was true and it was talking about past scriptures, it still doesn't solve a very bad problem. in 2:106, communications means communications from Allah, so it still says that Allah gave out better communications than he originally did. BIG PROBLEM and yet none of them see it. Well, actually, they do, but they have an uncanny ability to lie to themselves in their desperation. I find less abrogation in the hadiths than in the Quran because they were probably honest people afraid to lie about Muhammad and reporting to the best of their knowledge and/or memory, whereas Muhammad was lying and changing his edicts to meet whatever current circumstances arose.
F!CK! I missed this! How could I ? :D
Look around yourself and you'll find people with virtues are never required to demand respect since they automatically earn it. It is only those that are devoid of any virtues need to threaten and bully to gain respect. Needless to say that quran cannot be from God.

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Ali Sina Did You Know About This?

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

skynightblaze wrote:@Mbl

Opinions of scholars will be disregarded by these quran alone muslims. They will claim that quran doesnt say so and ofcourse it has no basis at all .

The Quran DOES say so in the case of the Quibla. It acknowledges it's changing the prayer direction and then uses the stupid excuse that it is merely a test.
skynightblaze wrote: I would trust an early muslim scholar because he knew better than any of us as he was close to Muhammad. EVen the tafsir of Ibn abbas would document this abrogation. Now Ibn abbas lived during Muhammads time.
Of course.
skynightblaze wrote: There is one more point here. Quran never explicitly said that quran was an exception to this verse of abrogation. The verse merely says we abrogate our communications and since quran is also an communication of Allah hence this verse by default would also be applicable to quran.
That's why the honest scholars understood it that way and why it is even proven in the case of the quibla where the Quran even acknowledges it's doing this.
Last edited by Muhammad bin Lyin on Sat Jul 09, 2011 11:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

Post Reply