Page 22 of 60

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:10 pm
by Muhammad bin Lyin
yeezevee wrote:
Not one Muslim can show where the Quran tells them to pray 5 times per day, and any Muslim will tell you that this prayer recommendation comes from the hadith of the night journey

No..No the Prayers and timings are mentioned in Quran dear Muhammad bin Lyin..


No, they are not specifically mentioned. There is no mention of praying 5 times per day, nor are there 5 clearly different times to pray mentioned in the Quran. The prayer frequency of 5 comes from the night journey and any Islamic scholar will tell you that. BagHat already tried this and he tried to "fill in the gaps" with smoke and mirrors, but it didn't work.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:15 pm
by yeezevee
yeezevee": No..No the Prayers and timings are mentioned indirectly in Quran dear Muhammad bin Lyin...
Muhammad bin Lyin: No, they are not specifically mentioned.

both words will convey same meaning dear MBL....

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:17 pm
by Muhammad bin Lyin
yeezevee wrote:
yeezevee": No..No the Prayers and timings are mentioned indirectly in Quran dear Muhammad bin Lyin...
Muhammad bin Lyin: No, they are not specifically mentioned.

both words will convey same meaning dear MBL....



You didn't say "indirectly". Go back and read it. You added "indirectly" to your requote.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:25 pm
by The Cat
skynightblaze wrote:
The Cat wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:EVery single debator can just say that his opponent is resorting to a fallacy of argumentum ad populum.So if we are to follow your line of thinking then tell me how is anyone supposed to know the outcome of a debate? There has to be a judge.

More logical fallacies won't get you out of the trap you've made for yourself. This is perflectly exposing your way of debating.

Let's have a poll for every single thread and debates there are and backward too! There has to be a judge! :lol:

Assuming that I have commited a fallacy you are supposed to answer a simple question. How in the world is anyone supposed to know the outcome of a debate if at all if we ask the public is going to be a fallacy of argumentum ad populum?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong. The argument that because 75% of people polled think the answer is A implies that the answer is A, this argument fails, because if opinion did determine truth, then there be no way to deal with the discrepancy between the 75% of the sample population that believe the answer is A and 25% who are of the opinion that the answer is not A.

However small the percentage of those polled is distributed among any remaining answers, this discrepancy by definition disproves any guarantee of the correctness of the majority. In addition, this would be true even if the answer given by those polled were unanimous, as the sample size may be insufficient, or some fact may be unknown to those polled that, if known, would result in a different distribution of answers.

A forum ain't a democratic institution. It's base on personal clashing opinions. As such any poll is like trolling in a result.

Otherwise, following your logic, every thread would need such a poll. That's ludicrous, an exercise in paranoid puerility.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:34 pm
by AhmedBahgat
yeezevee wrote:
yeezevee": No..No the Prayers and timings are mentioned indirectly in Quran dear Muhammad bin Lyin...
Muhammad bin Lyin: No, they are not specifically mentioned.

both words will convey same meaning dear MBL....



LOL, he is dumb, isn't he

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:38 pm
by AhmedBahgat
yeezevee wrote:
yeezevee": No..No the Prayers and timings are mentioned indirectly in Quran dear Muhammad bin Lyin...
Muhammad bin Lyin: No, they are not specifically mentioned.

both words will convey same meaning dear MBL....


Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:You didn't say "indirectly". Go back and read it. You added "indirectly" to your requote.


Are you that shameless, you filthy and ugly self deceiving piece of trailer trash?

yeezevee wrote:
Not one Muslim can show where the Quran tells them to pray 5 times per day, and any Muslim will tell you that this prayer recommendation comes from the hadith of the night journey

No..No the Prayers and timings are mentioned indirectly in Quran dear Muhammad bin Lyin..

for e.g. verses., 2:43., 2:149 ., 5:6., 11:114 ., 17:78 ., 24:58., 62:9 ., 4:43 ., 17:107, 108., 25:64, 65., 17: 110, 111 ..etc..etc..

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:42 pm
by AhmedBahgat
Salam all

Mushrik WB provided a stupid apology to defend his associate Bukhari concerning the alleged hadith to Maaz about going straight to paradise if you don’t shirk with Allah a thing, he said that not every Muslim read these books. Let me laugh again, hahahahahaha, the dumb WB bum forgot that this is all part of the plan of Iblis, he wants the Muslim to shirk by believing in man made rubbish of lies, contradictions, confusion and non sense WITHOUT READING IT. On the other hand Allah wants us to believe in Quran after reading it, see these verses:

أَفَلاَ يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِندِ غَيْرِ اللّهِ لَوَجَدُواْ فِيهِ اخْتِلاَفًا كَثِيرًا (82)
Do they not ponder upon the Quran? And if it had been from anyone other than Allah, they would have found in it much discrepancy.
[Al Quran ; 4:82]

-> See: Do they not ponder upon the Quran?, but we know that those Mushrikoon from among the Muslims and their pals from among the kafirs want to ponder upon the man made rubbish books of hadith, sirah, fiqh and sunah. Can you see how Allah is telling us indirectly that any other book that is not from Allah must have a lot of discrepancy, And if it had been from anyone other than Allah, they would have found in it much discrepancy.

THE FACT THAT THESE MAN MADE BOOKS HAVE A LOT OF DECREPENCY CANNOT BE EVEN DENIED BY THE FILTHY MUSHRIKOON AND THEIR PALS FROM AMONG THE KAFIRS.

And Allah calls on us again to ponder upon the Quran:

أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ أَمْ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبٍ أَقْفَالُهَا (24)
Do they not then ponder upon the Quran, or upon the hearts are its locks?
[Al Quran ; 47:24]

In fact, their own man made rubbish of crap tell them that the best of them is one who learns the Quran then teaches it to others, see this allegation from their man made book Sunan Ibn Magih:

Image

Source

Utham Ibn Affan said that the prophet said:

Rasool Allah (sslla Allah alayhi wa sallam) said (according to Shuba): Khairakum (the best of you) is he who learns the Quran and teaches it

According to Suffian, it goes like this: Afddalakum (The most preferred) is he who learns the Quran and teaches it.


However I agree that the hadith teaching is great, this is because it makes great sense that the best of believers are those who commit themselves to studying Allah words then teach it to others. Now let’s apply the above hearsay hadith on some people like Bukhari and Muslim, I will choose Bukhari for now as one example

Bukhari is a perfect example of such believers, he memorised the Quran by the age of 8, and that was it for him concerning Quran, then he spent the rest of his life learning hadith and teaching it to others, it happened like this as they alleged about their associate Bukhari:

From 8 to 10 (two years) he memorised 70,000 hadith (that is roughly equivalent to more than 10 Qurans btw), then from the age of 10, he spent the rest of his life learning and memorising 530,000 hadith for him to filter them based on his own criteria to about 7200 hadith, , during all these years which cover all his mature and elderly life, he was doing one thing only, learning, memorising, and teaching hadith to others

If we apply the above hadith from Ibn Magih hearsay book, then Bukhari can not be described as the best of the believers, he was not spending his life learning the Quran nor teaching it, let me remind you with the content of that hadith again, I will use Shuba version: Khairakum (the best of you) is he who learns the Quran and teaches it. and that can not be Bukhari, ironically the Bukhari associates are trying hard for 1200 years to convince the Muslims that Bukhari was one of the best of believers. Well, he might have been one of the best believers, Allah only knows; despite his actions can not prove it according to the criteria in the above hadith by Ibn Magih.

As for WB’s silly reply that not all believers read the man made books of hadith, well, but did Maaz Ibn Jabal obey the prophet and did not tell the good news to anyone? The man made books of rubbish hadith tell us otherwise, they tell us that Maaz kept it secret until just before his death, he revealed it to all and disobeyed the prophet. Welcome to my new show of more non sense and contradictions from these man made rubbish books of hadith:

Free tickets to Paradise, anyone?
تذاكر مجانية للجنة، اى حد؟


One of the most promoted flaws between the confused Muslims of the world is an alleged saying by some irrational people; such saying can be said in two ways:

1- Whoever dies while not shirking with Allah a thing will enter Jannah (Paradise).

2- One whose last words are La Ilah Illa Allah i.e. there is no god except Allah will go to Jannah (Paradise).

The above non sensible crap is so wide spread between the confused Muslims to a degree that one freak of them created a group on Facebook and named it as follow:

من كان آخر كلامه لا إله إلا الله دخل الجنة


i.e.

One whose last words are La Ilah Illa Allah will enter Jannah (Paradise)

Of course the above lie about Allah cannot be a name of anything, they were just using something that would make many sinners feel good so they join such group to register themselves as ones who said so, i.e. said there is no god except Allah. Sounds a bit funny to me, it is not like such allegation applies to those who say it in front of others instead of between themselves and their Lord.

I joined the group to fight them on their premises, however the outcome should be known to everyone in advance, that those confused and Mushrik Muslims do not want to hear one exposing their clear cut flaws and confusions, so they censored my comments. Believe me guys, even if you are polite and charming you will be banned, I tried them for years and years, they are nothing but a bunch of pussy cowards who cannot defend their belief which is being criticised bad. Every time I post something on that Facebook group’s wall, it just disappears on the fly. How coward such confused Muslims are. This is the common nature of most so called Muslim countries, if you expose their religious or political flaws; they either do any of the followings:

1- Censor you.
2- Oppress you.
3- Jail you.
Or
4- Kill you

They never reply to you and prove you wrong if they believe that you are wrong, there should be no reason to their cowardly action but the facts that they have nothing to say and that they are nothing but a bunch of confused, manipulated and manipulative con-artists who should be exposed with no mercy, fought hard and destroyed with the willing of Allah.

So this is the reason behind my article which I talked about briefly in the past in one of my articles:

Did Bukhari disobey the prophet?

Let me bring the hadith I talked about in the previous article above which should be an introduction to what will follow:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =126&doc=0

Image

Anas Ibn Malik said that it was mentioned to him the following:

The prophet said to Maaz Ibn Jabal: Whoever meets Allah while not shirking anything with Him, he should enter paradise.

So Maaz Ibn Jabal said to the prophet:

Should I inform everyone so they receive the good tidings?

So the prophet replied back to Maaz Ibn Jabal:

NO, as I fear that they may rely on that.

End of hadith

In the above we clearly read that the prophet PROHIBITED Maaz Ibn Jabal from telling the Muslims such good news because the prophet feared that it will make them rely on it. I believe that the fear by the prophet is motivated by the fact that the people may think that such good news is a free ticket to Paradise.

I say free ticket to Paradise because the allegation indirectly encourages committing sins while telling the sinners that they will still go to Paradise if they do not shirk with Allah a thing. For example: It is ok to steal, it is ok to commit adultery and it is ok to drink alcohol as long as you do not shirk with Allah, you will still go to Paradise.

What should also be concluded from the above allegation that Bukhari recklessly and stubbornly disobeyed the prophet by telling EVERY MUSLIM in the world over generations and generations about it, in clear violation to the prophet command in the very same hadith.

Through the rest of my article, I will walk you through some other non sense that is related to the above, in short term I call it:

O adulterers, thieves and drunks, I have free ticket to Paradise. Anyone?

It seems from these books that before Bukhari disobeyed the prophet, Maaz Ibn Jabal disobeyed the prophet too; let’s see this hadith from Sunan Abi Dawoud:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 2709&doc=4

Image

The hadith narrator is Maaz Ibn Jabal, so he alleged:

The messenger of Allah said: One whose last words are “there is no god except Allah” enters Jannah (Paradise).

End of hadith

Well, from the above hadith we can conclude the following facts:

1- Maaz Ibn Jabal DISOBEYED the prophet because he went on and told the people about the good news against which he was prohibited by the prophet to do.

2- Like Bukhari, Abi Dawoud also disobeyed the prophet by documenting such allegation in a book so everyone knows about it in clear violation to the prophet command.

3- The confused Muslim group on Facebook is also following their path to tell every one about it, and by even making the group name to be such unrealistic words from the above hadith: One whose last words are “there is no god except Allah” will go to Paradise.

I said the above is non sensible because there will be no justice served such way, in fact the hadith is indirectly teaching to sin as long as we make sure that our last words before we die are there is no god except Allah, as in such case, we will still go to Paradise as promised by Abi Dawoud and Bukhari.

There are two humans who should be perfect examples to the above. The first one was even mentioned in the Quran, who was Firon, who was killing the people, stealing their country’s wealth, committing adultery and drinking alcohol but his last words were There is no god except Allah and I am one of the Muslims. Let’s have a look and see if Firon will go to Paradise because his last words were as alleged in the man made hadith by Abi Dawoud and Bukhari:

وَجَاوَزْنَا بِبَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ الْبَحْرَ فَأَتْبَعَهُمْ فِرْعَوْنُ وَجُنُودُهُ بَغْيًا وَعَدْوًا حَتَّى إِذَا أَدْرَكَهُ الْغَرَقُ قَالَ آمَنتُ أَنَّهُ لا إِلِهَ إِلاَّ الَّذِي آمَنَتْ بِهِ بَنُو إِسْرَائِيلَ وَأَنَاْ مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ (90)

And We made the children of Israel to cross the sea, then Pharaoh and his soldiers followed them in tyranny and enmity; until when drowning overtook him, he (Pharaoh) said: I have believed that there is no god except that in Whom the children of Israel have believed, and I am from among the submitters (to Allah).
[Al Quran ; 10:90]

-> See what were the last words of Firon: قَالَ آمَنتُ أَنَّهُ لا إِلِهَ إِلاَّ الَّذِي آمَنَتْ بِهِ بَنُو إِسْرَائِيلَ وَأَنَاْ مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ , i.e. he (Pharaoh) said: I have believed that there is no god except that in Whom the children of Israel have believed, and I am from among the submitters (to Allah).

Should he go to Paradise according to the non sense by all those confused Muslims who promote lies about Allah? Let’s see what Allah told us, not what those confused Muslims are telling us:

وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا مُوسَىٰ بِآيَاتِنَا وَسُلْطَانٍ مُبِينٍ (96)
إِلَىٰ فِرْعَوْنَ وَمَلَئِهِ فَاتَّبَعُوا أَمْرَ فِرْعَوْنَ ۖ وَمَا أَمْرُ فِرْعَوْنَ بِرَشِيدٍ (97)
يَقْدُمُ قَوْمَهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ فَأَوْرَدَهُمُ النَّارَ ۖ وَبِئْسَ الْوِرْدُ الْمَوْرُودُ (98)


96: And certainly We sent Musa with Our signs and an obvious authority.
97: To Pharaoh and his chiefs, but they followed the command of Pharaoh, and the command of Pharaoh was not guided.
98: He shall lead his people on the resurrection day, and will deliver them to the fire; and miserable is the place to which they are delivered.

[Al Quran ; 11:96]

Therefore such allegation of hadith MUST BE A CLEAR CUT LIE against Allah. I wonder why those bunch of hadith worshippers insist on promoting allegations about Allah for which He sent no authority, and about which they have no knowledge? Let me remind them again and again and again that they are committing a HUGE sin:

قُلْ إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ رَبِّيَ الْفَوَاحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ وَالإِثْمَ وَالْبَغْيَ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ وَأَن تُشْرِكُواْ بِاللّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِ سُلْطَانًا وَأَن تَقُولُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ مَا لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ (33)

Say: Indeed, My Lord has prohibited indecencies, what is apparent of them and what is concealed, and sin and transgression without right, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down any authority, and that you say about Allah what you do not know.
[Al Quran ; 7:33]

-> See: قُلْ إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ رَبِّيَ َأَن تَقُولُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ مَا لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ , i.e. ]Say: Indeed, My Lord has prohibited ……. that you say about Allah what you do not know.

Their defence might be that, they did not say that about Allah, it was Muhammed who said so about Allah.

I say to them: Wrong, because it is not Muhammad who said so, it is ALLEGED that Muhammed said so. Which means that we can never know beyond an atom weight of doubt that Muhammad said so. While at the same time we are NOT required to believe that Muhammed said so because we are not required to believe in their invented man made books of alleged hadith. What adds strong merit to such argument is the fact stated in the same alleged hadith that Muhammed prohibited Maaz Ibn Jabal from informing the people with such information; Muhammed even explained to him why he should not do that. This means that we should not know about such alleged information from the first place.

The second example of humans whose last words are known to us is Saddam Hussain. Almost everyone around the world saw him saying before being executed: There is no god except Allah, but we know well that Saddam was killing his people and neighbours, was alcoholic and womaniser, and was stealing his country’s wealth. But according to the hadith worshippers Saddam will go to Paradise, in fact many of those confused Muslims consider him a martyr who is now enjoying life in paradise. How deluded they are. Certainly Saddam was aware of the above lie about Allah in Abi Dawoud’s hadith, so he used his free ticket to Paradise as promised by Abi Dawoud.

I stated above that Maaz Ibn Jabal DISOBEYED the prophet too, so let me show you how Maaz Ibn Jabal himself admitted that indirectly. The hadith is from Ahmad Ibn Hanbal’s man made hearsay book:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 1024&doc=6

Image

It seems that Maaz Ibn Jabal was sick and dying, so on his death bed he admitted to them that he was concealing some information from them. The hadith narrator is Maaz Ibn Jabal, so he alleged:

Maaz Ibn Jabal said to us during his disease: I have heard from the messenger of Allah something that I was concealing from you, I heard him saying:

For one whose last words are “there is no god except Allah”, Paradise should be a must for him.


End of hadith

See how Maaz Ibn Jabal admitted that he was concealing it: كنت أكتمكموه , I was concealing it from you. Certainly Maaz Ibn Jabal was concealing it because the prophet commanded him not to say it to anyone, yet shortly before his death he decided to disobey the prophet for no apparent reason, in fact in the above non sense of hadith, after he admitted concealing it, he started to reveal it without telling us why he decided to do so? I mean there was no reason for him to do so, it is not like the prophet came to him in his dreams telling him: Ok Maaz Ibn Jabal, now you can tell everyone about it. Total rubbish and non sense. It seems that Maaz Ibn Jabal, Abi Dawoud, Bukhari, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and many others wanted to make the Muslims totally rely on that, in clear violation to the prophet command.

Quickly after Maaz Ibn Jabal disobeyed the prophet by disclosing such information to the public, it became the talk of the town. Here is another guy named Abi Zarr elaborating on it as stated in Bukhari’s man made hadith book:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 2983&doc=0

Image

The hadith narrator is Abi Zarr, so he alleged:

The prophet said: Jebril said to me, whoever dies from my Ummah while not shirking with Allah a thing will enter paradise (or he said will not enter the fire)

So the prophet asked Jebril: Even if he commits adultery or steals?

Jebril replied: Even that.


End of hadith

Certainly Jebril was not having a chat with Muhammed, he must have been delivering a message to him from Allah, such message was said by Muhammed to Maaz Ibn Jabal while at the same time prohibiting Maaz from saying it to the people in fear that they will rely on it. Consequently the message from Jebril was useless from the first place. It is like, it was secret between Jebril, Muhammed and Maaz Ibn Jabal, but we know now that Maaz Ibn Jabal did not keep the secret as commanded, he went on and told ever one about it before his death, and that is why we see another guy named Abi Zarr saying it to other people with further elaboration that even if you steal or commit adultery, Paradise should be your destiny if you say “there is no god except Allah” as your last words before your death. I am sure Saddam Hussain was aware of such rubbish of hadith.

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 5962&doc=0

Image

The hadith narrator is also Abi Zarr, but this time he elaborated a lot while telling us that he went out for an hour walk with the prophet while the moon was in the sky. I will pickup this boring story halfway as the beginning is just useless, so Abi Zarr alleged:



I was walking with the prophet for an hour then he (the prophet) said to me: Sit here.

And he made me sit in a low ground surrounded by rocks and said to me: Sit here until I come back.

And he went to an area called Al-Harrah until I could not see him, and he was away for long time until I heard him saying while coming towards me: And even if he steals or commits adultery?

So when he came back to me I was not patient until I said to him: O prophet of Allah! May Allah make me scarify my life for you, who you were talking to in Al-Harrah? I never heard anyone replying back to you. So the messenger of Allah said:

Jebril came to me in Al-Harrah and said to me: Give the good tidings to your Ummah that whoever dies while not shirking with Allah a thing will enter Jannah (paradise). So I (Muhammed) said to Jebril:

O Jebril! Even if steals and commits adultery? So Jebril replied: Yes, even if he steals and commits adultery. So I said again: Even if he steals and commits adultery? So he replied: Yes and even if he drinks Alcohol
….


End of hadith

Well, it seems we have a clear cut contradiction in here, we can read clearly that the prophet said that Jebril commanded him to give the glad tidings to his Ummah that even if they steal and commit adultery and drink alcohol while not shirking with Allah a thing, they will still go to paradise: see the exact words of Jebril as alleged in this hadith: ‏قال بشر أمتك أنه من مات لا يشرك بالله شيئا دخل الجنة , i.e. Jebril said to Muhammed: Give the good tidings to your Ummah that whoever dies while not shirking with Allah a thing will enter Jannah.

Now if you remember the first hadith we discussed in this article, Muhammed commanded Maaz Ibn Jabal to conceal such information from the people, see the exact words as alleged in Bukhari hadith # 126

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =126&doc=0

‏أن النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏لمعاذ بن جبل ‏ ‏من لقي الله لا يشرك به شيئا دخل الجنة قال ألا أبشر الناس قال لا إني أخاف أن يتكلوا ‏

i.e.

The prophet said to Maaz Ibn Jabal: Whoever meets Allah while not shirking anything with Him, he should enter paradise.

Maaz Ibn Jabal said to the prophet:

Should I inform everyone so they receive the good tidings?

So the prophet replied back:

NO, as I fear that they may rely on that.


In effect, Bukhari hadith # 126 clearly contradicts Bukhari hadith # 5962

What is more sickening in this rubbish of hadith that Abi Zarr added drinking alcohol as another sin that will be ignored by Allah if you do not shirk with him a thing. It is like encouraging theft and committing adultery were not enough, so let’s bloody encourage with them drinking alcohol. Well, how about we just make it all bloody sins instead of the 3 nominated sins above, shall we:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 2213&doc=0

Image

The hadith narrator is also Abi Zarr, Bukhari was just fond to repeat many of hadith over and over and over, very sickening and boring, especially when the repeated hadith contradict others. This hadith is also about the same incident in Bukhari hadith # 5962 in which we read that Abi Zarr was having a walk for an hour with the prophet until he made him sit some where and wait for him, so Abi Zarr alleged:

.......

The prophet commanded me to sit and wait for him and he went to a place not far, then I heard a voice so I desired to go to him but remembered his command to sit and wait for him until he comes back to me. When he came back, I said to him: O messenger of Allah: I heard a voice. So the prophet said to me: Did you hear? I said: Yes. So he said back to me:

Jebril came to me and said: Whoever dies from you Ummah while not shirking with Allah a thing will enter Paradise.

So I (the prophet) said to him: Even if he did this and that?

So he (Jebril) replied: Yes.


End of hadith

Here are the exact words as alleged to be asked by Muhammed after Jebril informed him that all those who do not shirk with Allah a thing will enter Paradise:

وإن فعل كذا وكذا , Wa Inn Faal Kaza Wa Kaza?, i.e. Even if he did this and that? i.e. if he did any sin.

You may also notice that in the above hadith which is the same story that we read before, it was not a command from Jebril to Muhammed to give the good news to the Ummah concerning such piece of information. He was just telling him so without telling him to go and give the good news to the people.

It seems that Abi Zarr went nuts telling everyone he met about such alleged piece of information that he heard from the prophet, so in another location in Bukhari’s man made hadith book, we read the same story by Abi Zarr. The problem in here that the story sounds totally different to what we read so far, this actually proves that the story most likely is a lie, let’s see, shall we:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 5379&doc=0

Image

Abi Zarr alleged:

I came to the prophet while he was asleep and over him was a white dress. Then I came to him later after he waked up, and he said to me:

Any slave who said “there is no god except Allah” then died is not entering except Paradise.

So I said to him: Even if He steals and commits adultery?

So he said: Even if steals and commits adultery.

So I said to him (again): Even if He steals and commits adultery?

So he said (again): Even if steals and commits adultery.

So I said to him (again and again): Even if He steals and commits adultery?

So he said (again and again): Even if steals and commits adultery and even if you do not like it Abi Zarr.

And Abi Zarr used to say the hadith while saying ‘and even if Abi Zarr does not like it’

Abu Abdullah said: This is at the moment of death or before it if they have repented and regretted and said there no god except Allah. Allah will forgive him.


End of hadith

What the hell was that exactly? It is not like every bloody time Abi Zarr met the prophet, the story above happened, this is insane. How come he was walking with him for an hour in some area near Al-Harrah, then he was commanded to sit and wait for him until he comes back as we read in the previous two hadith, then in here we read that he went to the prophet house while he was asleep then came back to him after he waked up and the story goes on with the same rubbish and non sense?

In addition to that, in here we read that Abi Zarr never said the hadith to anyone except that he added at the end of it وإن رغم أنف ‏ ‏أبي ذر , i.e. Even if Abi Zarr does not like it. While in the two other Bukhari hadith by Abi Zarr that we walked through earlier, HE NEVER SAID SO.

Also, can you see how that guy named Abu Abdullah confirmed that saying so at the moment of death will make Allah forgive all sins: ‏هذا عند الموت أو قبله إذا تاب وندم وقال لا إله إلا الله غفر له , i.e. This is at the moment of death or before it if they have repented and regretted and said there no god except Allah. Allah will forgive him.

This is nothing but piles of lies against Allah, it seems that they underestimate the Mashi’ah of Allah (the willing of Allah) under which the matter of admitting some people to Paradise or to hell / forgiving them or not, is totally under His control and no one knows about it except Him. Even staying in Paradise or Hell is not guaranteed, that is if Allah wills otherwise, see these verses:

فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ شَقُوا فَفِي النَّارِ لَهُمْ فِيهَا زَفِيرٌ وَشَهِيقٌ (106)
خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا مَا دَامَتِ السَّمَاوَاتُ وَالْأَرْضُ إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ رَبُّكَ ۚ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ فَعَّالٌ لِمَا يُرِيدُ (107)
وَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ سُعِدُوا فَفِي الْجَنَّةِ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا مَا دَامَتِ السَّمَاوَاتُ وَالْأَرْضُ إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ رَبُّكَ ۖ عَطَاءً غَيْرَ مَجْذُوذٍ (108)


106: So as to those who are unhappy, they will be in the fire; for them therein is exhaling and inhaling.

107: Abiding therein as long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills; indeed your Lord is doer of what He wants.

108: And as to those who are made happy, in the garden abiding therein as long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills; a giving which will never be interrupted.

[Al Quran ; 11:106-108]

-> You can clearly read above concerning those who will be admitted to hell that they will abide therein unless Allah wills otherwise: فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ شَقُوا فَفِي النَّارِ لَهُمْ فِيهَا زَفِيرٌ وَشَهِيقٌ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا مَا دَامَتِ السَّمَاوَاتُ وَالْأَرْضُ إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ رَبُّكَ ۚ , i.e. as to those who are unhappy, they will be in the fire; for them therein is exhaling and inhaling. Abiding therein as long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills; which is the same for those who will be admitted to Paradise: وَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ سُعِدُوا فَفِي الْجَنَّةِ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا مَا دَامَتِ السَّمَاوَاتُ وَالْأَرْضُ إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ رَبُّكَ , i.e And as to those who are made happy, in the garden abiding therein as long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills;

Deceiving the people by offering them fake free tickets to Paradise must fall under saying things against Allah about which they have no knowledge or authority. I also consider it to be interfering with the willing of Allah, as if they know what Allah will do in the future concerning those who die while their last words were “there is no god except Allah”, like Saddam Hussain and Firon.

The books of man made hadith are filled with such clear cut deceptions; let me give you another clear example a free ticket to Paradise from Bukhari’s man made hadith book:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 5931&doc=0

Image

The hadith is alleged by the doubtful Abu Hurairah, therefore I am not going to translate it word by word for you because I really do not like this man, I found most if not all of what he alleged do not make sense, like in the above hadith which he alleged that Allah has 100 names, and out of those 100, there are 99 names that if memorised by anyone, he will enter Paradise. It is not like Allah has a max limit of 100 names, I actually believe that Allah has unlimited number of names, He gave us a few examples in the Quran and commanded us to call upon Him using such beautiful names, but when you read the man made books of hadith, the very simple moral of a story of calling upon Allah using His beautiful names becomes a matter of memory, i.e. if you memorise them, you will enter Paradise, which in effect makes those whom Allah created and blessed them with good memory higher than those who are created with weak memory and cannot memorise all these 99 names. This must make such crap by Abu Hurairah a clear cut lie about Allah, yet Bukhari listed the same crap by him again in which Abu Hurairah contradicted himself, see below:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 6843&doc=0

Image

Abu Hurairah alleged above that the messenger of Allah said that for Allah there are 100 names, out of those 100 names there are 99 names that if are found by anyone, he will enter paradise. You can clear see a clear cut contradiction between the two:

In the first it was a matter of MEMORISING the 99 names of Allah to enter Paradise, while in the second, it was a matter of FINDING them to enter Paradise. What is very funny that the early Muslims claimed to have identified (found) all those 99 names in the Quran, yet a young Saudi Sheikh came on the Egyptian TV (Al-Qahira Al-Youm) a few years ago ( http://free-islam.com/islam/asma2_allah ... e7a_p2.wmv ) claiming that the 99 names found by the early Muslims were wrong, so he managed to find the true 99 names of Allah using hadith and Quran in a very lengthy research that was approved by Al-Azhar. Hahahah. You know why he did so? Well, because if it was a matter of finding them to enter Paradise, then the game was over when the early Muslims found and identified all 99 names of Allah, so they should be the ones to enter Paradise for doing so, while anyone after them cannot be as such because they were already found, therefore this is what that Saudi Sheilh did:

He tried to prove that those 99 names identified by the early Muslims were wrong, then he brought another 99 names instead and claimed that his are the right ones.

What is so funny that he did not change the total number of the names; he kept them 99 to comply with the above crap by Abu Hurairah. Imagine that he came and said that those early 99 names were wrong, and he has discovered 110 names for Allah. NO WAY Al-Azhar would have approved his claim.

If you go and ask many of other sects’ followers, how many names Allah has? You will certainly get different answers than 99 names, in fact many other Islamic sects believe that they are more than 99 names. For me however the matter is settled by rejecting all their claims then believe that Allah should have UNLIMITED (infinite) number of names. This makes sense because Allah is the One who created the words and names and even all languages, therefore He can create for Himself UNLIMITED number of names. Remember this verse:

قُلْ لَوْ كَانَ الْبَحْرُ مِدَادًا لِكَلِمَاتِ رَبِّي لَنَفِدَ الْبَحْرُ قَبْلَ أَنْ تَنْفَدَ كَلِمَاتُ رَبِّي وَلَوْ جِئْنَا بِمِثْلِهِ مَدَدًا (109)
Say: If the sea was ink for the words of my Lord, the sea would have been consumed before the words of my Lord are exhausted, even if We were to bring the like of it (the sea) as a supplement.
[Al Quran ; 18:109]

Therefore, putting a max number of 100 or any other specified figures to the names of Allah makes absolutely no sense and I believe that it also falls under saying things about Allah without any knowledge or authority.

Let me finish this article with one more free ticket to Paradise:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =540&doc=0

Image

The above crap simply suggests that whoever prays Dawn and Afternoon prayers will go to Paradise. But I thought that we have 5 prayers a day, all 5 of equal importance that should be performed by any Muslim, it is not like: Ok, if you are going to dodge a few of these Salat then dodge Zuhr, Maghrib and Isha prayer while if you do not dodge Fajr and Asr prayer, you will still go to Paradise. Amen

Salam

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 2:40 pm
by The Cat
skynightblaze wrote:A tafsir is not a hadith but if hadiths are not allowed then neither should tafsir be allowed.

What Muhammad explicitly interdicted was the writing down of his sunna as hadith. And we've seen that even Ibn Abbas knew and must have followed it. So he either contradicted himself (if writing hadiths) or they must be hold spurious (ie. Bukhari, Muslim).

The exegesis provided by AhmedBahgat is a concluding proof about it all: the companions were AWARE of this interdiction and obeyed:
viewtopic.php?p=128846#p128846
viewtopic.php?p=128847#p128847
viewtopic.php?p=128848#p128848

Adding his recent addition :clap:
viewtopic.php?p=128986#p128986
The prophet said to Maaz Ibn Jabal: Whoever meets Allah while not shirking anything with Him, he should enter paradise.

Maaz Ibn Jabal said to the prophet:
Should I inform everyone so they receive the good tidings?

So the prophet replied back:
NO, as I fear that they may rely on that.


skynightblaze wrote:The above 2 examples show that the command to not write hadiths was abrogated .This is a proof that early companions of Muhammad didn’t mind writing the hadiths.

Wrong: Read again the above...

That is disapproved by their authoritative absence until the 'Sahih' hadiths appeared. They alone contradict that the earlier sparse hadiths were even recognized as authoritative. If so we'd have legal case using them on the authority of the prophet. We don't...

SHafi'i is the first on to have introduced such a notion.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 2:50 pm
by The Cat
skynightblaze wrote:Read what Bukhari had to say about his own work

skynightblaze wrote:IF Bukhari considered opinions of children then we can safely reject those people.

I reject his authority and that of the hadiths, just like the Koran does:

12.111: In their history verily there is a lesson for men of understanding. It is no invented hadith (Ĥadīthāan) but a confirmation
of the existing (Scripture) and a detailed explanation of everything, and a guidance and a mercy for folk who believe.

31.6: Among the people, there are those who uphold baseless Hadith (Al-Ĥadīthi), and thus divert others from the path of GOD.

45.6: In which Hadith (Ĥadīthin) other than GOD and His revelations do they believe?

48.23: It is the law of Allah (sunnata of Allah) which hath taken course aforetime.
Thou wilt not find for the law of Allah aught of power to change.

77.50: Which Hadith (Ĥadīthin), other than this, do they uphold?

Koraners are right: all authoritative hadiths are bid'aa: forbidden religious innovations.
Sunnites must first disprove their own holy book to get in their own ruling trinity.
Otherwise they are bound to hell, according to their own beliefs.

The real debate is thus limited to this:
1. Does the Koran allow authoritative hadiths: the answer is a resounding NO.

2. Did Muhammad allowed them: Historically NO. There were no -authoritative- hadiths until Shafi'i declared so, an innovation at the time.
http://www.answering-islam.net/Books/Sc ... uation.htm
According to the ancient schools, traditions from the Prophet as such do not as yet possess an overriding authority; only Shafi'i, obviously under the influence of the pressure group of traditionists, upholds consistently the doctrine that when there exists a tradition from the Prophet, no other argument is valid. (...) and it is clear that this doctrine was a startling innovation in his time. It is certain, too, that the great mass of legal traditions which invoke the authority of the Prophet, originated in the time of Shafi'i and later.

Unless you can prove point 1 to be wrong, you and Muhammadans have lost. PERIOD.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 4:21 pm
by skynightblaze
yeezevee wrote:
yeezevee": No..No the Prayers and timings are mentioned indirectly in Quran dear Muhammad bin Lyin...
Muhammad bin Lyin: No, they are not specifically mentioned.

both words will convey same meaning dear MBL....


Yeezevee quran doesnt even indirectly hint 5 prayers.All it tells us is about 3 prayers distinctly. Somewhere it says THE MIDDLE prayer. Now these muslims interpret this as the afternoon prayer.Middle prayer here according to quran would be prayer no 2 because it talks about only 3 prayers.The three prayers according to quran are dawn,sunset and night prayer so middle prayer would be sunset and not afternoon.

If quran spoke about 10 prayers then the middle prayer would prayer no 5. In short the middle prayer depends on how many prayers quran mentioned and not on the hadith . Bahgat has been exposed already on this issue.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:39 pm
by AhmedBahgat
skynightblaze wrote:If quran spoke about 10 prayers then the middle prayer would prayer no 5. In short the middle prayer depends on how many prayers quran mentioned and not on the hadith . Bahgat has been exposed already on this issue.


A lying freak, bring it here punk and show us how you exposed me, as I did to you above

Do the man made rubbish books of hadith prove the authenticity of Quran?

and btw dumby, if we have 10 prayers, the fifth prayer cannot be the midlle prayer, are you that stupid?

But if we have and odd number of prayers, then we should have a midlle prayer. Now we know that you are dumber than dumb. Dismiss yourself

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:22 am
by Muhammad bin Lyin
AhmedBahgat wrote:Are you that shameless, you filthy and ugly self deceiving piece of trailer trash?

yeezevee wrote:
Not one Muslim can show where the Quran tells them to pray 5 times per day, and any Muslim will tell you that this prayer recommendation comes from the hadith of the night journey

No..No the Prayers and timings are mentioned indirectly in Quran dear Muhammad bin Lyin..

for e.g. verses., 2:43., 2:149 ., 5:6., 11:114 ., 17:78 ., 24:58., 62:9 ., 4:43 ., 17:107, 108., 25:64, 65., 17: 110, 111 ..etc..etc..


And if you go further back, you will see that the first time he said this, the word "indirectly" was not there, but was then added when he requoted himself and then he changed his original post as well. What I quoted of him was the actual version of his original post before he changed it because all I did was to hit the quote button. I'm actually surprised he even did that. I often don't know what goes through his mind some times.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 4:46 am
by skynightblaze
AhmedBahgat wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:If quran spoke about 10 prayers then the middle prayer would prayer no 5. In short the middle prayer depends on how many prayers quran mentioned and not on the hadith . Bahgat has been exposed already on this issue.


A lying freak, bring it here punk and show us how you exposed me, as I did to you above

Do the man made rubbish books of hadith prove the authenticity of Quran?

and btw dumby, if we have 10 prayers, the fifth prayer cannot be the midlle prayer, are you that stupid?

But if we have and odd number of prayers, then we should have a midlle prayer. Now we know that you are dumber than dumb. Dismiss yourself



Show me where quran spoke about afternoon prayer and noon prayer. All it does is talk about 3 prayers i.e dawn,sunset and night.

You consider the middle prayer as afternoon prayer and thats because you have a hindsight that middle prayer refers to afternoon prayer. You get that hindsight from the hadiths. If we are to discard the hadiths completely then we also need to discard that hindsight. So show me where quran spoke about afternoon prayer . If we are to refer to quran alone then the middle prayer would be the middle value of total no of prayers quran mentioned.

AS far noon prayer is concerned you said that prayer at the decline of sun means the noon prayer.Decline of sun can also be interpreted as the evening or sunset prayer.So again no where does the quran speak about afternoon and noon prayer. All it talks about is dawn,sunset and night prayers.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:05 am
by piscohot
106: So as to those who are unhappy, they will be in the fire; for them therein is exhaling and inhaling.


:lol: :lol:

:clap:

Let's hear it for another useless quran verse.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:16 am
by yeezevee
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:
And if you go further back, you will see that the first time he said this, the word "indirectly" was not there, but was then added when he requoted himself and then he changed his original post as well. What I quoted of him was the actual version of his original post before he changed it because all I did was to hit the quote button. I'm actually surprised he even did that. I often don't know what goes through his mind some times.

yes..Muhammad bin Lyin., mind is a very complex thing., in fact it is a out put from a very complex organ. There is no surprise there but what happened there seems to be related to hyperactivity in FFI., You see when look at the timings of the posts you will understand why that happened., I have NOT read your post before I spell checked added or deleted words.,


this post on that Prayer thing viewtopic.php?p=128975#p128975 you posted at Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:35 pm

I copied few words from your post and responded viewtopic.php?p=128976#p128976 at Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:38 pm that is 3 mts difference.,

and then page turned and you quoted the above post at viewtopic.php?p=128977#p128977 Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:40 pm with in 2 mts of post .,


And I came to the key board and responded at 3.45 om viewtopic.php?p=128979#p128979 to say those words. And I left the place, went away 300 miles from that key board and coming back now to write this. I don't need to write this post., but what all I am saying is it is a hyperactivity problem.. May be I should cut it down a bit .

from that onwards you wrote this
......... I'm actually surprised he even did that. I often don't know what goes through his mind some times.
at viewtopic.php?p=128980#p128980 and more ...


So there is no surprise anywhere...

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:55 am
by yeezevee
AhmedBahgat wrote:I joined the group to fight them on their premises, however the outcome should be known to everyone in advance, that those confused and Mushrik Muslims do not want to hear one exposing their clear cut flaws and confusions, so they censored my comments. Believe me guys, even if you are polite and charming you will be banned, I tried them for years and years, they are nothing but a bunch of pussy cowards who cannot defend their belief which is being criticised bad. Every time I post something on that Facebook group’s wall, it just disappears on the fly. How coward such confused Muslims are. This is the common nature of most so called Muslim countries, if you expose their religious or political flaws; they either do any of the followings:

1- Censor you.
2- Oppress you.
3- Jail you.
Or
4- Kill you


They never reply to you and prove you wrong if they believe that you are wrong, there should be no reason to their cowardly action but the facts that they have nothing to say and that they are nothing but a bunch of confused, manipulated and manipulative con-artists who should be exposed with no mercy, fought hard and destroyed with the willing of Allah.
There must and there are good reason why Muslims could do that during early Islam can do that even now..

1). They must have founds verses in Quran that supports their actions.
2). When those criminal Muslims are doing such things to those who question them, OUR ALLAH/god/doll IS SLEEPING.. Allah doesn't do a shitt to them in this life.. So they think Allah supports them and they get away with such criminal actions And.. and they are NOT bunch of pussy cowards .. but you and me are bit cowardly as we sit behind key board faaaar awaaay from them to write these things dear Mr. A_B...

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 10:31 am
by WittyBoy
iffo wrote:
WittyBoy wrote:No, it's not like you want it to be, the booty has been collected, and divided, and then the Prophet(pbuh) sent Ali to get the khumus, i think he didn't take a plane from Mecca airport at this time, so it was a long time before this incident happened.

No sorry it can not be a long time. They had no planes but they were not figting in Turkey. If not days it has to be with in a week or two at the most. No woman who was cheering her side few days or week back will be willing to have sex with her enemy that soon willingly.

You first claimed that it was right after the war ended, now you said after a week or two, but you still can't say that he forced her on sex, and you don't have a hadith or a Quranic verse allowed forcing women on sex, if you found it, come and argue that Muslims forced the women on sex. When you tried to do so, you bring a hadith shows that a Sahabi take one of the prettiest girls on Arabia.However, he didn't do anything with her although she became lawful for him.

BTW prophets share is divided by prophet among his family and poor not Ali getting it before even prophet getting it. but that's not important.

If it's not important , why did you write it? :*) The Prophet(pbuh) said that Ali deserves more than this, so he didn't take what would affect the division of booty.

WittyBoy wrote:The narrator Abu saaid al-Khudri talked about himself, and he said we were suffering from "al Izba" which means "Celibacy", so i don't need to read this hadith again because i know from it more than what you know.

Wrong again. First you have no evidence that Abu was not married.

He was too young enough to be exempted from participating in the Battle of Uhud, so he couldn't be married after 3 years from that time, and i already showed you an evidences from the hadith itself. Read below,
Anyway even if he was that does not mean others were unmarried as well.

He said we suffered from celibacy. What does celibacy mean?

Even if they were, that's not important.

No, it's important, baby. You claimed that they have sex with these female captives right after the war ended directly even before they went back to their homes, and i proved you wrong.

What important is they said "Can we take the dick out", they did not say can we fuke or not that was understood they would.

Because everyone of them already knew that he can do sex with the female captive who became under his care.

Note:
This hadith showed how these companions have known their responsibilities towards the right hand's possession (the female captive), every one of them knew well that if his female captive got pregnant, the child will belong to him and he will be responsible for him and his mother.

And prophet said it does not make any difference its better if you don't. He did not say "NOOOOOO", you can not use them as sex object.

No, i showed you several narrations of this hadith, let's discuss them one by one:

(1)
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported: We took women captives, and we wanted to do 'azl with them. We then asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) about it, and he said to us: Verily you do it, verily you do it, verily you do it, but the soul which has to be born until the Day of judgment must be born. [Muslim, 8:3373]

(2)
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) (was asked if he had heard it himself), to which he said: Yes. (I heard) Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying: There is no harm if you do not practise it, for it (the birth of the child) is something ordained (by Allah). [8:3374]

(3)
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) was asked about 'azl, whereupon he said: There is no harm if you do not do that, for it (the birth of the child) is something ordained. Muhammad (one of the narrators) said: (The words) La 'alaykum (there is no harm) implies its Prohibition. [8:3376]

(4)
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that mention was made of 'azl in the presence of Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) whereupon he said: Why do you practise it? They said: There is a man whose wife has to suckle the child, and if that person has a sexual intercourse with her (she may conceive) which he does not like, and there is another person who has a slave-girl and he has a sexual intercourse with her, but he does not like her to have conception so that she may not become Umm Walad, whereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: There is no harm if you do not do that, for that (the birth of the child) is something pre- ordained. Ibn 'Aun said: I made a mention of this hadith to Hasan, and he said: By Allah, (it seems) as if there is upbraiding in it (for 'azl). [8:3377]


In the first hadith, the prophet wondered of this act, this indicates that this act is abnormal. In the second one, if the prophet wanted to allow this act, he would say : "there's no harm if you do that",
They: can we do so?
The prophet: there's no harm if you do so.

But he(pbuh) said: "there's no harm if you don't do that", which means that it will be harm if they do that. This opinion is supported by the third hadith, and the prophet said that this way as an upbraiding in Azl. This opinion is supported too by the last hadith. As you see, i don't come up with new fatwas or invent anything, everything is supported by evidences.

Meaning he allows that you take the dick out so they don't get pregenant, and then sell to someone else , they can do the same to them,. This is your Pathetic Islam and you claim it to be the champion of morality.

I didn't see anyone pathetic more than you. :*)

WittyBoy wrote:If it won't be harmful and it will be useful for her, so why not? but if these two conditions weren't met, what will make me do that? it doesn't a matter for who understands Islam well, but if some people doesn't understand Islam, it's not the fault of Islam. Islam doesn't forbade which can be useful, but it orders you to do it properly or not to do it at all. That's better and logical.


women genital cutting is not useful for noone. Its is so women don't get aroused. Why don't you take of all the flesh from penis head so they don't feel aroused

Please, bring anything prove that, and let me read it, because i experienced your understanding of texts.

WittyBoy wrote:
No, i won't answer, the hadith illustrates itself, the prophet already defined what's meant by the deficient in women intelligence and religion, he(pbuh) didn't say they are stupid or disbelievers.


This hadit only proves that not only you and your prophet are idiot, but your God is idiot as well.

Who made them deficient? Is it their fault IF(they are not) they are defiecient?? is it their fault that they have mesus and they are deficient in religion. Your God made them deficient and then he burn them in hell for that ...... Stupidity at its peak


Let any donkey other than you talk about stupidity, you will see now that your stupidity is what reaches its peak, this hadith doesn't prove anything but your stupidity and idiocy. I'll explain to your limited brain what hadith actually said,

The Prophet(pbuh): "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)."
The Women: "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?"
The Prophet(pbuh): "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you."

So the prophet defined the reason which is:
- cursing frequently and being ungrateful to the husband.
- leading a cautious sensible man astray.

A woman may enter Hell if she did these things, no sane on the earth, said that a woman will enter the Hell because of her menses or witness.

What about the middle statement; "I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you"? The Prophet didn't say it like this, he said (as in Sahih Muslim Translation, 1:142): "I haven't seen anyone deficient in intelligence and religion but (at the same time) robbing the wisdom of the wise, besides you.", the women then asked why The Prophet(pbuh) described them as deficient in intelligence and religion, and he(pbuh) answered them, he showed that this deficiency out of the religious rules not because the women are stupids or disbelievers.

WittyBoy wrote:why did you write "black woman" in bold??? he said a black woman with unkempt hair. BTW, The prophet(pbuh) when he adopted, he adopted a black slave, and who used to call for Muslims prayers was a black man too.

Its degrading to black women, untiddy hair is not a crime.

Do all black women look like the woman who the Prophet(pbuh) saw in the dream?? unkempt hair isn't a crime but it can be either acceptable, or scary. In this dream the Prophet(pbuh) narrated, this black woman with unkempt hair was in a form made the prophet interpreted this dream as a disease will come, but he didn't say that seeing any black woman is a bad sign, and i showed you that when the prophet(pbuh) adopted a son, he adopted a black child.

WittyBoy wrote:Then he said (to my wife). Call a lady-baker to bake along with you and keep on taking out scoops from your earthenware meat-pot, and do not put it down from its fireplace." They were one-thousand (who took their meals), and by Allah they all ate, and when they left the food and went away, our earthenware pot was still bubbling (full of meat) as if it had not decreased, and our dough was still being baked as if nothing had been taken from it.

Please learn to mention the source


It's the same hadith, man. :*) I just completed the same hadith you copied and pasted without even knowing its rest. Did you know only the first part of hadith? Did you use to do so all the time?? what If someone deceived you and showed you a part form hadith or a verse and hided the other part, would you follow him as a donkey?


WittyBoy wrote:So you are talking about a Prophet not an ordinary man.

Person like you who refuse to use his brain will be even OK ...

You don't have brain at all, :*) If someone like you do the same act, people would throw this food in his face, but He is A PROPHET, and he did so for a specific reason.

I can not think of any immoral evil thing that you will not justify as long as it is in hadith. Because you are morally and intellectulaly bankrupt, that's what you religion has done to you. I am glad there is no hadith about having sex with your mother, I am sure you will have some justification for that as well.

say: "Nay, Allah never commands what is shameful: do ye say of Allah what ye know not?"

Why don't you search other websites for new claims? I'm waiting...

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 11:01 am
by skynightblaze
Ahmed wrote:Do the man made rubbish books of hadith prove the authenticity of Quran?


Your master, havent I told you that I didnt yet read your posts?. It will take a lot of time to reply to your never ending posts.Its as good as a document.Btw in my last post I said "hindsight" . I am not sure whether its the right word. What I mean is you have a context or an association in mind when you see the word "middle prayer " and that association comes because of the influence of the hadiths.That bias shouldnt exist if we are considering quran alone.The word MIDDLE PRAYER simply doesnt mean anything to a person who doesnt know that there are 5 prayers and doesnt know afternoon prayer.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 11:50 am
by WittyBoy
@ AhmedBahgat

You brought a hadith about the prohibition of writing hadiths, but you completely neglected hadiths allow writing hadiths, i hope you open your mind and read the following,


Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As:
I used to write everything which I heard from the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). I intended (by it) to memorise it. The Quraysh prohibited me saying: Do you write everything that you hear from him while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) is a human being: he speaks in anger and pleasure? So I stopped writing, and mentioned it to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). He signalled with his finger to him mouth and said: Write, by Him in Whose hand my soul lies, only right comes out from it.

[Abu Dawood, 25:3639]



Narrated Abu Huraira:
There is none among the companions of the Prophet who has narrated more Hadiths than I except 'Abdallah bin Amr (bin Al-'As) who used to write them and I never did the same.

[al-Bukhari, 3:113]

Abu Huraira assured that Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As used to write hadiths, and the Prophet(pbuh) allowed him to write hadiths, The prophet said to him WRITE , and Abu Huraira said he (Abdullah) used to WRITE. So The prophet(pbuh) prevented some people from writing to protect Quran from mixing with other texts, and allowed others. By the time, The fear from mixing Quran with hadiths became pointless, so why don't they record what they memorized from the sayings of the prophet(pbuh)? This is how real Muslims think.

WittyBoy wrote:I showed you that what the companions has done was out of their honesty, and i asked you to answer my original post i addressed to you, but it seems like you are disabled to answer it, like as you did with the legitimate marriage question.
You showed me nothing, all your evidences from your Man Made rubbish crap books of hadith are not admissible in my court. How come you use something that I totally reject, against me?

OK, i decided not to continue reading this crap. If you want to debate me, you have to be as polite as me and as any real Muslim, but because you aren't real Muslim, and misunderstand Islam and its ethics, you will keep on your crap, and use that as a chance to run away, in this case, you don't deserve even one letter from me.

Re: Are these hadiths true WittyBoy?

PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:38 pm
by AhmedBahgat
WittyBoy wrote:@ AhmedBahgat


Salam

WittyBoy wrote:You brought a hadith about the prohibition of writing hadiths, but you completely neglected hadiths allow writing hadiths,


Hahahaha, how confused your are, have I not told ya that you cannot use your crap hadith against me?

Is that the only evidence you have to prove your shirk?

See, you are only standing on water. I am on the other hand standing on firm ground.

WittyBoy wrote:i hope you open your mind and read the following,


Open my mind to what? To your shirk?

Dream on, read this, Mushrik and hadith worshipper:

وَمَنْ يَهْدِ اللَّهُ فَمَا لَهُ مِنْ مُضِلٍّ ۗ أَلَيْسَ اللَّهُ بِعَزِيزٍ ذِي انْتِقَامٍ (37)
And one whom Allah guides, for him there will be no misguide. Is not Allah Mighty Who owns retribution?
[Al Quran ; 39:37]

-> See: And one whom Allah guides, for him there will be no misguide. Why I need yout misguiding, contradicting, confusing and rubbish man made books and I have the truthful book of my Lord?

answer this question only, Mushrik.

WittyBoy wrote:
Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As:


So, all the other evidences are abrogated by an alleged hadith by Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As?

And even if I take it so, It was only a command to that man to write, possibly he had a bad memory, not a command to Bukhari and others who did not even meet the prophet

WittyBoy wrote:I used to write everything which I heard from the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). I intended (by it) to memorise it. The Quraysh prohibited me saying: Do you write everything that you hear from him while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) is a human being: he speaks in anger and pleasure? So I stopped writing, and mentioned it to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). He signalled with his finger to him mouth and said: Write, by Him in Whose hand my soul lies, only right comes out from it.

[Abu Dawood, 25:3639]


How funny, He signalled with his finger to him mouth and said: Write, by Him in Whose hand my soul lies, only right comes out from it.

Right like what you ignorant Mushrik?

Approaching his wives for foreplay while menstruated then telling others it is better for you not to do that?

And even the shameful excuse you hadith worshippers presented as alleged to be said by Aysha is more sinister than the sin itself, don’t you know that your man made rubbish of crap tell us that our mother Aysha were talking to some men about Muhammed’s dick?

Yep, sharmooot Mushrik of a filthy idol worshipper, she was telling them Muhammed was superior in controlling his dick even though he had the sexual power of 30 men, opps I mean 40 men. So it was lawful for him to approach us for sexual foreplay through our top halves, but you men should never do that.

How fukin ridiculous, you stupid Muhsrik Muslim, I guess we should have an alleged rest of the story too, don’t you reckon? Let me imagine…. Hmmmmmmm, here is one

So the men asked Aysha: What can we do then, mother? We mean, we are horny and our wives are menstruated but we cannot do as the prophet used to do with you, mother, we mean fuk you from your top half; we cannot control our dicks as the prophet was superior of doing so, so we might get excited and fail to control our dicks then fuk them in their menstruated pussies?

Aysha thinks for a while and say: No worries horny sons, how about you masturbate during that period. That should be a type of dick control too.

How fukin ridiculous you filthy retarded bunch of Mushrikoon bound to hell.

And how stupid and dumb by you confused Mushriks.


WittyBoy wrote:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
There is none among the companions of the Prophet who has narrated more Hadiths than I except 'Abdallah bin Amr (bin Al-'As) who used to write them and I never did the same.

[al-Bukhari, 3:113]

Abu Huraira assured that Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As used to write hadiths, and the Prophet(pbuh) allowed him to write hadiths, The prophet said to him WRITE , and Abu Huraira said he (Abdullah) used to WRITE. So The prophet(pbuh) prevented some people from writing to protect Quran from mixing with other texts, and allowed others. By the time, The fear from mixing Quran with hadiths became pointless, so why don't they record what they memorized from the sayings of the prophet(pbuh)? This is how real Muslims think.


And how about Omar Ibn El-Khattab when he was a khalifah, you dumb?

And also, this is not how the real Muslims think, this is how the confused Muslims think.

BUT IT WAS NEVER WHAT THE PROPHET SAID YOU LYING PIECE OF MUSHRIK TRASH

WittyBoy wrote:I showed you that what the companions has done was out of their honesty, and i asked you to answer my original post i addressed to you, but it seems like you are disabled to answer it, like as you did with the legitimate marriage question.
You showed me nothing, all your evidences from your Man Made rubbish crap books of hadith are not admissible in my court. How come you use something that I totally reject, against me?
[/quote]

WittyBoy wrote:I OK, i decided not to continue reading this crap. If you want to debate me, you have to be as polite as me and as any real Muslim, but because you aren't real Muslim, and misunderstand Islam and its ethics, you will keep on your crap, and use that as a chance to run away, in this case, you don't deserve even one letter from me.




Piss off you confused filthy retarded piece of Mushrik trash. You should leave being a real Muslim or not to my Lord. But as I told your Mushrik arse, even if I am the worst sinful Muslim, as long as I am not shirking anything with Him, I may have a chance.

YOUR MAN MADE RUBBISH EVEN APPLY TO ME BUT NOT TO YOUR MUSHRIK ARSE.

Looks like that I will be the last one laughing at your Mushrik arse

At the end of the day, it was all what I EXPECTED and even said it before posting my Grand Slam exposing your clear cut shirk that can be even seen clearly by some kafirs, I stated that you will be dismissed if you wont come with anything new, at least you should have refuted all the many discrepancy found in your man made rubbish of crap. Shame on you.

You are nothing but a failed Mushrik who have been exposed. But as from now you have been life dismissed.

http://www.free-islam.com/modules.php?n ... =3646#3646

Welcome to my Cyber Jail, Mushrik inmate. Now the fun should begin.