Archive for the ‘God’ Category

The Haraam (forbidden) concept of halala
 
by Khurshid Imam
 
 
A. Introduction
 
Ask a mufti or maulana on an islamic scholar – “Can i marry a lady for one or two night?”
—- “What do you mean?”
 
“I mean i want to marry a lady for one or two night and after that i will divorce her. Is it ok? Is it permissible in islam?”
— — “No. No. its absolutely prohibited in islam. Its haraam. Its nothing less than zina i.e. illegal physical relation.”
 
Though any person with the sane mind and little bit of knowledge of islam will agree that marrying someone for one or two night or for fixed time is prohibited in islam yet there exists a similar unislamic practice called halala. Thanks to blind and unconditional following of their-set-of-scholars. Thanks to utter most ignorance about islam.
 
 
B. What is Halala?
 
Note: The correct way of divorce or talaq in islam is hardly practiced by people. Almighty God has clearly guided us regarding the procedure of talaq yet muslims as a whole mock at ruling of Allah and adopt other method of talaq contrary to the one described by Almighty God. If a couple really try to follow the proper way of talaq then very very few talaq will happen between a husband and wife. This is different topic and inshallah i will write over it in future. Wait for the article:Nikah and Talaq : As described by Almighty God
 
One must keep in mind that the correct procedure of talaq is such that a couple is highly encouraged to reconcile. It is actually very difficult and requires high degree of conviction for divorce; that a couple will get separated.
However, if a couple agrees for divorce and complete all formalities for divorce then they are to be separated. Let’s assume husband was Mr. H and wife was Ms. W. Now, after divorce they are to be separated. Here both H and W are free to marry any person. However they both can not get married to each other. They both can get married if (here comes two different ways 1- islamic way 2 – Un-islamic way called halala) :
 
1. Islamic way –
a. The wife W marries to someone else – say Mr. E. They marry as per islamic way.
b. They have not decided or put condition that their marriage will be only for one night or any fixed number of time.
c. Then if within their married life at any point of time due to any unavoidable reason they decide for divorce and go for separation and they complete all formalities of talaq or divorce as per Quran.
d. Then this lady W can marry her first husband W.
e. The important point is that W can not marry to E with the intention of divorce.
 
2. Unislamic way called halala
All above steps except that W or E or both have decided in advance that they will go for divorce so as to facilitate marriage of W with H. 
Its utter non-sense and against common sense that a marriage happens for a fixed time. This is because of ignorance and blind following of people. This halala has become business in some part of india-pakistan. There are halala expert men whose job is to marry a lady, divorce her after 1 night so that she can marry her first husband. 
 
 
C. Important point:
Marriage is a very important and sacred bond. Due to not following God’s way of life we know the horrific result of western world where more children and getting borne out of  (without their parents being married) wedlock.  
 
A. Just over 40% of births were outside of marriage in 2002 
 
B. Nearly half of all children born out of wedlock, official figures show (22 Oct 2010)
 
Since islam is a complete way of life (and not only theoretical gossip) hence islam prescribes best ways to deals with issues and day-today problems. One should not take marriage as game of doll. Its holiness need to be maintained. So Islam has prescribed the tough condition for re-marriage with the former husband IF talaq was complete in all aspects.
A Nikah in Islam is an Ibadat and is a contract of permanent nature till it is impossible for them to adjust later on for reasons unforeseen at the time of marriage. Describing the nature of permanency in a contract of Nikah, the Qur’an says: “They (the wives) have taken from you a solemn covenant.” (Quran, Surah Nisa 4:21)
 
 
D. Conclusion
1.      The Quranic way of talaq is hardly practiced by Muslims. The real method of talaq leaves no stone unturned in reconciliation between couple.
2.      After complete talaq husband and wife can marry only if wife marries a person without the intention of seeking divorce. If later in her married life, due to unavoidable reason she gets divorced, then only she can marry her former husband. This is Islamic way.
3.      The haraam concept of halal makes a wife marry a person for one night or a few days with the intention of divorce so that she can marry her former husband.
4.      Ignorance, distance from Quran is the main reason fro halala.
5.      For details on Nikah and Talaq kindly wait for the article: Wait for the article: Nikah and Talaq : As described by Almighty God
 
 
Note: * If you don’t agree with the mail then instead of giving fatwa of deviation / kufr / shirk / biddat – have faith in Allah and leave it to him to judge.
 
* Author: Khurshid Imam is software engineer at Bangalore, India. For any criticism / feedback / suggestion feel free to mail – serviceforhumanity@gmail.com
 
The article can be found at:  http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2012/04/haraam-concept-of-halala.html  and same has been attached in the mail.
 

An introduction to Hindu Scriptures

Introduction

Hinduism is the misnomer of Sanatan dharma that is professed by more than 80 million people in India. It actually refers to set of belief and customs. In this article we will throw light over sacred scriptures of Hinduism. When it is asked to a Muslim about their holy book then answer is – Quran; similarly our Christian brethren answer – Bible. But when same question is asked to hindus then there is different answers; some may say – bhagwad geeta, some will say ramayan and a very few Vedas. Let’s have brief idea about the scriptures of Hinduism in order to understand each other better.

Scriptures of Hinduism

Vedas
Upnishad
Darshan
Puranas
Itihaas
Smriti

The precise time of origin of each of these is not known. What people say about time is nothing but speculation. In fact – in terms of remembering the time of origin of any of hindu scriptures we have no information at all. No proof for whatever people say about the time of origin of any books. However the only thing guaranteed is the order in which they came into existence. For example – there is no difference of opinion that Vedas are the earliest, then upnishad were authored, then puranas came.

A. VEDAS

Vedas are the earliest scripture of Hinduism. They are held most scared by knowledgeable people of Hinduism. Vedas are considered ISH-WANI or God’s word. Vedas are said to be APAURISHAY meaning “Not from human being” or “divine”. There is no precise information available about the time of origin of Vedas. Regarding Vedas being God’s word or Not from Islamic perspective – is beyond the scope of the article. However I will only mention that though majority of Muslims are silent or negate Vedas being God’s word – we have several proofs based on which we say that Vedas too were word of God like torah,zabur,injeel . This discussion can be taken separately in other article.

Vedas are divided into 4 books. These 4 books are further divided with various terminologies. I will mention the latest rule of division for each ved.

1.Rigved: It is considered to be most scared and oldest Vedas. Rigved is divided into 10 mandal. Each mandal is divided into sukt and each sukt is divided into mantr. It is similar to the division of Quran: 30 para, each para has several ruku and each ruku has several ayah.

For example: “The Only Lord of all created beings. He fixed and holdeth up this earth and heavens. What gods besides Him shall we adore with our oblation?” – Rigved 10:121:1 means this statement is given in rigved 10th mandal, 121st suk and 1st mantr.
Remember there is no shlokas in Vedas. Vedas contain only mantr.

2.Samved: As per the latest division samved is divided into 1875 mantr.

3.Yajurved: It is divided into 40 adhyay and each adhyay is divided into mantr.

For example: “Those who worship natural things enter into darkness of hell, those who worship man made things enter more into darkness of hell” – Yajurved 40:9 – means 40th adhyay and 9th mantr.

4.Atharvaved: It is divided into 20 kand, and each kand is divided into sukt and each sukt into mantr.
For example: “He (God) does not die, nor grows old” – atharvaved 10:8:32 – means Atharvaved 10th kand, 8th sukt and 32nd mantr.

Vedas are full of monotheism. It is absent from idol worship. If someone does not misinterpret then it is free from multiple god concept. It will require a separate book to elaborate these points.

B. UPNISHAD

Primarily 108 upnishad are accepted. They were authored by scholars. They are not claimed to be God’s word. Upnishad contain word of wisdom, about monotheism about social life etc. They too are free from any concept of idol worship.

Probably chandogya upnishad was the starting point of the concept of birth-re birth cycle. Also through upnishad caste system got force. The status of Brahmin was raised.
“A man who steals the gold of a brahmin, he (i.e. a brahmin) who drinks liquor, he who dishonours his teacher’s bed and he who kills a brahmin—these four fall, as also a fifth who associates with them”- Chandogya Upnishad: Part 5, chapter 10, verse 9

However with the upnishad playing with the God’s word (Vedas) has started. Before upnishad only Ved was there – which was considered God’s word. But human interference in God’s word started with the writing of Illopnishad. All hindu scholars agree that illopnishad was the first upnishad – and to your surprise it contains word by word last chapter of Yajurved i.e. 40th Chapter of yajurved was written separately as a book in the form of illopnishad.

C. DARSHAN

Darshan means philosophy. There are 6 books of darshan. They contain philosophy, word of wisdom and monotheistic talk. Again they too free from idol worship concept. Out of these 6 darshan the most famous and popular is uttar-mimansa-darshan which is also called Vedant. It was written by badrayan.

D. PURANAS

Primarily 18 puranas are accepted. Puarans are the work of much later time than Vedas or upnishad. Some of the famous puranas are: shrimad bhagwad puran, shiv puran, Vishnu puran, kalki puran, bhawishy puran, matasya puran, garud puran etc. Puarans does contain the concept of idol worship, the concept of multiple gods, gods like human beings, marriage of gods, fights of gods etc. In fact what is practiced today in Hinduism is not vedic religion rather puranic religion. In shrimadbhagwad puran Krishan is projected as superior god, in Vishnu puran Vishnu is projected as superior, in shiv puran shiva is projected as superior.
The story of Prophet Adam, eve, Prophet Noah and the great flood is mentioned in detailed in puranas. Also puranas contain detailed description of paradise and hell as described in Islam.

E. ITIHAAS

Itihas means history. Two most famous books of itihas are : Ramayan and Mahabharat

1. RAMAYAN

Ramayan is the great epic written by valmiki ji. However the ramayan that we know today and that is read in temples is NOT the valmiki ramayan but tulsidas written ramcharitmanas. Ramcharitmanas was written during the time of Akbar and its mostly read, preached and telecasted through TV Serial. While valmiki ramayan projected ram only as a human being or an obedient son – ramcharitmanas projects ram as God. Valmiki ramayan speaks about king dashrath having more than 360 wives – ramcharitmanas speaks about he having only 3 wives. Similarly as per valmiki ramayan Ram had several wives. (For more information: click here – )

2. MAHABHARAT

This is also one of the greatest literary works in Sanskrit. This epic was written originally by Ved vyas. However what ved vyas wrote was a book called jay. It contained 8000 shlokas. After him Vaishampayan and other added shlokas in the book and named it bharat. Number of shlokas was increased from 8000 to 24,000. And today mahabharat contains more than 1,00,000 or 1 lakh shlokas and it is now called mahabhrata. So the book that was originally written with 8000 shlokas – today contain more than 1 lakh shlokas. So on an average out of every 13 shlokas in mahabharat 12 are adulteration and only 1 is as per original book.

BHAGWAD GEETA

Practically it is considered most sacred by hindus. Bhagwad Geeta is nothing but a small part of Mahabharat. It is from the bhism parv of mahabharat. Geeta contains conversation between arjuna and Krishna. In the battlefield when arjuna refused to take arms against his relatives then Krishna encouraged him to fight for truth and justice. Now as I already mentioned that today’s mahabharat contains every 12 shlokas out of 13 as adulteration or interpolation. So whatever krihna / arjuna say in geeta there is only 1/13 chance (on an average) that they have said as per original mahabharat.

F. SMRITI

Most popular book under this category is manusmriti. This is the book of Hindu law. Hindu laws are derived from this book. It emphasizes lot on caste system. However I would like to add that one should not get confused by the name that MANU was the author of this book. . It is of very later origin. Manu was not the author rather it was in his remembrance that book was written and attributed to him.

These are very brief information about Hindu scriptures. One should know it in order to have better understanding of Hinduism.

If you don’t agree with the mail then instead of giving fatwa of deviation /kufr /shirk/biddat – have faith
in Allah and leave it to him to judge

Author: Khurshid Imam is software engineer at Bangalore. For any criticism / feedback / suggestion
feel free to mail – serviceforhumanity@gmail.com

What is the name of Allah?

Khurshid Imam

 

A. Introduction

It is very common among muslims to hear – “Allah is the personal name of God and Allah has 99 attributive names”.

However, this statement opens door for several questions.

There is a personal name of almighty God?

He has only 99 attributive names? And all in arabic only?

What about other language names for God?

Is Allah “arabic” God?

Is God of muslims is specific to arabian peninsula or arabic language at least?

What about Krishna, yahowa, ishwar etc? Are they not the name of God?

B. Can Almighty God have a personal name?

It is said that Allah is the personal name (zaati naam) of almighty God. There are 99 attributive name (sifati naam) of Allah. Please ponder over the term personal name.

Who named mobile phone as mobile phone?

Who named mount Everest as mount Everest?

Who named Albert Einstein as Albert Einstein?

Who named Lamborghini car as Lamborghini?

The answer to all above questions is – the producer, the discoverer or the one who owned it named it so. To name something i.e. to give a personal name there MUST be an entity over and above that thing. Then only that particular thing can be named. My son is called as Ammar imam because i have named him so. There must be someone before ammar imam who will name him so.

Now when one say that personal name of Almighty God is Allah – then a very logical and natural Question arises: Who was there before Allah who named him so? Who decided that Allah should be the personal name of Allah? And that also why only an arabic name? Is Almighty God specific to Arabic language? Billion dollar question is – can God have a personal name?

Answer is:

1. There is no personal name of almighty God. All names of God are attributive names.

2. The one who is the master, creator, sustainer, ..(You can add all possible attributes of almighty God) is the one who alone is worthy to be worshipped. He is the one almighty God.

3. One who is worthy to be worshipped is called Allah in arabic language. Arabic word Allah is made up of two words – Al (The) + Ilah (Worthy to be worshipped).

4. Did not pre-islamic pagans of arabs used to address their supreme God as Allah?

5. Allah or Almighty God existed when there was no language viz: Sanskrit, Arabic, Hebrew.

Note: I am aware of some people’s opinion that Allah is not made up of Al+ilah rather its one personal name of God. I respect their view but find it wrong because it is based on the wrong assumption that Almighty God has personal name Allah.

C. The myth of personal name of Allah

“Say: “Invoke Allah or invoke the Most Gracious (Al Rahmaan), by whatever name you invoke Him (it is the same), for to Him belong the most beautiful Names (Asma ul husna)”- Quran, Surah Isra 17:110

1. The Ayah says that whether you call Allah or Al-Rahman; you can call him by any name as long as it is the most beautiful name.

2. Message of Allah has come into different regions of the world and in different language. It is obvious that Almighty God would have addressed himself in those revelations in that language and not in Arabic. The message of Allah in Persian language would have mentioned Almighty God in Persian language. Similarly the revelation of Allah in Sanskrit language would had terms in Sanskrit language that would denote Almighty God.

3. There is very close resemblance in the root word for “worthy to be worshipped” / “Allah” in languages like Arabic, Hebrew etc. Not going into details of these.

4. Previous ummah upholding the message of God would have addressed almighty God in their language. Since Quran is in arabic hence we have the arabic word Allah.

5. The above ayah makes clear that God can be called by any name that is most beautiful and befits the God. In fact – all good qualities in its extreme form refers to Almighty God only. There is no limit to the number of attributive names of God. His all names are depending upon a quality.

6. Hence in dawah one can refer to Almighty God as Ishwar, mahaprabhu, Sarwshaktimaan, ajanma etc.

D. Hadees regrading 99 names of Allah

1. There are few ahadees that speaks about 99 names of Allah. for example:

Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah has ninety-nine Names, i.e., one hundred minus one, and whoever believes in their meanings and acts accordingly, will enter Paradise; and Allah is Witr (one) and loves ‘the Witr’ (i.e., odd numbers). (Sahih Bukhari, Book #75, Hadith #419). Also Sahih Bukhari, Book #50, Hadith #894

2. However there is a hadees in trimdhi that speaks about certain 99 names of Allah. The hadees of trimdhi that speaks about certain 99 names and put the list of 99 names has been deemed week by the scholars. The list of 99 names was inserted by the narrator Al Walid Ibn Muslim. This hadees has been judged weak by many hadith scholars such as al-Tirmidhi himself, al-Nawawi, ibn Hajar, ibn Taymiyyah, ibn al-Qayyim, ibn Kathir, al-San’ani and others.

Without going into detail i would like to just point out that:

1. As evident with many ahadees, one need not to take every word of hadees literally. 99 names does not indicate that only 99 names. For example- Sahih Bukhari, Book #50, Hadith #894 says that Allah has 99 names and whoever knows them will go to Paradise. One should not conclude that just by knowing 99 names of Allah one will get jannah. Taking it literary will create havoc. Lot of mushrik can just memorize these 99 names and claim that they are entitled for jannah because they know these names as per this hadees. Similarly 99 does not mean only 99, rather it signifies lot of names.

2. Scholars like Ibn Taimiyah, Ibnul Qayyim have made clear that hadees saying Allah has 99 names; does not mean only 99. Imam Nawawi states:”The scholars agree that this hadith did not limit the Names of Allah and this is not what it is supposed to mean, that Allah do not have Names other than these 99 Names.What is meant in this hadith is that, anyone who managed to encompass ( memorize and understand ) these Names will enter paradise. So it was intended to inform us on the condition for the entry of paradise, and not limit the Names of Allah.”

3. There are so many names of Allah in the Quran that are not mentioned in ahadees.For example:

Dhul Fadhl: (Mentioned in Quran, Surah Baqrah 2:105)

Dhul Arsh: (Mentioned in Quran, Surah 85:15)

Dhil Ma’aarij: (Mentioned in Quran, Surah Marij 70:3)

Dhul Jalali wal Ikram: (Mentioned in Quran, Surah rahmaan 55:27, 78)

Dhul Tawl: (Mentioned in Quran, Surah momin 40:3)

Ar Rabb: (Mentioned in Quran, Surah Fatiha 1:1)

Researchers have found far more than 99 attributes of Allah from Quran. There is no restriction of language or number of names of Almighty God.

E. Claim of ISKCON : Krishna – name of God?

Those of you who are into interfaith interaction, would have encountered situation when an ISKCON / hare krishna group person would have said that krishna is also name of Allah. ISKCON / hare krishna is a sect of Hinduism and believes Krishna to be supreme God. They tell to muslims that Krishna and Allah are same and Krishna is one of the name of Allah. One need to remember following things:

1. Krishna refers to the person who was part of Mahabharat – an epic. The epic has no correlation with reality. Only with the passage of time people started believing this mythological story as real story.

2. Apart from that, as per the story; Krishna was a man, who was born, who died. He can never ever remotely be called God.

3. Last but not least – As Quran says in 17:110 that all beautiful names belong to Almighty God. krishna means “black”. Black is usually symbol of negative / devil / ignorance and hence can never ever apply to Almighty God.

F. Conclusion

1. It is a misconception that the almighty GOD has a personal name. He can never have a personal name.

2. All names of Allah are attributive name including the name Allah.

3. God can be referred in any language. There is no restriction of language. God is beyond the boundaries of language.

4. Its wrong to say that God has only 99 names. In fact there is no limit to names of God.

5. To God belongs most beautiful names.

Note: * If you don’t agree with the mail then instead of giving fatwa of deviation / kufr / shirk / biddat – have faith in Allah and leave it to him to judge.

* Author: Khurshid Imam is software engineer at Bangalore, India. For any criticism / feedback / suggestion feel free to mail – serviceforhumanity@gmail.com

The article can be found at http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2012/04/what-is-name-of-allah.html

The article can be downloaded in pdf from: http://www.scribd.com/KHURSHIDIMAM

Meat eating and animal killing in Valmiki ramayan
 
By: Khurshid Imam
 
 
 
A. Introduction
 
Valmiki Ramayan happens to be the “Original Ramayan” in Indian tradition. This is the book that introduced people to the story of Shri Ram chandr ji. This great epic was written by Shri Valmiki ji. Owing to the popularity of this book; several versions of Ramayana were written afterwards. Several centuries later Ramcharitmanas written by Tulsidas came into existence. Now days it is Ramcharitmanas that is read widely. Valmiki Ramayan is not read as much, but thankfully it is accessible and available to people.
 
To know about some differences between Original Ramayana and the Ramayana that you know – click here.
 
Our Hindu brethren accuse muslims of meat eating and declare this act as inhumane and barbaric. This issue of “meat eating” has even become a political tool for some mischievous elements of society. However when we go through Sacred Books of Sanatan dharma or Hinduism then we find several references that not only permit or justify meat eating but also encourage in some case. When killing of animal for sacrifice or eating is done by revered personality or those who are worshipped then it poses a very big question mark over the issue of meat eating. In this article we will look at very few such references (7-8) wherein sacred personalities of Hinduism kill animal for sacrifice and for eating purpose.
 
Kindly note: I am not presenting research work on all references related to meat eating in Hindu Scriptures but only showing very few references from one book only!!
 
Another important point is that I would like to draw attention of dear readers of gross mistranslation done by some publishers. It is not difficult to understand that there are deliberate mistranslations done for some verses which speak about meat eating or animal killing. Why this literal fraud? Of course; to conceal truth from the common mass and let them not understand the reality of the issue.



For the ease of user we are presenting at least 2-3 different translations for each shlok (Verse).
 
 
B. Glorification of roasted meat for eating by Shri Ram chandr ji and others
 
1. Sanskrit text
तां तदा दर्शयित्वा तु मैथिली गिरिनिम्नगाम् ।निषसाद गिरिप्रस्थे सीतां मांसेन छन्दयन् ।।
इदं मध्यमिदं स्वादु निष्टप्तमिद मग्निना ।एवमास्ते  धर्मात्मा सीतया सह राघवः ।।
(वाल्मीकि रामायणअयोध्या काण्ड, 96, 1  2)
 
Hindi Translation
अर्थात इस प्रकार सीता जी को (नदी केदर्शन कराकर उस समय श्री रामचन्द्र जी उनके पास बैठ गए और तपस्वी जनों के उपभोग में आने योग्यमांस से उनका इस प्रकार लालन करने लगे, ‘‘इधर देखो प्रियेयह कितना मुलायम हैस्वादिष्ट है और इसको आग पर अच्छी तरह सेका गयाहै।‘‘
===============================================================================
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation:
मैथिलीम् princess of Mithila, तां सीताम् that Sita, तथा in that way, गिरिनिम्नगाम् mountain-river, दर्शयित्वा having shown, मांसेन with meat,छन्दयन् gratifying, गिरिप्रस्थे on the mountain-slope, निषसाद sat.
धर्मात्मा righteous,  राघवः that Rama, इदम् this, मेध्यम् sacred meatइदम् this, स्वादु is savoury, इदम् this one, अग्निना with fire,निष्टप्तम् roastedएवम् uttering this way, सीतया सह in the company of Sita, आस्ते was seated.
 
Having shown to Sita the mountain-river Mandakini and gratifying her with meat, Rama sat on the mountain slope. Righteous Rama was seated in Sita’s company and remarked saying “This meat is sacred. This is savoury roasted in fire“. (Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 96:1-2)
 
===============================================================================
 
The intentional mistranslation by Geeta Press, Gorakhpur:
 
 
 
See the mistranslation done by Geeta press, Gorakhpur. Word “meat” is mistranslated as fruit and plants parts!!Though Original Sanskrit text is talking about meat that is meant for eating; meat that is roasted well on fire but in hindi translation readers are told that fruits and plant parts were meant for eating and cooked well on fire J
 
 
C. Shri Ram chandr ji and Shri Lakshman killing animals for meat
 
2. Sanskrit text
तौ तत्र हत्वा चतुरो महामृगान्      वराहमृश्यं पृषतं महारुरुम् 
आदाय मेध्यं त्वरितं बुभुक्षितौ      वासाय काले ययतुर्वनस्पतिम्
(Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 52:102)
 
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation
बुभुक्षितौ being very hungry, तौ they, तत्र there, वराहम् a boarऋश्यम् a white footed male antelopeपृषतम् spotted deerमहागुरुम् a great deer with black stripesचतुरः four, मृगान् animals, हत्वा killedमेध्यम् pure meatत्वरितम् quickly, आदाय partaking as food,काले in the evening time, वासाय for rest, वनस्पतिम् under a tree, ययतुः reached.
 
Being famished, Rama, Lakshmana hunted and killed a boar, a Rishya animal (a white footed male antelope), a spotted deer and a great deer with black stripes and quickly partaking the pure meat reached a tree by the evening to spend the night. (Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 52:102) 
 
===============================================================================
 
See the intentional gross mistranslation
 
In the below photo taken from the site http://nyktrivedi.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/valmiki-ramayan-sanskrit-hindi-vol-02-ayodhya-kaand-purvardh1.pdf  one can see how readers are made to understand things wrongly.

 

 
 
The Sanskrit word HATWA (हत्वा) = after KILLING. But it’s wrongly translated as “shikaar kheli” i.e. (they enjoyed hunting???)
Similarly word  Medhyam (मेध्यम्) = pure meat here. But it is wrongly translated as “kand mul, phal” i.e. Plants, fruits etc J
Can you see this open forgery?
 
The intentional mistranslation by Geeta Press, Gorakhpur:
 

 

 
Yet again we can see entirely different translation. Text says that Shri Ram chandr ji and Lakshman ji killed various animals and took meat from it but translation says that they merely threw at animals and took plant food for eating J Is not this literal scam? People are being fooled.
 
 
D. Shri Ram chandr ji and lakshman ji killing animals for sacrifice
 
3. Sanskrit text
ऐणेयं मांसमाहृत्य शालां यक्ष्यामहे वयम्।
कर्तव्यं वास्तुशमनं सौमित्रेचिरजीविभि:       Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 56.22।।
 
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation
सौमित्रे! O Lakshmana, ऐणेयं मांसम् flesh of black antelopeआहृत्य having brought, वयम् we, शालाम् this leafy hut, यक्ष्यामहे will worship,चिरजीविभि: those who intend to live for long time, वास्तुशमनम् pacification by house-hold deity, कर्तव्यम् should to be done.
 
O Lakshmana! Those who intend to live for long should pacify the deity residing over here.Therefore, we shall bring the flesh of black antelope and offer sacrifice at the leaf hut. (Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 56.22)
 
===============================================================================
 
The intentional mistranslation by Geeta Press, Gorakhpur:
 

 

The mistranslation is clear. Meat is again replaced with some plant part; Nothing more to say.
 
 
4. Sanskrit text
मृगं हत्वाऽऽनय क्षिप्रं लक्ष्मणेह शुभेक्षण!
कर्तव्य श्शास्त्रदृष्टो हि विधिर्धर्ममनुस्मर।       Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 56.23।।
 
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation
शुभेक्षण one who has auspicious looking eyes, लक्ष्मण Lakshmana, मृगम् the antelopeहत्वा having killedक्षिप्रम् quickly, इह here, आनयbring, शास्त्रदृष्ट: as prescribed by the scriptures, विधि: rites, कर्तव्यः हि will have to be carried out, धर्मम् the tradition, अनुस्मर recollect.
 
O Lakshmana!, Kill an antelope and bring it here quickly. The rites as prescribed by the scriptures will have to be carried out. You know and recollect that tradition also.
 
===============================================================================
 
 

 

The intentional mistranslation by Geeta Press, Gorakhpur:
 

 

One can see the same trend here. Word “meat” being replaced as plant’s part. Word “After killing” omitted.
 
 
5. Sanskrit text
भ्रातुर्वचनमाज्ञाय लक्ष्मणपरवीरहा।
चकार  यथोक्तं  तं राम पुनरब्रवीत्।       Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 56.24।।
 
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation
परवीरहा slayer of enemy heroes,  लक्ष्मण: that Lakshmana, भ्रातु: brother’ s, वचनम् words, आज्ञाय having understood, यथोक्तम् as told,चकार carried out, राम: Rama, तम् him, पुन: again, अब्रवीत् said.
 
Lakshmana who is slayer of enemy heroes having understood his brother’s words carried out accordingly. Again Rama said to him.
 
===============================================================================
 
 

 

 
6. Sanskrit text
ऐणेयं श्रपयस्वैतच्छालां यक्ष्यामहे वयम्।
त्वर सौम्यमुहूर्तोऽयं ध्रुवश्च दिवसोऽप्ययम्।       Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 56.25।।
 
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation
सौम्य! O gentle Lakshmana, एतत् this, ऐणेयम् flesh of antelopeश्रपयस्व cookवयम् we, शालाम् hut, यक्ष्यामहे will offer sacrifice, अयम्this, दिवस: day, अयम् this, मुहूर्त:अपि auspicious moment also, ध्रुवश्च is firm, त्वर hasten up.
 
O gentle Lakshmana!, dress this meat. We will offer sacrifice to the presiding deity of this hut. This moment indicates stability. Hasten up.
 
===============================================================================
 
 

 

 
7. Sanskrit text
 लक्ष्मणकृष्णमृगं मेध्यं हत्वा प्रतापवान्।
अथ चिक्षेप सौमित्रिस्समिद्धे जातवेदसि।         Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 56.26।।
 
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation
अथ then, सौमित्रि: son of Sumitra, प्रतापवान् valorous, लक्ष्मण: that Lakshmana, मेथ्यम् fit for sacrifice pure, कृष्णमृगम् black antelope,हत्वा having killedसमिद्धे in a well-kindled, जातवेदसि fire, चिक्षेप offered.
 
Then, Lakshmana, the valorous son of Sumitra, having killed a black antelope pure enough for a sacrifice, cast it in a well-kindled fire.
 
===============================================================================
 
 

 

The intentional mistranslation by Geeta Press, Gorakhpur:
 

 

Though Sanskrit text spoke about Lakshmana killing animal and getting sacred meat but hindi translation is done in such a way that reader will not have even glimpse of this fact!!!
 
 
8. Sanskrit text
तन्तु पक्वं परिज्ञाय निष्टप्तं छिन्नशोणितम्।
लक्ष्मणपुरुषव्याघ्रमथ राघवमब्रवीत्।             Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 56.27।।
 
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation
लक्ष्मण: Lakshmana, निष्टप्तम् roasted wellछिन्नशोणितम् drained the blood, तम् that, पक्वम् cookedपरिज्ञाय having found, अथ then,पुरुषव्याघ्रम् tiger among men, राघवम् Rama, अब्रवीत् said.
 
Having observed that it is well-boiled, drained off the blood and cooked well, thus said Lakshmana to Rama, the best of men.
 
===============================================================================
 
 
 
The intentional mistranslation by Geeta Press, Gorakhpur:
 

 

Once again this publication – Geeta press, Gorakhpur – has made mockery of Sanskrit to hindi translation. Revered personality lakshaman follows order of his elder brother Shri Ram chandr and got the meat drained off blood; roasted it well and cooked it. But hindi translation is telling different story about some plant / vegetable.
 
 
9. Sanskrit text
अयं कृष्ण स्समाप्ताङ्ग श्शृतो कृष्णमृगो यथा 
देवतां देवसङ्काशयजस्व कुशलो ह्यसि।          Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 56.28।।
 
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation
समस्ताङ्ग: with all the limbs, अयम् this, कृष्णमृग: black antelope, सर्व: completely, मया by me, श्रुत: is well-cooked, देवसङ्काश equal to devatas, देवता: devatas, यजस्व offer with sacrifice, कुशलअसि हि you are proficient.
 
This black antelope with all the limbs is completely and well-cooked. As such O! devine sir, you may offer sacrifice to Vastu devata. You are proficient in doing such acts.
 
===============================================================================
 
 

 

The intentional mistranslation by Geeta Press, Gorakhpur:
 
 
Same story of literal fraud is repeated here. Sanskrit text is openly abused and wrong translation is being presented to the innocent mass. People are made to believe that Non-veg food is against their culture while sacred books talk about “god” eating animal meat after killing them.
 
 
E. Shri Ram chandr ji killing animals and bring meat
 
10. Sanskrit text
समाश्वस मुहूर्तं तु शक्यं वस्तुमिह त्वया।        Valmiki Ramayan, Aranya Kand 47.22।।
आगमिष्यति मे भर्ता वन्यमादाय पुष्कलम्।
रुरून्गोधा न्वराहांश्च हत्वाऽदायाऽमिषान्बहून्।    Valmiki Ramayan, Aranya Kand 47.23।।
 
Word by word Sanskrit to english translation
मुहूर्तम् for a while, समाश्वस take rest, त्वया you, इह here, वस्तुम् staying, शक्यम् it is possible, मे भर्ता my husband, रुरून् deer, गोधाःalligators, वराहांश्च hogs, हत्वा after killing, बहून् many of them, आमिषान् varieties of meatआदाय after fetching, पुष्कलम् in plenty,वन्यम् from the forest, आदाय getting, आगमिष्यति will come.
 
Take rest for a while staying here. It is hoped that my husband will come and be getting from the forest plenty of meat of many kinds on killing deer, alligators and hogs.
 
===============================================================================
 
 

 

The intentional mistranslation by Geeta Press, Gorakhpur:
 

 

Geeta press, Gorakhpur – again misleads the common mass. The Sanskrit text is talking about Shri ram chandr ji bringing meat of animals after killing deer, alligators, hogs/pigs for purpose of eating; but the hindi translation speaks about “fruit” for eating J. Fooling the common mass!!!
 
 
F. Conclusion
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>1.      <!–[endif]–>Majority of our Hindu brethren are made to believe that Non-veg food is against their culture and tradition. They are told that Hinduism is against killing of animals for food. However a careful study of  their sacred scripture gives entirely different picture.
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>2.      <!–[endif]–>Valmiki Ramayan not only speaks about shri Ram chandr ji – who is worshipped by millions of Indians as ideal person – eating meat but gives the picture that he was very fond of it.
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>3.      <!–[endif]–>Shri Ram chandr ji would kill animals, get meat to eat. He would order his brother Shri lakshmana ji to do the same. They would offer animals for sacrifice also.
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>4.      <!–[endif]–>Unfortunately some Ramayana publications grossly mistranslate such sholkas of Valmiki Ramayan that speaks about meat eating and animal killing. They not only mislead common mass but also disrespect scripture by not giving its due.
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>5.      <!–[endif]–>It’s heartening to note that some translators DO have translated such sholkas correctly and accepted meat eating and animal killing in Ramayana.
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>6.      <!–[endif]–>When Ramayana speaks about permissibility of meat eating then one should not lead common mass into believing wrong thing.
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>7.      <!–[endif]–>Intention is not at all to hurt any of our brethren but to draw attention towards the literary fraud done by some publications and wrong principles preached by some people.
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>8.      <!–[endif]–>We have not speculated, assumed or guessed but presented correct translation of such references done by learned Hindu Scholars.
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>9.      <!–[endif]–>Also its time for our Indian brethren to wake up and understand the tactics of some elements of our society who use meat eating as a political tool to divide people. Due to the sensitive nature of the topic some of our innocent’s brethren get carried away in emotion and don’t look at facts. Let’s not be divided and don’t let people polarize the society.
 
<!–[if !supportLists]–>10.  <!–[endif]–>Let us not allow anti-social elements to spread hatred, create division and polarize hearts of fellow countrymen in the name of meat and animals.
 
 
 
Note:  Lets look at another source which proves our point. Please find below translation of above mentioned verses from Scholars of Hindu scriptures available at other site: http://www.valmikiramayan.net
 
Reference 1.  Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 96:1-2
 
तां तथा दर्शयित्वा तु मैथिलीं गिरिनिम्नगाम् |निषसाद गिरिप्रस्थे सीतां मांसेन चन्दयन् || ९६
 
tathaa = thus; darshayitvaa = having shown; girinimnagaam = the mountaneous river Mandakini; taam siitaam = to that Seetha; maithiliim = the daughter of the king of Mithila; niSasaada = sat; giriprashthe = on the hill side; chhandayan = in order to gratify her appetite; maamsena = with flesh.
 
Having shown Mandakini River in that manner to Seetha, the daughter of Mithila, Rama set on the hill-side in order to gratify her appetite with a piece of flesh.
 
इदं मेध्यमिदं स्वादु निष्टप्तमिदमग्निना |एवमास्ते  धर्मात्मा सीतया सह राघवः || ९६
 
2. saH raaghavaH = that Rama; dharmaatmaa = of righteousness; aaste = stayed; siitayaa sha = with Seetha; evam = thus speaking; idam = this meat; madhyam = is fresh; idam = this; niSTaptam = was roasted; agninaa = in the fire.
 
Rama, whose mind was devoted to righteousness stayed there with Seetha, saying; “This meat is fresh, this is savoury and roasted in the fire.”
 
 
Reference 2.  Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 52:102
 
तौ तत्र हत्वा चतुरः महा मृगान् |वराहम् ऋश्यम् पृषतम् महा रुरुम् |आदाय मेध्यम त्वरितम् बुभुक्षितौ|वासायकाले ययतुर् वनः पतिम् || ५२१०२
 
102. hatvaa = having killed; tatra = there; chaturaH = four; mR^igaan = deer (namely); varaaham = Varaaha;R^ishyam = Risya; pR^ishhatam = PR^isata; mahaaruru = (and) Mahaaruru; (the four principal species of deer); aadayaa = and taking; tvaritam = quickly; medhyam = the portions that were pure; tou = Rama and Lakshmana; bubhukshhitou = being hungry as they were; yayatuH = reached; vanaspatim = a tree; vaasayaa = to take rest; kaale = in the evening.
 
Having hunted there four deer, namely Varaaha, Rishya, Prisata; and Mahaaruru (the four principal species of deer) and taking quickly the portions that were pure, being hungry as they were, Rama and Lakshmana reached a tree to take rest in the evening.
 
 
 
Reference 3-9. Valmiki Ramayan, Ayodha Kand 56.22-28
 
ऐणेयम् मांसम् आहृत्य शालाम् यक्ष्यामहे वयम् |कर्त्व्यम् वास्तुशमनम् सौमित्रे चिरजीवभिः || ५६२२
 
22. saumitre = Oh; Lakshmana!; aahR^itya = being; aiNeyam maamsam = bring meat of the antelope; vayam = we;yakshyaamahe = shall worship; shaalaam = (this) leaf-hut; vaastushamanam = purifactory ceremony on entering the house;kartavyam = on entering the; chirajiivibhiH = by those who wish to live long.
 
“Oh, Lakshmana! Bring the meat of an antelope. We shall perform a purifactory ceremony while entering the house. Which is to be done by those who wish to live long.”
 
मृगम् हत्वाऽऽनय क्षिप्रम् लक्ष्मणेह शुभेक्षण
कर्तव्यः शास्त्रदृष्टो हि विधिर्दर्ममनुस्मर || ५६२३
 
23. shubhekshaNa = Oh; large-eyed; lakshmaNa = Lakshmana!; hatvaa = killing; mR^igam = the antelope; kshhipram = quickly; anaya = bring; iha = here; vidhiH = the prescribed rite; shaastra dR^iSTaH = according to scriptural point of view;kartavyaH hi = indeed is to be done; anusmara = keep in mind; dharmam = the sacred obligation.”
 
“Oh, large-eyed Lakshmana! Killing the antelope quickly, bring it here. The prescribed rite according to scriptural point of view indeed is to be performed. Keep in mind the sacred obligation.”
 
भ्रातुर्वचन माज्ञाय लक्ष्मणः परवीरहा |चकार  यथोक्तम्  तम् रामः पुनरब्रवीत् || ५६२४
 
24. saH lakshmaNaH = that Lakshmana; paraviirahaa = the slayer of enemies; aaJNaaya = understanding; bhraatruH = his brother’s; vachanam = words; chakaara = acted; yathoktamcha = as instructed; raamaH = Rama; abraviit = spoke; punaH = again; tam = to him (as follows).
 
Lakshmana the slayer of enemies, understanding his brother’s words, acted as instructed. Rama spoke again to Lakshmana as follows.
 
इणेयम् श्रपयस्वैतच्च्चालाम् यक्ष्यमहे वयम् |त्वरसौम्य मुहूर्तोऽयम् ध्रुवश्च दिवसोऽप्ययम् || ५६२५
 
25. saumya = Oh; great brother!; shrapayasva = boil; etat = this; aiNeyam = antelope’s meat; vayam = we; yakshyaamahe = shall worship; shaalaam = the leaf-hut; ayam = this; divasaH = day; ayam = (and) this; muhuurtaH api = instant also; dhruvaH= are of a distinctive character; tvara = be quick.
 
“Oh, gentle brother! Boil this antelope’s meat. We shall worship the leaf-hut. This day and this instant also are of a distinctive character. Be quick.”
 
 लक्ष्मणः कृष्ण मृगम् हत्वा मेध्यम् पतापवान् |अथ चिक्षेप सौमित्रिः समिद्धे जात वेदसि || ५६२६
 
atha = then; saH lakshmaNaH = that Lakshmana; prataapavaan = the strong man; saumitriH = and son of Sumitra; hatvaa = killing; medhyam = the holy; kR^iSNa mR^igam = black antelope; chikSepa = tossed; jaata vedasi = in a fire; samiddhe = ignited.
 
Then, Lakshmana the strong man and son of Sumitra, killing a holy back antelope, tossed it in an ignited fire.
 
तम् तु पक्वम् समाज्ञाय निष्टप्तम् चिन्न शोणितम् |लक्ष्मणः पुरुष व्याघ्रम् अथ राघवम् अब्रवीत् || ५६२७
 
27. parijJNaaya = feeling certain; pakvam = it is cooked; niSTaptam = and heated thoroughly; chinna shoNitam = with no blood remaining; lakshmaNaH = Lakshmana; atha = thereafter; abraviit = spoke; raaghavam = to Rama; puruSa vyaaghram= the lion among men (as follows).
 
Feeling certain that it is cooked and heated thoroughly with no blood remaining, Lakshmana spoke to Rama the lion among man as follows:
 
अयम् कृष्णः समाप्त अन्गः शृतः कृष्ण मृगो यथा |देवता देव सम्काश यजस्व कुशलो हि असि || ५६२८
 
28. ayam = this; kR^iSNaH mR^igo = black antelope; samaapta angaH = with its complete limbs; shR^itaH = has been cooked; sarvaH = completely; mayaa = by me; deva damkaasha = Oh Rama; remsembling god!; yajasva = worship;devataaH = the deities; asi ahi = you are indeed; kushalaH = skilled (in such act)
 
“This black antelope, with its complete limbs, has been cooked completely by me. Oh, Rama resembling God! Worship the concerned deity, as you are skilled in that act.”
 
 
 
Reference 10.  Valmiki Ramayan, Aranya Kand 47.22-23
 
समाश्वस मुहूर्तम् तु शक्यम् वस्तुम् इह त्वया || ४७२२
आगमिष्यति मे भर्ता वन्यम् आदाय पुष्कलम् |रुरून् गोधान् वराहान्  हत्वा आदाय अमिषान् बहु || ४७२३
 
22b, 23. muhuurtam samaashvasa = for a moment, be comfortable; tvayaa iha vastum shakyam = by you, here, to take rest, possible; me bhartaa = my, husband; ruruun = stag with black stripes; godhaan = mongooses like [civet-like mammals of the family Viverridae, esp. of the genus Herpestes, Marathi manguus]; varaahaan ca = wild-boars, also; hatvaa= on killing; bahu amiSaan aadaaya = aplenty, meat, on taking; puSkalam vanyam aadaaya = plentiful, forest produce, on taking; aagamiSyati = will be coming [soon.]
 
“Be comfortable for a moment, here it is possible for you to make a sojourn, and soon my husband will be coming on taking plentiful forest produce, and on killing stags, mongooses, wild boars he fetches meat, aplenty. [3-47-22b, 23]
 
 
 
A. IntroductionA quick glance of Shia murder in pakistan alone.

1. 6-01-1963 – 118 Shia Muslims including many children were killed on Ashura Day in Therih, Khair Pur

2. 17-May-1988 – 800 Shias killed by attack form Kohistan, Chilas, Darel, Tangir, assisted by military govt

3. 10-Sep-1996 FATA ; Parachinar – 200 shia killed

4. 1-10- Aug-1997 – Punjab, Lahore- 100 Shia killed

5. 11-Jan-1988 – punjab, Lahore – 25 Shia Muslims including children were killed and many injured when Sipah e Sahaba terrorists opened fire at a funeral gathering at a graveyard in Momin Pura, Lahore

6. 4 July 2003 – balochistan, Quetta –  killing of 53 worshippers at the main Shia Friday Mosque in Quetta.

7. 10 April 2007 – Attack on Shia mosque and villages in Parchinar 60 killed

8. 16-23 Nov 2007 – FATA, Parachinar 183 Shia killed

9. 17 jan 2008 – A suicide bomber killed 10 and wounded 25 in an attack on a Shia mosque in Peshawar.

10. 1 sep 2008 FATA 100 Shia killed

11. 5 feb 2009 – Bomb attack on a Shia procession 35 killed

12. 20 oct 2009 -Khyber Pakhtunkhwa – Shia funeral attacked 40 Shia killed

13. 5 april 2009 suicide attack on imambargah – 30 shia killed

14. 28 dec 2009- Sindh – 40 people killed in a suicide bombing on a Shia procession in Karachi

15. 1 sep 2010 – 43 Shias were killed and 230 people  injured in a blast during a procession in Lahore

16. 4 sep 2010 – 73 people killed in a suicide bombing at a Shia Al-Quds rally in Quetta

17. 28 feb 2010 – Gilgit, Massacre – bus , identity card checked for sect, 19 Shia killed

18. 3 april 2010 – Gilgit – Over 200 Shia Muslims taken out of buses and killed, 6 buses burnt, two dozens kidnapped.

Are we addressing the REAL reason?

This string of attack against Shia is going in pakistan unabated. Somewhat similar is the story of murder of qadiyanis in pakistan. A complete failed state – pakistan; is completely unable to protect its own citizen. Every time one hear about innocent being killed – an honest person condemns. One disagree with these kind of brutal attack and demand strongest punishment for perpetrators of such dastardly act.. every time we condemn attack.. we condemn… what we condemn? Attack? But what happens afterwards? Again attack on Shia / qadiyani. Such attacks will not reduce or fizzle out unless we condemn and work for elimination of “root reason”. We – every time – fail to address the root reason behind such attacks. Please Note: i am talking about attacks that is because of “he / she is Shia” / “he / she is a qadiyani”. We are not talking about robbery, murder for gain or for personal reason – we are talking about attack that is because of “islamic” reason. We are talking about attack that originates due to hate for shia.

Think about this sequence:
A Salafi / Sunni is taught by his set of “scholars” that Shia are deviated.
He consider Shia to have gone astray.
He is taught that Shia abuse Sahaba, they have different Quran, they consider hazrat Ali superior to Prophet Muhammad, Shia are betrayer….. his blood is made to boil.
He starts hating Shia, his hatred for Shia grows with each sermon / lecture on topic related to Shia.
Some scholars go to another extreme and start preaching that Shia are apostate or murtad (means they are out of islam).
………
……..
… so anger against Shia is growing. A Salafi / Sunni starts considering hatred for Shia part of his deen.
— he is getting angry. Every kind of catalyst is provided to him to despise Shia. What is required is a mere push / emotional push.

His “Scholars” give final touch by declaring Shia to be muratd / kafir / wajib-ul-qatl.. i.e. you “can” kill Shia, … gradually things turn out that — in fact one “should” kill Shia because they abuse Sahaba, they are kafir…
…and..they should be killed… that days is ashura… kill them when they will be celebrating a “biddah”… kill..
…………..
…………. Then……
……
10-Jan-2013: BREAKING NEWS — A Bomb blast on Thursday 10th January 2013 occurred at a snooker club which was close to a police station and a Shia Mosque. “First suicidal attack was conducted and then a car bomb exploded on Alamdar Road,” Said Mir Zubair Mehmood, the Capital City Police Officer.The bomb exploded 8:50p.m local time. As police, rescuers and media personal rushed to the blast site, another bomb fixed to a vehicle parked nearby the site went off, causing an even greater number of causalities. Over 140 were killed and 121 wounded in the second twin bomb attack. Lashkae-e-jhangvi, a extremist terrorist group banned by the government has claimed responsibility for all the blasts.

More than 400 Shiites were killed in targeted attacks in Pakistan in 2012
Think about people killed. What if they were your brother? Your own sister? Your own father? What if these kids were your own kids?? Making suicide bombers for killing innocent human being in the name of islam??
Attacking people in masjid?? When they were remembering Allah you murdered them??
Shameless act!! Astaghfirullah. Killing people in the name of islam?? What has happened to muslim scholars?

Providing catalyst for murder of Shia

Though there are tons of material of hatred and despise available, i am quoting only three here. Many Sunni / Salafi knows why he “should” hate shia.

1. Wikipedia says:  “In recent decades the late leading Saudi cleric, Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd Allah ibn Baaz, issued fatwa denouncing Shia as apostates, and according to Shia scholar Vali Nasr “Abdul-Rahman al-Jibrin, a member of the Higher Council of Ulama, even sanctioned the killing of Shias,[145] a call that was reiterated by Wahhabi religious literature as late as 2002.”[147]”

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi’a%E2%80%93Sunni_relations

2. While answering about Shia, a leading Salafi website says:

“Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: As for the one who goes further and claims that they apostatized after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, apart from a small number, no more than ten or so, or that they (referring to Shia) became evildoers, there is no doubt that he is a kaafir, because he is rejecting what it says in the Qur’aan in more than one place, that Allaah was pleased with them and praised them. Indeed, the one who doubts that such a person is a kaafir is to be labelled as a kaafir himself, because what this view implies is that those who transmitted the Qur’aan and Sunnah were kuffaar or rebellious evildoers. …… End quote from al-Saarim al-Maslool ‘ala Shaatim al-Rasool (p. 590).

This does not mean that every sect that calls itself Muslim is actually Muslim, rather they may be kaafirs and apostates, such as the extreme Raafidis (referring to Shia), the extreme Sufis and the baatini sects such as the Druze, Nusayris and others. These are all beyond the pale of Islam and are not regarded as being among the sects mentioned in the hadeeth.”

Source: http://islamqa.info/en/ref/101272

3. A pseudo jihadi Salafi-website – taking “knowledge” from “Scholars of knowledge” (Such as above) says:

“..Furthermore, the Raafidah Shi’a are indeed Murtadeen (Murtad means one who has abandoned religion) (as we will come to see) so treating them like Muslims is out of the question as well as Jizya. Therefore, there is no practical solution with the Raafidah Shi’a except force since they are not even a sect within Islam; they are Murtadeen and the hudood must be implemented on them unless if they accept the true Islam. The same goes for the Ahmadiyya group who thinks they are a part of Islam.
……..
So we say: It should be clear to everyone here that the Shi’a Raafidah are Murtadeen and are not in the folds of Islam. We must avoid them and their gatherings and let others know of their disbelief so that they are not inclined towards them in any way. This is only done for the protection of Tawheed and its purity. Furthermore, others must know of them and their evil beliefs so that they can be confronted whenever they are around the people of Sunnah. All of this should tell us that we cannot unite with the Shi’a Raafidah on any bases and should refrain from making such ignorant statements.”

http://theunjustmedia.com/Islamic%20Perspectives/Shia%20are%20kafirs%20here%20is%20the%20proof.htm

Eliminate this “islamic” terrorism

1. One can find such numerous fatwas / opinion coming from the mouth of bloodthirsty / firebrand “s-c-h-o-l-a-r” and its “followers of Quran and Sunnah”. Let me assure you all – don’t get scared after reading above 3 points, don’t hate islam after reading above 3 points because they are diametrically opposite to teachings of islam; they are completely against the spirit of islam; they are completely against the teachings of Prophet Muhammad.
Above fatwas / wordings has nothing to do with Quran.

2. Please note here we are not discussing the exact status of Shia belief, Qadinai belief, Salafi belief. We are not discussing whose accusation is correct. We are – on the first level – discussing that even if each and every accusation against Shia is correct then do they have right to kill Shia?
Can a muslim kill someone because he does not agree with the belief of opponent?
Has Allah given right to anyone to kill people because of belief?
Instead of correcting others (whom you feel have gone astray) why you are indulging in spreading hatred, despise and arising emotions??

3. All such nonsense fatwas are  because of completely abandoning Quran. In fact Shia-Sunni-Salafi itself is result of abandoning Quran. For details listen to this with open mind both parts ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZ7AMW1ei_I

4. Allah has not FORCED people to believe in something. Allah has made people free to believe in whatever they want. Allah has shown the way. Why you are interfering? Your job was to convey.

There is no compulsion in religion[Quran, Surah Baqrah 2:256]

Say, ‘The truth is from your Lord’: Let him who wills believe it, and let him who wills, reject (it).” [Quran, Surah Kahaf 18:29]

If it had been your Lord’s will, they all would have believed – all who are on earth. Will you, then, compel the people, against their will, to believe?” [Quran, Surah Yunus 10:99]

Please note this last ayah specially. Its not part of Allah plan that people should be forced to believe in something. How dare you kill people because of their faith and belief???

2. If you believe in day of judgment then why don’t you leave it to Allah to judge who was kafir, murtad? If you think that by calling yourself Shia / Sunni / Salafi you have certificate of jannah and rest all will go to hell then you can continue living in fool’s paradise. If you get some, try to read Quran. You abandoned Quran, Allah abandoned you and made you divide into sects.

Who is kafir as per GOD? read here: http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2011/09/who-is-kafir-clear-misconception_24.html

You are sending people to hell on petty issues; see the universal message of Quran which you would not be able to digest you sectarian muslims.

Those who believe (in the Qur’an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.” Quran 5: 69

Now some ill-informed people will say that this ayah is abrogated – leveling another charge against GOD.
For deatils about abrogation in Quran- read this: http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2012/05/how-many-ayah-of-quran-are-abrogated.html

3. If you feel that certain teachings of Shia or Sunni or Salafi is incorrect and wrong then all you can do is tell them things which you deem correct… but not with sword and knife but with wisdom, love and beautiful preaching. That is what is taught by Almighty God.

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

a. You don’t agree, don’t fight; rather educate; have dialogue, have discussion. Is it necessary to hate; to despise; to kill? If your scholars have taught you to hate then they are presenting evil picture of islam. Islam is pure and clean from such blame.

b. Is not it surprising that prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) is mentioned as Rahmatul-alemeen i.e. mercy for all worlds .. yet followers of so-called Quran and “SUNNAH” are proving to be zalim, brutal, intolerant and inhumane?

c. Is not it surprising that though people made several accusation against Prophet; terming his sorcerer (Quran 10:2); poet; majnu… yet prophet Never ordered to KILL them??

d. IS not it surprising that in whole Quran Almighty God has addressed “real kafir” as KAFIR ONLY one time… i repeat – in whole Quran Almighty God has addressed “real kafir” as KAFIR ONLY one time… i.e in Surah kaferoon (Qul Ya ayyohal kaferoon);  rest all places God has referred them as HUMAN BEING (Ya ayyohannaas)… but follower of “Quran and Sunnah” has made it part of their faith to declare people kafir, send them to hell and kill them.

e. Is not it surprising that there are terrorist groups in pak whose very purpose is to kill Shia? And please mind it – these terrorist groups are leaded by scholars with “long beard” who are scholars of Quran and Sunnah?? Something is horribly wrong going the way muslim world is understanding islam.

f. Killing people because of their faith??? Not permitted in islam at least. God permits killing only in case wherein either one has murdered someone OR he is the cause of fasad on earth (refer to Quran 5:32). Fasaad means disturbing the balance of peace on earth. Its a broad term.

g. The Quran – whose 113 out of 114 chapter / surah starts with the introduction of Almighty GOD as “‘In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful” — the pathetic condition of some muslims is that – because of influence of some lunatic and fanatic scholars they are giving the opposite picture of God. Are those muslims anywhere closer to being merciful and compassionate due to their hatred and killings?

Conclusion

1. Murder of anyone – from any faith / cast / creed — if he is innocent — is against islam, against Quran. If any scholar / muslim preaches contrary to it then mind it he is wrong; no matter how long his beard is.

2. You have difference of opinion – discuss, have dialogue. That is the only way. This discussion need to be done under guidance of Quran.

3. You are bearing fruits of abandoning Quran that you are divided into sects. Hold firmly Quran and inshallah all sects will disappear – viz: Shia, Sunni, Salafi.

4. Respect, be tolerant, and learn to live with difference. Murder of one innocent is murder of whole humanity.

Note: * If you don’t agree with the mail then instead of giving fatwa of deviation / kufr / shirk / biddat – have faith in Allah and leave it to him to judge.

* Author: Khurshid Imam is software engineer at Bangalore, India. For any criticism / feedback / suggestion feel free to mail – serviceforhumanity@gmail.com

The article can be found at: http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2013/01/condemn-and-eliminate-real-reason.html

The article can be downloaded as pdf from: http://www.scribd.com/KHURSHIDIMAM

Khurshid Imam
 
 
A. Introduction
 
Muslim: “You know Quran is word by word God’s word. Quran provides way of life.  Its language is so eloquent, its word so perfect that it does not resemble human work. Each word, each ayah is beautiful, choice of word is so perfect that …….”
Not yet Muslim: “Oh! Is it? I would love to read this book and understand it. Please give me Quran”
 
Muslim: “Sure brother! Take it. But… you know there are many Ayah in Quran that are not relevant now. Their orders / commandments are cancelled. You can read those ayah but can not practice it. I don’t identify those ayah. Some scholars told hundreds of such ayah exists in Quran while some have pointed out only 5. So I can’t point out who is correct.”
Not yet Muslim: “I am confused. You told Quran is God’s word, it should be free from any weakness or defect. Is not God most-wise?”
 
Muslim: “Also there were some ayah in Quran EARLIER but they are lost now. They are not to be found in Quran any more. But we need to practice those lost ayah. Lost ayah will be practiced even by going against some Quranic ayah”
Not yet Muslim: “I am ultra confused!!!!”
 
Muslim: “Wait!! I have to tell some more aspects of Quran also ….”
Not yet Muslim: “God’s word is not source of confusion and imperfection. Bye bye, I m going.”
 
B. The myth of abrogation in Quran
 
If you ask about the concept of abrogation in Quran, then most probably you will get answer that:
1. Sometimes Allah enforces a legal edict that is relevant only to a particular situation.
2. Later, in His infinite wisdom, He cancels the order and enforces a new one in its place.
3. This action is known as “abrogation” (naskh), and the replaced order is then termed “abrogated”  (mansukh) while the new replacing order is called “abrogator” (nasikh).
4. It means the abrogated ayah of the quran was meant only till the abrogator ayah was revealed. Abrogated ayah can never ever be practiced.
Abrogation concept says – “Allah gave a ruling for a particular issue. But later on Allah changed the ruling through another Ayah. Hence the previous ruling is cancelled and irrelevant now.” Abrogation is translated from the Arabic word naskh which literally means “to erase; to compensate.” Its technical definition is “to repeal a legal order through legal argument”.
The concept of abrogation opens door for some serious questions as it is full of flaws. It goes against Quran and common sense. All arguments given in favor of abrogation are extremely bogus-can not go down well to any honest and logical person. In order to justify abrogation people come up with weak arguments which puts islam into dock and make us laughing stock. Anti-islamic writers exploit it to defame Quran and islam.
 
Why abrogation came into existence?
 
1. The root reason for the evolution of the concept of abrogation was inability to explain the “seemingly-contradiction” in the Quran. When we felt that a particular ayah of the Quran contradicts with other ayah of Quran and both can not be practiced then we declared one of the ayah to be abrogated. It means this ayah is not relevant today; its ruling / command / order was cancelled by Allah by another ayah.
 
2. This concept was accepted by the general body of scholars as a fundamental aspect of Islamic legislation, and there is therefore not a single book on Usul al-Fiqh (The basic legal theories of source methodology in Islam) which does not have a section on the issue. 
 
3. Let me give you one horrible example of abrogation concept:
While explaining the ayah – “There is no compulsion in religion…” (Quran, Surah Baqrah 2:256) – a famous salafi website says that this ayah is abrogated and hence invalid now.
Please read carefully what is told on this site about ayah 2:256
Other scholars said that this applied in the beginning, but was subsequently abrogated by Allaah’s command to fight and wage jihad. So whoever refuses to enter Islam should be fought when the Muslims are able to fight, until they either enter Islam or pay the jizyah if they are among the people who may pay jizyah. The kuffaar should be compelled to enter Islam if they are not people from whom the jizyah may be taken, because that will lead to their happiness and salvation in this world and in the Hereafter.
 
[I am very sorry to say that above quoted statements from the site is completely alien to islam; contradicting to the very basic of islam; it projects islam as a violent, illogical and inhumane religion. Tell me why non muslims
will not hate islam if one teaches such things? 
No wonder the general perception created by us is that all ayah revealed in mecca which speaks about peace, love and harmony were abrogated by ayah speaking about fighting with non-muslims revealed during medina life!!!!!
 
Oh Allah! Have mercy on the ummah and its learned people.]
 
A contemporary Scholar, Muhammad Al-Ghazali’s (Born 1917) says:
The allegation that 120 verses on the invitation to Islam were abrogated by the verse of the sword [Surah tauba 9:5], is in fact one of crassest stupidity and only serves to show that the great number of Muslims are in a stage of regression of either knowledge or intelligence in our time, and have become ignorant of the Qur’an. As a result of this ignorance therefore, they have forgotten how to call to the way of God, how to facilitate the call to Islam, and how to be proper examples, and how to present a good perspective. Perhaps this is the reason for the failure in the propagation of Islam, and the prolonged stagnation of the Islamic message being affected—for it has been assumed that the sword is that which fulfills the obligation of delivering the message. Such a concept is, by the agreement of all those who are rational and discerning, totally absurd.

Family members of abrogation

As if this shock is not enough we have some more from the “misunderstanding of Quran” list. Abrogation concept has its whole family ruling over minds of muslims for centuries.
Once the concept of abrogation was given sanction from the Qur’an and hadith, the jurists started categorizing the different types of abrogation. Three types of abrogation in Quran are explained as:

(1) Abrogation of the text and its ruling: It is said that there were some Ayah in the Quran earlier; they no more exists in Quran now; so their recitation and command – both are cancelled and abrogated. For example: We are told that earlier there were some ayah in Surah ahzab (Surah number 33) that were as long as Surah Baqrah (Surah number 2). But these ayah are not part of Quran now. (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith 21245)

(2) Abrogation of the text, but not its ruling: We are told that there were some ayah in Quran that no more exists in Quran now but they should be followed today. According to this story, the ‘stoning verse’ was recorded in Quran during the time of Prophet Muhammad; but after his death, a goat ate the page on which that verse was inscribed. Thus, the stoning verse has been abrogated physically. Ibn Maja, Nikah, 36/1944 and Musnad Imam Ibn Hanbal, 5/131,132,183; 6/269.

(3) Abrogation of the ruling, but not the text: It means there are ayah in Quran that will be recited but will not be practiced. For example: Ayah dealing with prohibition of alcohol; Ayah quoted above from the website about 2:256; Ayah dealing with kalala; Ayah dealing with fidya in context with fasting; Ayah dealing with marriage with ahle-kitab women etc. This is the type of abrogation which we are dealing in this article.

One important observation

Quran is a book that constantly urges its reader to ponder over it, understand its meaning and not be blind minded. The more one ponder over Quran better will be understanding. Scholars who declare abrogation in Quran have good intention. But piety does not always refer to intelligence level of a person. The passing of time has seen a tremendous fluctuation in the number of ayah alleged to have been abrogated.
 
Al-Zuhri (8th century AD), one of the first to write on the subject, mentioned 42 abrogated ayah in Quran,
Al-Nahhas (10th century AD), mentioned 138 abrogated ayah in Quran,
Ibn Salama (11th century AD), mentioned 238 abrogated ayah in Quran,
Ibn al-Ata’iqi (14th century AD), mentioned 231 abrogated ayah in Quran,
al-Suyutti (16th century AD),  declared 20 ayah of quran to be abrogated!
Shah Wali Allah (18th century AD), mentioned only 5 instances of abrogation in Quran!!
 
Will not Quran become a laughing stock where; as per some scholars there are 500 ayah in Quran which will be recited but not practiced; while some scholars say that 200 such ayah exists; and on the other extreme some scholars will tell that only 5 such ayah exists in Quran. The whole Quran will loose its beauty, its divinity. Why were they given to us in our constitution and guidance if we are not to obey them? Tell me-how come then Quran is divine? How come Quran is so wonderful book?
 
Attention: All so-called-examples of abrogation in Quran can be very well explained by pondering over the Quran. I am not going into detail for those. Each so-called-examples of abrogation require separate article.
 
Visit http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2011/12/marriage-with-ahle-kitab-women.html  for explanation regarding so called abrogation for “marriage with mushrik women” ayah.
If any human being had the right to declare some ayah of Quran to be abrogated then this right was for the one on whom Quran was revealed i.e. Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him). But he never declared any such thing.

.

C. Concept of abrogation clearly contradicts with Quran
 
An anti-islamic writer writes – “Muslim authorities try to explain the internal apparent contradictions in the Qur’an by stating that certain passages of the Qur’an are annulled (Mansukh) by verses revealed chronologically later, known as Nasikh verses. Yet, there is by no means any certainty as to which disagreeing verses are mansukh and which are nasikh, since the order in which the Qur’an was compiled was not done chronologically“.
 
1. As it is crystal clear that the reason for evolution of abrogation concept is to solve the problem of seemingly-contradictory ayah in Quran. For example: Ayah dealing with prohibition of alcohol (2:219; 4:43; 5:90) perplexed scholars as they found it impossible to practice all three ayah. They misunderstood that there is contradiction in commandment of these 3 ayah; hence they declared first two ayah to be abrogated.
Actually no way there is any contradiction in these 3 ayah.
But, but, but… those people who feel that any two ayah of Quran is contradicting then they are agreeing that Quran is NOT AT ALL from GOD!!! Wait- don’t get angry. Look what Allah has to say:

.
“Do they not consider the Qur’an with care? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein many contradictions“. Quran-Surah Nisa 4:82

Quran tells that if Quran contains contradiction then Quran is not from God. So those people who believe in abrogation – which is because of assuming Quran contains contradictory ayah – are proving that Quran is not from God. The miracle of Quran is that it distinguishes right from wrong. Abrogation is clearly in contradiction to Quran.
 
2. How can Quran be a unique masterpiece, divine message if it cancels its own ruling?
What was the need then in the first place to reveal such ayah if Allah already knew that he is going to cancel his words? Its human words that contradict – word of Allah can never contradict, God can not go against his own words.
 
“No change can there be in the Words of Allah (Quran, Surah yunus 10:64)
“There is none that can alter the Words of Allah (Quran, Sura Anam 6:34)
 
If the Qur’an is indeed of divine authorship, and is perfect in its construction and style, no Ayah can be better than another; how then could one Ayah abrogate another? Is God not Wise and Far-Seeing enough to give rulings that are permanent? Abrogation of a law meant that it became illegal in the face of the one replacing it, and that this latter one was illegal while the former was in place. This would be to declare good as evil and evil as good, clearly not a divine activity
Almighty God mentions clearly that Allah can not change his words. It means if he has given a ruling for a particular issue-in a particular context and situation-then this can not change.
 
D. Does Quran support abrogation?
 
Supporter of abrogation quote one particular ayah in their support.
 
1. مَا نَنسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِّنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا
None of Our Ayah (sign) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?” Quran-Surah Baqrah 2:106
 
a. People think that in this ayah Allah is talking about abrogation of Quranic ayah. They fail to realize that this ayah is also speaking about “forgetting of ayah”. So if you mean that Allah abrogates ayah in Quran then you have to agree that Allah makes you forget some of ayah of the Quran!!! This is ridiculous. 
The words “cause to be forgotten” could not be applicable if the word ‘Ayah’ in this ayah meant a verse in the Quran. How can a ayah in the Quran become forgotten? For even if the ayah was invalidated by another (as supporters of abrogation falsely claim) it will still be part of the Quran and thus could never be forgotten.
 
b. In this ayah-in fact-Allah is speaking about previous revelations. Previous revelations were forgotten with the passage of time and its some portion were abrogated by ayah of Quran. Abrogation  and  forgetting of ayah (With the passage of time previous revelation could not be preserved, hence gradually lost and forgotten)- both can be applied for previous revelation and NOT for Quran. This is simple and logical understanding.
 
c. The words “ We substitute something better or similar ” would be meaningless if the word ‘Ayah’ in this verse meant a Quranic verse, simply because it would make no sense for God to invalidate one verse then replace it with one that is identical to it! So actually this ayah is talking about abrogation of ayah (some ayah, not all ayah) of previous revelations. It is not talking about abrogation of quranic ayah.
 
E. Where we went wrong
 
With due respect to our pious scholars – the concept of abrogation propounded is not in sync with Quran. Quran is a miraculous book whose miracles would be revealing from time to time. If we don’t understand clearly what an ayah mean then we should say we don’t understand its meaning. Instead of this if we declare that this ayah is abrogated by some other ayah then we are moving in wrong direction. If we don’t understand something then lets leave it for future generations. May be – with more and more knowledge with time they will be able to comprehend it better.
 
For example – think about how number of abrogated ayah decreased from 500 to 20 and then 5. Piety is not necessarily an index of intelligence level of a person. When people pondered more and more over the Quran then they rejected 500 instances of abrogation and Imam syuti concluded that only 20 ayah of Quran are abrogated. Imam syuti did not make any mistake by disagreeing with early scholars in the number of instances of abrogation in Quran. He had full right to ponder over Quran and understand it. Similarly when Shah waliullah dehlavi disagreed with Imam syuti and solved the invalidated abrogation of 15 such ayah then he too did not do any wrong. He concluded that not 20 but actually only 5 ayah of Quran are abrogated.
So with the passage of time, with more wisdom, intellectual level and knowledge; muslim world made abrogation instances to be 5. So now if people ponder more over Quran and then they reduce instances of abrogation in Quran to be zero then they are not mistaken as they are trying honestly to do more pondering over Quran. Remember: time and again Quran asks its readers to ponder more and more over Quran.
 
E. Prohibition of Alcohol – An example of abrogation?

.

The best example given in support of abrogation is prohibition of alcohol. People say that Alcohol was prohibited in 3 stages. People misunderstand that initially Quran permitted alcohol consumptionthen it asked people not to consume alcohol for some time and then finally Allah prohibited it completely. So – they say – first two ayah of this series are abrogated by the third ayah. Lets analyze it using simple translation and common sense.a. They ask you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) concerning alcoholic drink and gambling. Say: “In them is a great sin, and (some) benefit for men, but the sin of them is greater than their benefit.”…. (Quran, Surah baqrah 2:219)

b. O you who believe! Approach not As-Salat (the prayer) when you are in a drunken state until you know (the meaning) of what you utter……. (Quran, Surah Nisa 4:43)

c. O you who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, and Al-Ansab , and Al-Azlam (arrows for seeking luck or decision) are an abomination of Satan’s handiwork. So avoid that, in order that you may be successful. (Quran, Surah Maidah 5:90)

Traditional understanding is:
1. Quran initially permitted Alcohol. They cite 2:219 and 4:43 for their support.
2. Later these two ayah were abrogated by 5:90 in which Allah prohibited alcohol.
This example is the best example of abrogation as per the supporters pf abrogation.

However, a serious and careful understanding of these ayah make clear that none of the ayah is abrogated, none of the ayah contradict with any other one, all 3 ayah can be practised even today. This is the miracle of Quran that its each letter, each word and each sentence is divine.

1. 2:219 says that in alcohol there is some benefit for men, but harm is far more than benefit. That is true. Human being DO use it in chemical industry, in medicine. In cold countries people drink it to get warmth. It is also used in thermometers, as a solvent, and as a fuel.

Important point to note is that Quran is not saying that Alcohol is permitted for consumption. Had Quran mentioned here that “you can have alcohol” then it would have directly contradicted with 5:90 and then as per 4:82 we could say that Quran is not God’s word. But, alhamdulillah, God’s word is superior to human misunderstanding.

2. 4:43 says that do not approach for salah when you are in drunken state. Here many people get confused and assume that this ayah means that one can have alcohol when not going for salah. [If A is father of B then that does not always mean B is son of A. B can be daughter of A 🙂 ] They are mistaken. The word of Quran is very balanced. It conveys the meaning, give command and maintain the principle that Quranic ayah can NOT contradict. This ayah is not abrogated and it can be practised even today. Alcohol is prohibited (As per 5:90), yet there would be some bad muslims who would consume alcohol. Just like; zina (illegal physical relation) is prohibited but some people may do zina – that is why we have punishment for those who commit zina. Similarly for people who have consumed alcohol – for them instruction is that if they want to repent through salah or they want to offer salah then they should not go for salah till they are in sound mind, till the intoxicating effect of alcohol has gone. Please note-even in this ayah Allah is not saying at all that alcohol is permitted. This ayah does not contradict with 2:219 and 5:90

3. Finally 5:90 said that Alcohol is prohibited. It does not contradict any ayah; viz 2:219 and 4:43

Appreciate the beauty of Quran

This is the beauty of quran. Quranic ayah have multiple aspects. On the one hand these 3 ayah were prohibiting the custom of alcohol among arabs. The ayah revealed were perfectly in sync with human psychology. Its difficult for human beings to shun alcohol in one go. In gradual manner it is easier to stop drinking habit.
See how it was relevant that time when it was revelaed:
a. 2:219 gave indication to arabs that alcohol has bad effects. Quran told them that even though it has some good yet overall it is bad for human being.

b. Next ayah 4:43 made these arabs to stop alcohol for at least some hours a day. As per this ayah they should not approach salah when in drunken state. So for them that time they were supposed to avoid alcohol for 3-4 hours a day at least. Lets assume that 30 – 45 minutes before salah they should not consume it in order to be in sound state at the time of salah.

c. So with the passage of time people that time had decreased their drinking habit. Many had already shunned. As a last nail in the coffin – 5:90 made clear that it is prohibited. So keeping in the mind the psychological condition of human being these 3 ayah eradicated the evil of alcohol from the society.

These 3 ayah were practised that time by arabs. Even today these 3 ayah are relevant as explained earlier. Hence there is no contradiction in these 3 ayah, there is NO abrogation at all. Nothing is abrogated from Quran, not even a letter, not a word, not a sentence.

F. Conclusion

1. Majority of muslim scholars believe in the concept of abrogation in Quran. It means there are some ayah in the quran which does not hold good today. Its ruling has been cancelled by other particular ayah of the Quran.
 
2. This concept of abrogation makes Quran a laughing stock in the eyes of non-muslims. How a book that is divine and from Almighty God – can cancel and repeal its command? Is not God Most wise and far sighting?
 
3. There is difference of opinion among scholars how many and which all ayah of Quran are abrogated. While early scholars pointed out 500 such ayah, Imam suyuti narrowed down to 20 and as per Shah Waliulalh dehlavi Quran has 5 such ayah that are abrogated. Muslim world is NOT at all unanimous on what all ayah of Quran do not hold good today.
4. With the passage of time-as scholars pondered more and more over the Quran the number of abrogated ayah decreased from 500 to 5. Does not it mean that if we ponder more then this 5 can come down to zero?
 
5. The concept of abrogation of ayah came into existence because of seemingly contradictory meaning of two ayah. When it is found that two ayah of Quran can not hold true simultaneously then scholars declare one of of ayah to be abrogated. In simple words in order to get rid-off contradictory ayah in quran concept of abrogation was given. I am sorry to say-this understanding / concept is horribly wrong and against Quran, logic and common sense.
 
6. Quran makes clear that you will not find any two ayah of Quran contradicting. If you believe that Quran contains contradictory ayah then you have to agree that Quran is not from Allah (Surah Nisa 4:82). If there is abrogation in Quran then Quran is not God’s word.
 
7. If someone is unable to decipher the apparent contradiction in Quran then its better to keep silent on the issue rather declaring it abrogated. May be with the passage of time and with more and more pondering over Quran we will understand its clear meaning. In no case Quran can contain contradictory Ayah.
 
8. A general understanding among muslims is that prohibition of Alcohol, kalala, pace making wit non Muslims, inheritance etc – are examples of abrogation. All these ayah can be understood clearly without un-Quranic concept of abrogation.
 
9. Not a single letter, word or ayah of Quran is abrogated.
 
 
 
Note: * If you don’t agree with the mail then instead of giving fatwa of deviation / kufr / shirk / biddat – have faith in Allah and leave it to him to judge.
 
* Author: Khurshid Imam is software engineer at Bangalore, India. For any criticism / feedback / suggestion feel free to mail – serviceforhumanity@gmail.com
 
The article can be found at: http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/
The article can be downloaded as pdf from: http://www.scribd.com/KHURSHIDIMAM
By Khurshid imam

Note: Heading of this article might suggest that we are going to have in depth discussion about islamic and Hindu scripture – but that is not the case. I have tried to give example of just 2-3 mantr of vedas. The emphasis – as of now – is not on the CONTENT of scripture ; rather APPROACH towards scripture.

I was going through vedic mantr; i found something interesting. Mantr from Atharva Ved 6th Kand, 50th Sukt and Mantr no 1-3 deal with protecting crops from animals, birds and insects. It recommends one to kill those birds, animals and insects that harm the crop. This is of course logical and obvious; because if we let other animals destroy crop then we human being will not have anything to eat. Almighty God has made human beings in such a way that diet of human being is only and only living things. Apart from that; Almighty God has subjected animals and plants to human beings.

After reading those mantras one can resort to two approach:

1> Conflicting approach :

In this approach one tries to find more and more problems with others. Understand things in ways so that they appear him / her to be wrong and absurd. Honesty is less evident in this case. If i use this approach then my conclusion could be something like following:

a. “Vedas preach barbarism”.
b. “Vedas teach to KILL animals”.
c. “Vedas preach brutality when it says to kill animals, insects and birds”.
d. “Hinduism is barbaric religion”…
…..
and so on

Please note – in above conclusions i am completely ignoring the context of mantras. These mantras are specific to the case of saving crops from other creatures. In short – its about the particular case and situation wherein human beings are permitted to kill animal, birds and insects. If we don’t do this then we will have bigger harm.

2> Conciliatory approach:

In this approach one tries to conciliate as much as possible – but without being dishonest. If there can be two correct interpretation – one that goes against my understanding and another that goes in sync with my understanding then its wiser and better to have later one. When you meet someone and instead of agreeing on common things, you start fighting with each other then its childish and immature approach.

Many people – in order to dominate and humiliate people of other faith resort to this approach. They lambaste others faith , scriptures etc. But in return what they get? Hate – abuse – counter attacks and disharmony. A constructive discussion would have lead to positive and better result.

If we have 10 differences and 10 commonalities then its better to agree on commonalities, stand for it, propagate it.

Atharva Ved 6th Kand, 50th Sukt and Mantr no 1-3

“O ashwin! Kill the crow, the swine, the rat – cut off their heads and crush their ribs. They should not eat barley. Bind fast their mouths.” –

Then mantr 2 and 3 also speaks about preventing loss of crops from insects and other creatures by killing them – “we crush and mangle all those piercing insects” – or asking them to go away.

You can check hindi translation from – http://www.aryasamajjamnagar.org/athrvaveda/atharvaveda.htm
English translation here : http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/av/av06050.htm

Conclusion:

1. Can we have more and more harmony among various faith?
2. Can we open doors of love and brother hood and destroy house of hate?
3. Can we have more conciliatory approach without indulging in cheating, lying and being dishonest?
4. Can we ???

Note: * If you don’t agree with the mail then instead of giving fatwa of deviation / kufr / shirk / biddat – have faith in Allah and leave it to him to judge.

* Author: Khurshid Imam is software engineer at Bangalore, India. For any criticism / feedback / suggestion feel free to mail – serviceforhumanity@gmail.com

The article can be found at: http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/
The article can be downloaded as pdf from: http://www.scribd.com/KHURSHIDIMAM

By Khurshid Imam

Warning: This article is useful for people from any faith who are not blind followers of their-set-of-scholars. Blind followers with closed mind can ignore the article. Others: kindly read the whole article before concluding.

A. Welcome to the religion of peace?

“Welcome to Islam – the religion of peace! ! ! !”
“Islam stands for peace, justice and humanity. ! ! ! !”
“There is no compulsion in religion! ! ! !”
“Islam is religion of God. ! ! ! !”
“Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) was rahmatul-alemeen i.e. mercy for all the worlds.”
……
Wait…… learn one more teachings alleged-to-be-of-Islam…
………………
if ..you.. want.. to.. leave.. Islam.. then…….. you deserve death penalty!!!!
What??? Did not understand?
Your head MUST be cut off if you abandon Islam.. -@#$%^&*
You know why?
Because Islam says that apostate should be killed .. killed .. killed .. killed .. killed!
What? Barbaric religion? No way – Islam is religion of peace and gives utmost freedom of thought.

B. What is this issue: Death-for-apostasy?

1. Why this issue is relevant?

• A person who leaves / abandons / shuns a faith or religion is called apostate.
• In Islamic context if a muslim become atheist or starts following another religion or just leaves Islam is called apostate of Islam.
• The horrific understanding of majority of Muslims is that Islam prescribes death for apostasy.
• The interesting point is: this issue is in the limelight not because many Muslims become apostate; but because of hue and cry made by non Muslims and a few Muslims. Common non-Muslims hate and abhor Islam saying how can one accept that God of Islam says that an apostate deserve death. Anti Islamic forces ridicule and lambaste Muslims, Quran and Prophet Muhammad saying “is this religion of peace? Is this freedom of thought in Islam? Islam is barbaric and inhumane religion. Why should one accept a religion when it’s a one way road-you enter alive but when you leave then you MUST die?”
• In today’s scenario; killings in the name of shia – sunni or sects is influenced by death-for-apostasy understanding. Equation is simple:

Equation A- a sunni “scholar” declares some shia as apostate because of some reasons (in most cases silly reasons).
Equation B – Apostate should be killed
Matching equation A & B – Shia should be killed and this is as per “teachings of Islam”. Hence proved.

2. Wait!! Don’t be biased. Be honest and just.

• Whether Islam prescribes death penalty for apostasy or not – we will see later; but the
billion dollar question is – whom should we please? Muslims? Islamic scholars? Non Muslims? Anti Islamic forces? Or Allah – the almighty God? If you say Allah then you MUST find out what Allah or Almighty God has told about this issue.

• If Almighty God guides us on any topic then will you still follow what you have been following? Will you prefer your set of scholars to God?

• “I will follow what I found my forefathers doing” – this mentality is condemned by Almighty God if it goes against the teachings of God.

When it is said to them: “Follow what God has sent down,” they say, “Nay! We shall follow what we found our fathers following.” What! Even if their fathers did not understand (ya‘qilun) anything and they were not guided? (Quran, Surah Baqrah 2:170)

And when it is said to them: “Come to what God has sent down and to the Messenger,” they say, “Enough for us is that which we found our fathers following. What! Even if their fathers did not know anything and they were not guided? (Quran,Surah Maida 5:104)

C. The Misconception and its reason

The popular myth regarding apostasy is that “Apostate should be killed”.
Proof: People cite a few hadees from which they conclude that Islam prescribes death penalty for apostasy. Most oft-repeatedly cited statement is – Prophet told that whoever changes religion – kill him.

1. Reason for this misunderstanding

Again: the most commonly repeated mistake of the majority of Muslim. Not understanding an issue UNDER THE PRINCIPLE OF QURAN. When people don’t look at Quran, don’t analyze what Allah has revealed, don’t ponder over how Quran has guided and directly try to reach at conclusion just by looking at hadees in isolation then they are bound to make mistake.

2. Revisiting basics

“The month of Ramadhan in which was revealed the Quran, a guidance for the people and clear proofs of guidance and criterion …….” [Quran, Surah Baqrah 2: 185]

Please mark the purpose of Quran.
1. It is for whole mankind. Quran is not exclusive property of any particular sect, religion, group or race.
2. Quran is for guidance purpose. We MUST seek guidance from Quran.
3. Quran is the criterion – it means in any matter Quran will have the last say; what is right and what is wrong – what Quran decides will be final.

No wonder Muslims claim Quran to be word of God loudly but when it comes ACTUALLY believing and practicing it they fail miserably.

Quran says that one MUST judge as per the revelation of Almighty God.
……… If any do fail to judge by what Allah has revealed, they are Unbelievers (kaferoon). [Quran, Surah Maida 5:44]

………..And if any fail to judge by what Allah has revealed, they are wrong-doers (Zalemoon). [Quran, Surah Maida 5:45]

……… If any do fail to judge by what Allah has revealed, they are those who rebel (Faseqoon). [Quran, Surah Maida 5:47]

To you We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee…….;[Quran, Surah Maida 5:48]

And this (He commands): you judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires,…….. [Quran, Surah Maida 5:49]

Above ayah of Quran make very clear that if we judge against the guidance of Quran then it is kufr / zulm / fisq / absolutely wrong. See how much emphasis Allah has given on judging from what he has revealed.

D. There is absolutely NO punishment just for apostasy

1. Almighty God and Quran give absolute freedom to believe or disbelieve.

“There is no compulsion in religion” [Quran, Surah Baqrah 2:256]

You can not force anyone to become muslim. If you say that death should be awarded to apostate then it means you are forcing him not to leave islam. You are threatening him with death if he/she leaves islam.


“Say, ‘The truth is from your Lord’: Let him who wills believe it, and let him who wills, reject (it).” [Quran, Surah Kahaf 18:29]

“If it had been your Lord’s will, they all would have believed – all who are on earth. Will you, then, compel the people, against their will, to believe?” [Quran, Surah Yunus 10:99]

It is illogical-absurd-non sense-injustice to force someone to believe or enter Islam. Neither physical nor psychological force can be applied on anyone to believe in Islam. Faith comes from inner conviction and NOT from external compulsion.

2. Killing of human being in the house of Islam

• Life is sacred. Killing of one innocent is like killing whole mankind. [Quran, Surah Maidah 5:32]
• In order to safeguard the peace and human life; Quran permits capital punishment- but only in two cases – murder and spreading mischief. [Quran, Surah Maidah 5:32]

3. Quran is against death penalty for apostasy.

Does Quran mentions about apostasy? “YES” – “several times.”
What punishment it prescribes? “No worldly punishment for sure. It always speaks about punishment in the life hereafter.”

Quran address the issue of apostasy at several places. Almighty God tells about the people leaving Islam-but at not a single place God says that such people should be killed. Look at 2:217, 3:86-90, 4:137, 9:66,74, 16:106-109, 47:25-27

A)”… And if anyone among you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then the works of such as these will be lost in this life and in the hereafter they will be the dwellers of the fire, abiding therein forever. [Quran, Surah Baqrah 2:217]

B) How shall God guide those who reject faith after their belief and after they bore witness that the Messenger was true and after clear (signs) had come unto them? God guides not unjust people.
They are those whose recompense is that on them (rests) the curse of God, of the angels, and of all humankind.
They will abide therein. Their torment will not be lightened and they will not be given any respite –
Except for those that repent after that, and make amends (by righteous deeds), for, verily God is forgiving, most merciful.
But surely those who disbelieved after their belief and then went on increasing in their disbelief, never will their repentance be accepted; for they are those who have gone astray. [Quran, Surah Ale Imran 3:86-90]

C) Surely those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe (again) and (again) disbelieve, and go on increasing in disbelief, God will not forgive them nor guide them nor guide them on the way. [Quran, Surah Nisa 4:137]

Please note: this ayah talk about an apostate coming back to islam and then again becoming apostate – if you kill apostate then how he will get chance to again come to islam? So this ayah directly contradicts with death-for-apostasy.
D) Make no excuses. You have disbelieved after your belief. If We pardon some of you, We (may) punish others amongst you, for they are guilty. [Quran, Surah Tauba 9:66]

They swear by God that they did not say, but they did say the word of disbelief and they disbelieved after their islam and meditated a plot which they were unable to carry out. And (by this) they avenged nothing except that God and his Messenger had enriched them of his bounty! If they repent, it will be better for them; but if they turn away, God will punish them with a grievous penalty in this world and in the hereafter. And there is none for them on earth as a protector or helper. [Quran, Surah Tauba 9:74]

E) Whoever disbelieved in God after his belief – not he who is forced to do so while his heart is content with faith but he who opens his breast to disbelief – on such wrath from God, and theirs will be a great torment. [Quran, Surah Nahal 16:106]
No doubt, in the hereafter they will be losers. [Quran, Surah Nahal 16:109]

F) 47:25 Surely those who have turned back (to their state of kufr) after the guidance was made manifest to them, Shaytan has enticed them and filled them with false hopes. [Quran, Surah Muhammad 47:25]

The crux of the issue:
1. Quran gives absolute freedom of belief / disbelief. None can be forced to believe in Islam. None can be threatened with death for leaving Islam.

2. Quran mentions about apostasy issues several times, but not a single time Allah says that apostate should be killed. Please mind it – almost every place Almighty God talk about punishment in the life hereafter.

3. The biggest irony is that almost all ayah that deal with apostasy were revealed in medina where Islamic state was established. Imagine – even Surah taubah (which was revealed during war time) speaks about apostasy but stop short of execution of apostates. In medina Islamic state was established and criminal laws were implemented. In this situation what big deal it was to reveal that apostates should be killed?

4. What difficult it was to say in such place that punishment for apostasy is capital punishment? But no, Quran never said so.

5. Any unbiased Muslim / non-Muslim after going through above ayah of Quran will agree that Quran does NOT prescribe death penalty for apostasy.

6. Death-for-apostasy directly contradicts with several ayah of Quran: 2:256, 3:90, 4:137

7 Quran clears in 5:32 the situations when capital punishment can be given – one is murder; another is spreading mischief in land. A person can be given death for apostasy if his apostasy falls under the category of “fasad” i.e. spreading mischief on the land or better to say – “misbalancing the peace of earth”. It will be up to the Islamic state rulers to decide whether a particular case of apostasy can be termed as fasad-fil-ard i.e. spreading mischief in land. This term fasad or spreading mischief on land is abstract term and its implementation will vary from time to time and case to case. Important point to note is that then death punishment will be because of spreading mischief in land and NOT because of ONLY apostasy.

4. Can death punishment be left for hadees?

Some people will come up with childish argument. They say – “death-for-apostasy” is not in Quran but not in hadees.” These people fail to realize that it’s crystal clear from Quran that death-for-apostasy contradicts with several ayah of Quran.
Life is extremely scared in Islam; a crime that deserves death has to be stated in Quran clearly.
When Almighty God mentions about various crimes and its punishment – some even less severe than death; for example – cutting off hands for theft, flogging for wrong accusation of zina – then how come Allah will leave it to hadees to explain a crime and the punishment that is more severe? As I mentioned earlier – apostasy may or may not come under spreading mischief on land depending upon the situation. However, saying apostasy per-se is crime and deserve death penalty is against Quranic.

Note: For a real “Muslim” or believer in God and his teachings – this article is complete at this stage in its purpose. However, since most of so-called-Muslims have abandoned Quran and actually don’t believe in Quran in totality (practically) – hence further information is provided.

E. Analysis of hadees that allegedly prove that apostate should be killed

1. Hadees saying – “WHOEVER CHANGED HIS RELIGION, KILL HIM”

As should become clear in the sequel, the only hadith that legislates or prescribes as a law the death penalty for apostasy is found, with some variations, in Bukhari 2794, 6411, Abu Da`ud 3787, Tirmidhi 1378, Nasa`i 3991-7, Ibn Majah 2526, Ahmad 1776, 2420, 2813 (cf. Ahmad 1802).

Ahmad ibn Muhammad bin Hanbal related to us: Isma‘il bin Ibrahim related to us: Ayyub informed us from ‘Ikrimah that ‘Ali, peace be upon him, burned some people who abandoned Islam. This reached Ibn ‘Abbas and he said: I would not have burnt them with fire. Indeed, the Messenger of God said: ‘Do not punish with the punishment of God.’ I would have killed them in accordance with the word of the Messenger of God. For, surely the Messenger of God said: ‘Whoever changed his religion kill him’.” This reached ‘Ali, peace be upon him, and he said: ‘Woe to Ibn ‘Abbas’. (Abu Da`ud 3787)

Grave problems with this hadees:

1. This hadees mentioned in different books of ahadees gives contradictory statement in the last part. There are several differences in the various narrations of the hadith, some of which are important. As per different traditions Hazrat Ali said different things:
“Woe to Ibn ‘Abbas” (wayha Ibn ‘Abbas).
“Woe to the mother of Ibn ‘Abbas” (wayha umm Ibn ‘Abbas)
“Ibn ‘Abbas said the truth.” (sadaqa Ibn ‘Abbas).

2. One of the crucial narrator of this hadees -‘Ikrimah, the slave of Ibn ‘Abbas, has received mixed reviews from the scholars of hadith. Though some have considered or are reported to consider him reasonably trustworthy while others considered him a liar or at least untrustworthy. He is reported by many as liar, cheater and saying wrong words in the name of hazrat ibn abbas.

3. The hadith requires us to believe that either Sayyidna ‘Ali did not know the prohibition by the Messenger of God against burning people or he knowingly acted contrary to it. Both possibilities are extremely remote.
And even if for some reason Hzrat ‘Ali was ignorant about the hadith against burning, some of the many other senior Companions alive at the time would have known about it. We expect them to bring the Prophet’s words to ‘Ali’s notice when he was deciding to burn people or after he had done so.

4. Quite apart from the hadith prohibiting the burning of people, there is no report of burning of a human being by the Prophet, or Abu Bakr, or ‘Umar, or ‘Uthman. So why would ‘Ali depart from the practice of his illustrious predecessors? Perhaps he became very angry at those people and wanted to punish them in the severest way. But it was not the style of the khulafa` rashidun to act in anger in this way. ‘Ali’s character was closer to the one depicted in the tradition in which he was about to kill a disbeliever during a battle when the man spat on him. ‘Ali withdrew his sword and let the man go. When asked about why he withdrew his sword, ‘Ali replied in effect that the man’s spitting on him might have tainted the purity of his intention of fighting only for the sake of God. Hence killing people because of excessive anger is not expected from ‘Ali. It was something that came after the time of al-khulafa` al-rashidun when the rulers became power-loving, dictatorial and unjust.

5. Furthermore had ‘Ali burned some people many Muslims would have come to know about it, not least because of the unprecedented nature of the punishment. Consequently, reports about the burning would have found their way in many books of history. But we do not seem to have any independent report about it in any reputed source.

There are several other reasons that put big question marks over the authenticity of this hadees.
For more analysis on this hadees: please read here – http://islamicperspectives.com/PunishmentOfApostasy_Part2.html

2. A few apostates killed because of murder

It should not be difficult for any person with common sense that in the following hadees where prophet ordered execution of some apostates who have murdered people – the execution was because of MURDER and not apostasy. This is in sync with Quran and Prophets come to implement Quran ONLY.

A group of people from ‘Ukal and ‘Urainah came to Madinah and accepted Islam. Subsequently they apostated , killed and tortured a Sheppard [other version say sheppards] and mutilated their bodies. The Prophet ordered their arrest and they were executed. Sahih Al-Bukhari, op. cit., Vol.8, Hadeeths # 794, 795, 796, 797, pp. 519-522.

F. Prophet not ordering killing of apostate

There are proofs from the book of ahadees where Prophet did not order execution of apostate. Had death been divine punishment from Allah then definitely Prophet would have followed the commandment. This is in sync with the Quranic spirit that apostasy does not require death punishment.
1. The below hadees says that how a person accepted Islam and then left it, yet prophet didn’t order to execute him.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Muhammad bin al-Munkadir from Jabir bin ‘Abd Allah: A Bedouin gave a pledge of allegiance for embracing Islam. The next day he came with fever and so came to the Prophet, saying: “O Messenger of God! Cancel my pledge.” The Prophet refused. He came to him again and said: “Cancel my pledge”. He refused. He came to him another time and said: “Cancel my pledge.” He refused again. The Bedouin then went out. Then the Messenger of God said: “Madinah is exactly like a furnace; it expels out the impurities and retains the good.” (Muwatta 1377)

2. Also we know the famous case of ‘Abd Allah bin Abi Sarh. He became a Muslims, used to write for the Messenger of God but Shaytan made him slip and he joined the disbelievers. The Messenger of God ordered his execution on the day of the conquest (of Makkah). This order was because of him being an open enemy and not just because of apostasy. But ‘Uthman bin ‘Affan sought protection for him and the Messenger of God granted it to him. Now we see he was not finally executed. If apostasy deserved a mandatory capital punishment then definitely Prophet would have got him executed. (Refer to Abu Da`ud 3792, see also Nasa`i 4001)

No wonder a large number of people are coming open against this Anti-Quranic concept of death-for-apostasy.
Read http://apostasyandislam.blogspot.in/

G. Conclusion

1. It is one of the wide spread myth that Islam prescribe death penalty for apostates.

2. Islam gives utmost freedom of faith; one is free to believe or disbelieve. 2:256; 18:29; 10:99

3. Though Quran mentions about the issue of apostasy several times but not for once it prescribes any worldly punishment for it. In fact – at all such places – Allah speaks about punishment in life hereafter. Read 2:217, 3:86-90, 4:137, 9:66,74, 16:106-109, 47:25-27

4. Death for apostasy contradicts with several ayah of quran. For ex- 4:137 ; 2:256

5. Almost all ayah dealing with apostasy were revealed in medina where Islam state was established and Islamic criminal system was implemented. In this favorable situation it was not difficult for Allah to reveal that apostasy deserves death penalty.

6. God can not leave it to hadees to prescribe divine punishment for apostasy when Quran clearly mentions about crimes and punishment less severe compared to apostasy. 5:32-33; 5:38; 24:2

7. Since Muslims, as a whole have abandoned Quran (25:30) so they think that apostate should be killed.

8. A very few hadees that gives idea that apostate should be killed is full of contradiction and have several flaws.

9. Prophet never ever ordered execution for apostasy. Several instances from ahadees prove that even though people left Islam Prophet did not order their execution.

Note: * If you don’t agree with the mail then instead of giving fatwa of deviation / kufr / shirk / biddat – have faith in Allah and leave it to him to judge.

* Author: Khurshid Imam is software engineer at Bangalore, India. For any criticism / feedback / suggestion feel free to mail – serviceforhumanity@gmail.com

The article can be found at: http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2012/09/does-islam-teach-to-kill-apostate.html.

The article can be downloaded as pdf from: http://www.scribd.com/KHURSHIDIMAM

 
 
Belief of Hinduism – Sakar Upaasna (Idol worship)
 
By Khurshid Imam
 
 
Introduction
 
Idol worship or sakar upaasna is one of the most important features of our Hindu brethren. Only aryasamajis are strictly against idol worship. They don’t do idol worship because it is against the teachings of Vedas. Except aryasamajis almost all sects of Hinduism believe and practice it. However, when it is asked to them – does God have any shape or color or figure? Then the reply is “NO”. Then why you do idol worship? The reply is – “See, Almighty God is nirakar (without any shape), but we can not concentrate on someone who is shape less so we need sakar (a shape) medium in order to reach that nirakar. We will reach that nirakar God using sakar medium”. This is the most common argument in favor of sakar upaasna or idol worship.
 
 
Why people do idol worship?
 
Even though every logical and just person will agree that idol worship is not correct yet our Hindu brethren give an excuse for doing the same. They say – “See, God is actually formless. God can not be seen by anyone. But it becomes very difficult to concentrate on that imageless God. How can a layman concentrate on formless God? So we say that for people in initial level of devotion should do idol worship; so that through a sakar (with shape) medium he can reach nirakar (without shape) God.”
 
 
No person till now has reached to almighty god using a shape or image.
 
* I am yet to meet any person in my life who has started with idol worship, then gradually he stops it because he has successfully acquired the devotion of God and does not require idol for concentration of that shapeless God.
* 1 billion Muslim in the world can concentrate on that God without using idol/shape/picture then why can not our Hindu brethren?
* When a Muslim child as small as 7 years and a Muslim old man of 70 years can concentrate on that God without using idol/shape/picture then why can not our Hindu brethren?
* No need to say how strict and uncompromising Muslims are in terms of God being one and unique.
* Go to any mosque round the globe and you will find hundred and thousands of people worshipping almighty God in the form of Namaz without any need of idol/picture/image. I firmly believe that even our hindu brethren can concentrate without image.
* When convinced logically; our hindu brothers will agree that YES actually God should be worshipped without image; but Question is HOW? I will answer later in this article. First we need to understand why we need serious introspection about the validity of sakar upaasna.
 
 
Idol worship distorted the pure Sanatan dharm
 
The pure Sanatan dharm that was based on oneness of God is lost in multiple gods, multiple images of God. We have lost the pure religion of God because of distortion of monotheism. God is one, unique, without any likeness, without any need. Never ever God taught us to give him any image. When someone worships image then he is worshipping anything except God. Vedas never propagated idol worship. The pure Sanatan or Shashwat dharm is lost in the distorted concept of God.
Swami vivekanand and many scholars of Hinduism have spoken against idol worship. .
 
 
1.                  Idol worship contradicts Vedic mantr
 
Worship is for whom? For God! Who will define about God? God himself! Does God define himself in his revealed scripture? YES – this is the most fundamental part of the revelation. Vedas are considered to be ish-wani or God’s word by hindus. They are considered apaurishya i.e. not humane but divine. Now what God has said about him? A true hindu should ponder over these mantras and introspect their practice:
 
* Na tasya pratima asti yasya namah mahaddashah : “Of him (The God) there is no image. Remembering him is itself great act” Yajurved 32:3
 
* God can not be grasped in any direction” Yajurved 32:2
 
* Sah akayam: “He is bodiless” Yajurved 40:8
 
* Andhatm pravishanti ya asambhti upaste… “Those who worship asambhuti – they enter into darkness of tamas (part of hell). Those who worship sambhuti – they enter more into darkness of tamas (part of hell)”- Yajurved 40:9
 
The Sanskrit word asambhuti when loosely translated into simple language will refer to Natural things e.g. Sun, air, water, moon, tree, river, mountain, man, woman, animal.
The Sanskrit word sambhuti when loosely translated into simple language will refer to man made things e.g. idol.
The Sanskrit word “tamas” as per Sayanaacharya – the Vedic Scholar – refers to one of part of hell which is also described in Shrimadbhagwad Puran.
 
So yajurved 40:9 tells that those who will do shirk (Associate partner with Almighty GOD) will enter hell. This is similar to what Quran says in 4:48; 4:116; 5:72
 
 
* “That GOD alone is ONE without any partner.” – Atharv ved – 13:4:12
 
* “GOD is the master of all creatures. He is the master of heavens and the Earth. Except him whom do you worship?”- Rigved 10:121:1
 
* “GOD is the Ruler of living and non living worlds. He is the Lord of man kind and animal kingdom – Except him whom do you worship?” Rigved 10:121:3
 
* “.. Except the GOD whom do we worship and give offerings?”- Rigved 10:121:5
 
There are several other references from Vedas which make ample clear that Almighty God is one, alone, unique, without any likeness. He can not be compared with anything. He is the master of all beings. How it is possible then that we can create image/shape / picture of God? Does God creates us or we create God?
 
 
2.                  Idol worship contradicts logic and common sense
 
Even if you leave what scripture says and just think logically then you will realize that it does not go well for a logical person.
 
Who made universe?
 
                  Look at the world around you. How big our earth is; great and huge mountains, immense oceans  how big our earth is? Very big? What is the status of earth in our galaxy-milki way? Nothing. Earth is so small that almost negligible in our galaxy. Our galaxy has more than 1000000000000 stars!!! Each star being thousands of time greater than earth!! How many galaxies are in the universe? More than 100000000000!!!!! So how many stars? Infinite? How big our universe is? Infinite! And this infinite universe is continuously expanding!!! No comparison. Who is the creator of this universe? I? You? Any sadhu-maulana? No No not at all. It’s the almighty God who is the creator, sustainer and planner of this universe. Is that almighty God someone like me and you? No! Is he someone who needs food to survive? No! Does he sleeps and get tired? No. Does he have any parent or children of spouse? No. Then how come we can give him any image or equate him with anything. He can not have any likeness, no vision can grasp him. He is beyond comprehension.
 
Different gods for different people?
 
                     How many Gods are there? One. Is there a separate God for hindus, separate God for Muslims and separate God for Christians? No. Is there a separate God for people of India, bhutan, America and japan? No. Then how come we have made hundreds of different gods in Hinduism? How come we have made separate God for north India and separate God for south India? How come different God for Andhra Pradesh, different God for tamilnadu and different God for kerala? How come a separate God for rain, separate God for wealth, separate God for prosperity? Is not this all wrong? YES, absolutely these all are wrong beliefs. You know what is one of the reasons for this? Its idol worship. Once people started giving different images to God, these images gradually became different gods.
 
Who makes idol?
 
                     People believe that Almighty God is THE CREATOR who had done many things necessary for our existence. How it is logical and just that people create idols from their own hands and then worship it? Idol is created by man; then how come idol becomes superior to man? Can an idol eat sweet that is offered to it? No! Can an idol remove a fly that sit over it? No! Can an idol stop someone who brings stick to hit at it? No! It does not have capacity. Then why you worship something that can not do anything? Leave alone giving life and death, it can not see/hear/listen/harm/benefit you at all. Don’t you think the only worthy to be worshipped is almighty God who can really benefit / harm / see/listen to you?
 
Justification in favor of idol worship
 
                     Some people say that through the idol we are worshipping Almighty God. They give example of visiting card. Just like a visiting card represents your detail, similarly an idol represents God but it’s actually not God. Again, this is very bad logic. When you take visiting card and then you want to speak to or seek any help from the person concerned then do you communicate to the person on you speak to visiting card? Obviously people will laugh if you hold visting card of Mr. xyz in hand and tell – “O! xyz. I want to meet you tomorrow at office. Please bring my Cds. Meet me at 5 O’ Clock”. It’s illogical to do this. What you will do is you will actually go and talk to Mr. xyz. Similarly when you want to worship God then you will worship him and not any image or shape or idol or human being. When 1 billion Muslims can worship God without any image then why can’t others do?
 
·                     Some people try to twist it so much that they will come with absurd arguments. Some will say that there is great benefit of idol worship. How? There are various types of waves that emancipates from idols. When you go to idol you get these waves which are very useful. And so on….
My question is: even if we suppose that waves come out of idol, how does it justify that one should worship idol? Is an idol God? Waves come not from idol but from all objects – so should we worship everything? There is no justification for this argument. Wave comes from brick then should we worship it?
 
Kaba is NOT worshipped
 
                     Here on thing is important to mention. Some people – knowingly or unknowingly spread the misconception that Muslims also do idol worship. They say that Muslims worship kaba. This is gross misconception on the part of such people. Never ever any Muslim has worshipped kaba.
Kaba is a cubical structure at mecca. It represents as the direction for namaz (prayer) for Muslims all over the world. Islam lays great emphasis on unity and discipline. For worship also great emphasis is on unity and harmony. One can not offer the obligatory prayer any time he wishes. There are certain times for that. One can not offer namaz at any place, but people have to gather at mosque. One can not offer prayer separately, but all people will stand shoulder to shoulder in rows. All people will face the same direction. This direction is kaba. All Muslims round the globe have this common direction of prayer which is a great symbol of unity and harmony.
 
 
3. Idol worship is against human psychology
 
·                     Usually our hindu brethren will say that in order to concentrate on formless God we concentrate on idol or image. It is as per human psychology that the more you will concentrate on something more it will be in your mind. The more you look at image or idol and concentrate over it more it will be embedded into your mind as God.
 
·                     The more you look at idol assuming it to be God, the more you propagate the same, the more you teach the same – more you will replace God with idol.
 
·                     People usually give excuse that it’s only for the beginners that idol is needed for concentration – for later stage it’s not required. Again this theory is a lie. Every hindu who believes in idol worship does throughout his life. Never have we heard that someone has left idol worship because now he is able to concentrate on God without idol. Also other important point is that we can not teach wrong thing. If idol is not God then we can not say idol is God for beginners; but for people in advance stage idol is not God.
 
 
What is the substitute for idol worship?
 
The problem expressed by our hindu brethren in concentrating formless God is actually a genuine problem. It’s really difficult to concentrate on formless God. This problem is a genuine problem and hence it has a practical solution – The Salah or Namaz. Namaz is one of the ways to worship God. Everyday 5 times a Muslim is supposed to offer namaz.
 
This problem of concentrating on God is met by following solution:
Prophet Muhammad taught us that when you stand for prayer then you assume that God is seeing you. When a person starts offering namaz with the belief that God is seeing him then he will be able to fully concentrate on namaz. He will understand that namaz is a way of communication with God. The way we offer namaz with full obedience – we should be obedient even after namaz. One can see 1 billion Muslims round the globe concentrating on the God without any need of image or idol.
 
Messenger of God or Prophet Not only teaches to worship God but also teaches how to do so. Namaz is the worshipping of God and it was taught by all prophets. So namaz was there for every prophet, even for the prophet who was sent to India. One of the part of namaz is still prevalent in Hinduism today – in its distorted version – in the form of sashtang.
 
Sashatang
 
One of the mode of worship is sashtang in Hinduism in which the worshiper lie down on the  ground. Unfortunately this sashtang is done on wrong way. Word sashtang is made up of 3 words: sah + asht + ang i.e together + 8 + part. Sashtang is the mode of worship in which 8 parts of body participate. When a person lies down on ground then his whole part and not 8 parts – touches ground; so its not the correct form. The correct form is sajda in which 8 parts of body touches ground: 2 hands, 2 knees, 2 leg-fingers, 1 forehead and 1 nose.
 To know more about islamic meditation-namaz-click here: 
 
 
Conclusion
 
·         Idol worship or sakar upasna is one of the most important features of Hinduism today.
·         People doing so give the excuse that one can not concentrate at initial level hence it is required for concentration. This excuse is against scripture and logic.
·         Idol worship contradicts the teachings of Vedas.
·         It contradicts common sense and logic.
·         Namaz is the substitute of sakar upasna where a person can very well concentrate on God without using any image or idol.
 
 
 
Note: Author Khurshid imam is a software engineer, Bangalore. For any feedback mail to serviceforhumanity@gmail.com

Does Allah deceive? makar-Allahu

 
by Khurshid Imam
 
 
A. Introduction
 

Quran:  Wamakaroo wamakara Allahu waAllahu khayru almakireena
….
Quran translation: “And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah” 3:54
…..
Anti-Quranic people: “See! The Quran says that Allah is deceiver / plotter because the arabic word “makar” refers to plotting / deceiving. Muslims mistranslates Quran and change the meaning. They wrongly write that “makarAllahu” means planning – “Allah plans”. The correct translation should be “Allah plots / deceives”.
Almighty God is deceiver-What does it mean??
 

B. How do we understand any attribute of God? How do we understand any action of God?

Word of God is available to us in language. Language was invented by human being. Human being invented Aramaic, Hebrew, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian and the revelation of God were in these languages. See the chronological order:
a. In the beginning ONLY God existed. There was no Arabic, Sanskrit, Hebrew.
b. Then creation took place. Human being started living on the earth.
c. As a result of evolutionary process human being started using / inventing language. Sanskrit, Hebrew, Arabic, English came into existence gradually.
d. God revealed his scripture in these languages and detailed about himself using these languages.

The last point has the crux of the article. God describes about himself / his actions / his doings using the language that was invented by human being. Now question is:
How EXACTLY is GOD?
How God DOES anything?
How God perform any action?
How exactly God does that entitle him to be called The CREATOR?
How exactly God does that entitle him to be called The SUSTAINER?
How exactly God does that entitle him to be called MOST MERCIFUL?
… and so on.
Any honest person will say – “I do not know”.

Understanding things beyond our material world

Its but natural that human mind can not grasp the complete and exact nature of God. How can we? When none of us has ever seen him? The brain with which we want to comprehend God – was given by him. Science tells that human being is able to use hardly 5-10% of his brain. How can we grasp / understand the nature of God with limited mind, without seeing / experiencing him.
He was there when nothing else was there. He created nature, he gave us eyes to see, ears to hear, mind to think and we want to comprehend him 100%? It is not possible at all.

Why only God? Even paradise-hell: its exact nature; our life after death; how angels take out soul at death; the life of barzakh (stage after death till the day of judgement) … all such things are beyond our material world. None of us has seen these with eyes or seen photograph or had audio / video; they are beyond this material / physical world hence we can not grasp exact nature of all these till we are in this material world.

    Human mind perceive and understand those things about which it had some experience of seeing / feeling etc OR at least there exists something similar to that. Things that we have not experienced at all and whose resemblance does not exists – we can not perceive fully. We can just use some terms to explain its nature yet never we can explain fully. Take an example:

Discovery of “orange” !!!
Imagine a time in the past when human beings had discovered “Apple” and “Lemon”, but “Orange” was not discovered. Now one fine day Khurshid imam discovers “orange” 🙂
Now how he will explain about orange to the masses? Please keep in mind that even the name “orange” will be given to that entity using human language. He will explain nature of newly discovered thing by telling:
– You know the fruit that i have discovered is somewhat similar in shape of Apple. But it is not exactly of apple shape.
– Its taste is – more sweeter than lemon but less sweeter than apple. Its sweetness is in mid of these two fruits.
Even if i write voluminous books just to explain the taste of “orange” i can not make people understand how it taste. It is ONLY after actually tasting that someone will understand what is the taste of orange.
Now imagine about God!! There is no resemblance of him. Nothing is like him. How can we make anyone understand how exactly God is? How he does anything? No way! Absolutely no way! We have to rely on what he has revealed to us and we can get only a glimpse of his attributes.

Talking to unborn baby?
Imagine a hypothetical scenario. A 7 month old unborn baby in the womb of mother. Suppose somehow someone from outer world can communicate to him 🙂 Baby is told that as of present he is residing within the “body” of a “human being“. One day he will “come out“. Then he can see lot of “man“, “woman“, “boy“, “girl“, “animals“, “plants“. He can sit in “car“. He can see huge “mountain“, he can go to “lake” which is full of water. He can see “computers“, “robots“, “washing machine that washes clothes“, “TV that shows videos“………  oh! i will faint.
Do you thing these words will make any sense to the unborn kid? Can he comprehend any of these things? NO! All these are beyond his perception, beyond his small “world”, beyond his imagination. You can only make very very little effort in explaining nature of these things to the baby. You will use things that are within his domain to explain about out-of-womb things.

Similarly everything that is beyond our material / physical world viz: God, paradise-hell, life of grave will be understood better when we cease to exist in this physical world, when we leave this material body. Until then we will get only minimal description of these things. Now the question is How God makes us understand these things? Answer is: using the language human beings understand. That is why the Quran describe beautifully about God in these words:

Say: He is Allah (Almighty God), the One and Only;
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begets not, nor is He begotten;
And there is none like unto Him. Quran; Surah Ikhlas 112

This the shortcut but unique description of almighty God. As we have seen earlier that human mind can only understand things using his experience / his understanding. If he tries to understand completely the nature and essence of God using his brain then he is bound to fail. The same thing happened with dayanand sarswati – the founder of aryasamaj. He tried to understand the exact nature of God using his limited brain. His brain told that how can God create something from absolutely nothing? His logic was that since for any creation human being need some initial matter to start with; and in absence of any such matter no creation can take place hence – he propagated that – almighty God also can not create anything from absolutely nothing. I m sorry to say that Pandit dayanad sarswati completely failed; he underestimated God. He was using defective scale to measure the length!!!

C. What is meant by “makar” (plotting / deceiving) of Allah?

We can not see or feel God. So how we know him? Through his signs and attributes. Quran has given so many attributes to almighty God. Some of them are:

Ar-Rahman                             (الرحمن)                                        The All-Compassionate
Al-Malik                                 (الملك)                                           The Absolute Ruler
Al-Jabbar                               (الجبار)                                          The Compeller
Al-Musawwir                         (المصور)                                       The Shaper of Beauty
As-Sami                                 (السميع)                                         The Hearer of All
Al-Basir                                 (البصير)                                         The Seer of All
Al-Hakam                              (الحكم)                                           The Judge
Al-Hasib                                (الحسيب)                                        The Accounter
Ash-Shahid                            (الشهيد)                                          The Witness

Now we say God is Al-Basir i.e. “The Seer of All “. How he sees everything? Its exact sense – we don’t know.

a. Human beings also see. Animals also see. Seeing of human beings will have a limit. This attribute of “seeing” in infinite sense will apply to God only. There is no comparison between seeing of human being and seeing of God. When i tell you “i saw a peacock”. Then you can understand what i m talking about, you can grasp it. But, when God says that “He sees” then we may not grasp it fully. Why?

b. For any action / attribute of human being; a medium is required.
When you talk about same action / attribute for God then medium is eliminated. There is no medium. We never know HOW he DOES anything?

For human beings to see they require “eye” – something with which they can see.
Not only presence of “eye” but also its various elements like retina etc should function well.
Not only this, but also some “light” is required so that their eyes can function.
… and similarly one can see that so many mediums are required for the action of seeing.
.. However, when you talk about GOD then seeing of God does not discuss or take into account any medium but it only reflects the end result. How he sees? we don’t know. But the end result that by seeing he is well aware of everything – is correct.

When we say God is As-Sami i.e. The Hearer of All – then we never mean that God requires a ear, a medium where sound can travel etc but we only mean the end result; that is he is hearing everything so he is well aware of speech of people.

When we say God is Al-Khaliq i.e. The Creator – then we are only expressing the end result that he will cause things to come into existence. How exactly? We do not know. Human beings need initial material, a process, a plan, a time line, other favoring conditions but when for God we can only say that these medium will be eliminated and as a end result creations will come into existence.
…….
Similarly if you ponder over any attribute of God then you will realize that all attributes express the ultimate end result by eliminating medium. Now let us come to the actual topic of the article.
People from all faith ultimately believe in what i have explained till now. Please note that there can not be any word in any language to denote the exact nature of any action of God. When you ask a hindu / christian / or any theist – “How exactly God does anything? How he creates? how he sees? how he hears? How he destroys? Then all will say – we don’t know, we can not grasp super power God”

It is true that Quran refers to “makar” of Allah at several places. But what will this action “makar” will mean when used for God? We have seen that any action of God always conveys the end result by eliminating medium. Because medium is required for human beings. “makar” means to deceive.
What happens when i deceive you?
In simple words “what you were understanding was actually wrong. You were thinking that you were right but actually you were wrong” – right? Now for deceiving you i would have used some medium. I might have spoken lie, i might have tricked you into believing something else. So a medium is required when deceive word is used with human being.

When makr is used with Allah then medium for “makar” is eliminated. We do not know medium but we know the end result that people were actually wrong when they were thinking they are right. If Allah has done makar with anyone then it indicates that those people were believing / understanding wrong thing ultimately.

If you read all such reference of makar of Allah then you will be surprised to see that in all such references people were actually believing something wrong while being convinced that they were right. So makar-Allah is the most appropriate word for such instances!!!! In order to cut short the article we will take only one instance for explanation.

a. Quran, Surah Al Imran 3:54

See how beautifully this ayah refers to the wrong belief of those people who believed that jesus had died!!
Read Surah al-imran; ayah 46 onwards till 55 and you will realize that only “makar” Allah was the befitting word for the event described.

Surah Al Imran 3:45 – describes about the glad tidings of birth of jesus to Maryam (Peace be upon her). It is prophesied that Jesus will be an honorable person.
Surah Al Imran 3:46 – speaks about the prophecy of speech of jesus when in cradle.
Surah Al Imran 3:47 – Maryam would be surprised how she can bear without any physical touch. She will be assured that God will make this happen. Now here also please note: God will make maryam give birth to jesus even without male intervention; how it is possible? We don’t know exactly. As its action by God we will eliminate the medium which is required in normal case. Only end result is know i.e. Maryam will give birth to Jesus.
Surah Al Imran 3:48-53 – details about teachings propagated by Jesus. Then he would know about some people who would reject his teachings and planned against him.
..
And then 3:54 speaks about planning of jews against Jesus. They planned to kill jesus. Obviously Jesus did not want to be killed. Jews did everything to make sure that they kill jesus. But what happened? Did they kill? Answer is NO.
Quran says emphatically in 4:157 that though jews thought that they had killed jesus but actually they did not kill. And this planning , deceiving is mentioned in Surah Al Imran 3:54.
“And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah” 3:54

makara l-lahu – refers to the false belief of jews i.e. they were deceived into believing that they had killed jesus. They were made to believe that they had killed jesus while actually they had not. Plotting by Allah is not same as plotting by human beings; but the end result is same that people believed/understood wrong!!!

Note: Jesus was killed or he will return back? Go through below articles for detailed analysis:
http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2012/06/jesus-dead-or-alive.html
http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2012/06/jesus-is-not-dead-and-will-come-again.html

Similarly you can analyse following ayah and understand in context that how some people were deceived and they believed wrong things.

b. Quran, Surah Anfal 8:30
c. Quran, Surah A’araf 7:99
d. Quran, Surah Namal 27:50

D. Allah mocks?

Once you have understood what is meant by makara l-lahu it will not be difficult to understand other supposed-to-be-negative qualities that are used for God. Why we assume them to be negative is because we understand it the way it is used for human being. While God is free from any error.

al-lahu (Allah) yastahziAllah mocks at them and gives them increase in their wrong-doing to wander blindly…. (2:15)

Let us read in context. If you read Surah baqrah 2 ayah 8 to 15 then you find:

8. And of mankind, there are some (hypocrites) who say: “We believe in Allah and the Last Day” while in fact they believe not.

9 They desire to deceive Allah and those who believe, while they only deceive themselves, and perceive (it) not!

10 In their hearts is a disease and Allah has increased their disease. A painful torment is theirs because they used to tell lies.

11 And when it is said to them: “Make not mischief on the earth,” they say: “We are only peace-makers.”

12 Verily! They are the ones who make mischief, but they perceive not.

13 And when it is said to them (hypocrites): “Believe as the people have believed,” they say: “Shall we believe as the fools have believed?” Verily, they are the fools, but they know not.

14 And when they meet those who believe, they say: “We believe,” but when they are alone with their Shayatin (devils – polytheists, hypocrites), they say: “Truly, we are with you; verily, we were but mocking.”

 So here Almighty God is speaking about people who
  – want to deceive allah and believers;
  – have knowing rejected truth and thus this has lead to disease of rejecting truth
  – Used to lie;
  – Would not mend their rebellious nature;
  – Would consider believers as fool;
  – they would proclaim that they are mocking at truth / believers.

Then next ayah says – Allah mocks at them and gives them increase in their wrong-doing to wander blindly. Quran, Surah Al-Baqrah 2:15
Kindly ponder – if you read with context then you will realize that those people who are trying to make mockery of truth / believers would be mocked by God. Meaning – these rebellious people would think that believers are lower / wrong / mean / going astray while actually God will make these people be wrong and going astray.

These are they who have purchased error for guidance, so their commerce was profitless. And they were not guided. Quran, Surah Al-Baqrah 2:16

Now we see some people make mockery of religion. How? We have seen detail in 2:8-14 i.e. by falsely claiming so many things and considering believers to be fool and on wrong path. When you mock someone then you may or may not lie and you will end up showing the opponent as lower or mean.
Allah mocks. How? For sure his way of mocking is not as that of human being. But the end result is same. ACTUALLY these deviated people will end up being shown on wrong path and hence lower.  Ponder over ayah 15-16 “….These are they who have purchased error for guidance, so their commerce was profitless….”
Thus they will be mocked by God.

E. Conclusion

1. Anti-islamic writers attack Quran by saying that it speaks about God deceiving and plotting. They say “How this is possible”. They refer to 3:54 and other ayah.
2. God existed when nothing existed. Language was invented later by human beings. God reveals his scripture in these languages. God describes about himself using these languages.
3. God is without any likeness, without any resemblance. No word in any language can describe the essence of God. None of us has seen him so that he can describe how God is.
4. When a action is attributed to human being then it is well understood, but when same action is attributed to God then it express only the end result. The medium used for performing this action is eliminated when we talk about God.
5. For human beings to see they require “eye” – something with which they can see.

Not only presence of “eye” but also its various elements like retina etc should function well.
Not only this, but also some “light” is required so that their eyes can function.
.. However, when you talk about GOD then seeing of God does not discuss or take into account any medium but it only reflects the end result. How he sees? we don’t know. But the end result that by seeing he is well aware of everything – is correct.

6. Makr-Allah i.e. plotting by God expresses the end result that these people were made to believe wrong thing, they were misunderstanding while thinking that they are understanding. This is makr-allah. The medium for this action is eliminated.

7. Remember everything we talk about God is conveyed to us using language invented by men. So we can never get complete grasp of his essence until we actually feel (which is not possible till we are in material / physical world).

Note: * If you don’t agree with the article then instead of giving fatwa of deviation / kufr / shirk / biddat – have faith in Allah and leave it to him to judge.

* Author: Khurshid Imam is software engineer at Bangalore, India. For any criticism / feedback / suggestion feel free to mail – serviceforhumanity@gmail.com

The article can be found at: http://khurshidimam.blogspot.in/2012/07/allah-decieves-makr-allaho.html

The article can be downloaded as pdf from: http://www.scribd.com/KHURSHIDIMAM