Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - karim fattah

Pages: [1] 2 3
« on: June 07, 2018, 12:24:00 PM »
what actually is the proof the bible is corrupted and changed.
And secondly what about the dead sea scrolls which are 2000 years old and show no corruption in the bible?

« on: February 18, 2018, 05:03:07 PM »
Assalamu alaikum

I had a quick question with regards to cousin niece marriages. I find it to be quite weird to marry members of your own family and your cousins and nieces, also this has been scientifically proven to be harmful, why would islam then allow this if it js a weird marriage between families and can cause harmful babies.


« on: February 08, 2018, 12:44:49 PM »
There are 3 people you can be referring to. 2 of them have fake weak isnads and the stories make no sense ( abhu afak and asma ) and kaab instigated a war on the prophet muhammad saws in order to get hi killed.

To refute:

1.   Asma bint Marwan: it is not reliably transmitted , ibn ishaqs story, Ibn Ishaq's Sīratu Rasūlu l-Lāh, an important early work of sīra, was composed over 100 years after the Prophet's death using oral traditions passed down from his early followers. However, its accuracy for use as hadith, a body of traditions of the prophet that Muslim scholars use to flesh out Islamic doctrine, is not completely accepted. This particular story has been challenged by Muslim scholars for having a weak chain of transmission, on account of it containing a known fabricator, Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj.
Ibn Ishaq's version of the story has a number of chains of transmission (isnads) that go back to Ibn ‘Abbas, a companion of Muhammad. However, all those various isnads include Muhammad ibn al-Hajjaj al-Lakhmi, also a known fabricator of hadith:
Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al-Shami → Muhammad ibn al-Hajjaj al-Lakhmi → Mujalid ibn Sa’ed → Al-Shu'abi → Ibn ‘Abbas
Muhammad ibn al-Hajjaj al-Lakhmi has been accused by hadith scholars of fabricating this and other hadiths. Ibn ʻAdī (died 976) stated: "...this isnad (chain of reporters) is not narrated on authority of Mujalid but by Muhammad ibn al-Hajjaj al-Lakhmi and they all (other reporters in the chain) accuse Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj of forging it".
Ibn al-Jawzi (died 1201) said something similar in his Al-'ilal.
Regarding Al-Lakhmi, Al-Bukhari said: "his hadith is abandoned",
Yahya ibn Ma'een said: "compulsive liar" and once said: "not trustworthy".
Al-Daraqutni denounced him as a liar.
1.   then ibn sad narrative is even more stupid. firstly again the chain is not correct Al-Albani declared Ibn Sa'd's chain of transmission to be weak as well, as it includes Al-Waqidi:
Ibn Sa'd → Al-Waqidi → 'Abd Allah ibn al-Harith ibn al-Fudayl → Al-Harith ibn al-Fudayl
Al-Waqidi has been condemned as an untrustworthy narrator and has been frequently and severely criticized by scholars, thus his narrations have been abandoned by the majority of hadith scholars.
Yahya ibn Ma'een said: "Al-Waqidi narrated 20,000 false hadith about the prophet". Al-Shafi'i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Al-Albani
said: "Al-Waqidi is a liar" while Al-Bukhari said he didn't include a single letter by Al-Waqidi in his hadith works.
In addition, this isnad is discontinued (muʻḍal) as Al-Harith ibn al-Fudayl never met any of Muhammad's companions.
1.   and why ibn sad story is more retarded is because the hadith says: “She used to revile Islam, offend the prophet, and instigate the people against him. She composed verses. Umayr Ibn Adi came to her in the night and entered her house. Her children were sleeping around her. There was one whom she was suckling. He searched her with his hand because he was blind, and separated the child from her. He thrust his sword in her chest till it pierced upto her back. …” [1]
2.   muhammad sent a blind man to do a killing? really now. either way i have proven from the chainof narration that this story is fake, from ibn sads narration a guy that is blind is commanded to do a killing
3.   let me just post some more links that completely refute this whole narrative,
4.  and  and
1.   and and 
2.   so now your best source of information is broken, the narrators are fakers and forgers and the story dont make sense as a blind man is sent to do a killing, hmm I think more should be said regarding the authenticity of the narration, look at what it says... A blind man crept all the way across town found her house, made it into her bedroom where she was with here 5 kids and an infant, mannaged to locate her in a house he had not seen beffore, not wake anyone up, then remove the child from her arms while she was still sleeping and didnt notice, murder her with out her making a sound or her children waking and then escape...the story does say he was blind.

So asma to conclude: all the isnads to her story are fabricated and weak. And the story doesnt make sense as it is a blind man doing a killing

Next abu afak

For abu afak it is again very easy to refute, as the story is both baseless and if we dig deeper we some things done by abu afak as well.

Firstly proving the story is baseless requires no effor. Because there is literally no isnad for the stkrym there is no chain of narration so we don’t know who gave us such a story thus hoe can we accept it.

As yahya snow said:
According to Ibn Sa'd and Ibn Ishâq, Abu 'Afak was a 120 years old Jewish man who had abused the Prophet(P) verbally, so the latter launched a raid under the command of Salîm Ibn 'Umaîr to kill him. We do know that Ibn Ishâq lived in the 2nd half of the 2nd century after Hijra, as well as Al-Waqîdî from whom Ibn Sa'd (died 230 A.H.) copied the story of Abu 'Afak.

As explained above, the chain of reporters of the story from eye-witnesses of the event till Ibn Ishâq or Al-Waqîdî must be examined and verified. So, our legitimate question is: where is the isnâd (i.e., chain of reporters)?

Unfortunately, references of the Sîrah do not provide such information. Actually, we are told that this story has no isnâd at all; neither Ibn Ishâq (or his disciple Ibn Hîsham) nor Al-Waqîdî (or his disciple Ibn Sa'd) had provided such a thing! In this case, the story is rated by hadîth scholars as "...of no basis", indicating that it has reached the lowest degree of criticism regarding its isnâd. This is in fact a proper scientific position because we cannot accept such a problematic story without evidence.

In brief, we have no commitment to accept such a baseless story - according to scientific criteria of hadîth criticism - which strangely had appeared in the 2nd half of the 2nd century after Hijra. We are therefore obliged to reject the story of the killing of Abu 'Afak by Salîm Ibn 'Umaîr at the Prophet’s command.

Besides this. I have also gone even deeper into the stories ( these stories I found are from the same or other sources. Im not saying they are strong but neither are the hadiths saying he killed him either. But by putting all of this together even if we assume it is strong, ehich it isnt, we could still explain it)

Now what did he do.

“فكان (أبو عفك) اليهودي يحرض على رسول الله”
“The Yahud (Abu Afak) used to instigate (war) against the Messenger of Allah.” (Tarikh al-Khamis, by Husayn Ibn Muhammad Diyarbakri, volume 1, page 408)

 يحرض الناس على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم
“He (Abu Afak) incited the people (al-nas) against the Messenger of Allah.” (al-Sirah al-Halabiya, by Ali Burhan al-Din al-Halabi, volume 3, page 147

أبي عفك اليهودي من بني عمرو بن عوف وكان شيخا كبيرا قد بلغ مائة وعشرين سنة وكان يحرض على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم
“Abu Afak… instigated (war) against the Messenger of Allah.” (Bidaya Wa Nihaya, by Ibn Kathir, volume 5, page 202. Arabic Edition)

 يحرض يحث ويحمل الناس “على” قتال “النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم”
“He (Abu Afak) was spurring the movement of provoking and stimulating the people so as to kill the Messenger of Allah.” (Sharh al-Zurqani`alal Mawahib-al laduniyah lil Qastallani by Imam Muhammad az-Zarqani, volume 2, page 347, online source, )

So basically to conclude on abu afak the story is baseless and has no narrator meaning we eont accept it. But even if you want to acceot it we see that he used to instigate war on the prophet wanting to kill him either way it is a false and fake fabricated story.

Finally kaab bin ashraf

After the Battle of Badr, one of the Banu Nadir's chiefs Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf, went to the Quraish in order to lament the loss at Badr and to incite them to take up arms to regain lost honor, noting the statement of Muhammad: "He (Ka'b) has openly assumed enmity to us and speaks evil of us and he has gone over to the polytheists (who were at war with Muslims) and has made them gather against us for fighting".[14] This was in contravention of the Constitution of Medina, of which the tribe led by Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf was a signatory, which prohibited them from "extending any support" to the tribes of Mecca, namely Quraish. Some sources suggest that during his visit to Mecca, Ka'b concluded a treaty with Abu Sufyan, stipulating cooperation between the Quraysh and Jews against Muhammad

Ka’ab bin Al Ashraf used to satire the Prophet and incited the infidels of the Quraish against him. …” (Sunan Abi Dawud: Book 19, Hadith 2994)

A real authority and great muhaddith ibn hajar says: The author [Bukhari] placing this in the chapter of Jihad gives the mean that Ka’b was a war enemy. … He was assassinated only because he violated his treaty and assisted in the war against the Messenger of Allah (p)…” (Fath al-Bari, by Ibn Hajar, page 160 and page 340)
Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf was the most resentful Jew at Islam and the Muslims, the keenest on inflicting harm on the Messenger of Allah (p) and the most zealous advocate of waging war against him. He belonged to Tai’ tribe…” (Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum – The Sealed Nectar: Biography of the Noble Prophet By Safi-Ur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri, page 241)

He also incited the Mushrikeen (idolaters) to take revenge against Nabee (Prophet) and the Muslims. This was the same enemy who invited Nabee (Prophet) for a meal and has placed some people to kill him. Allah informed Nabee about this plan and he left from there before this evil plan could be executed. Many Sahabah intended killing this evil man but were exhorted by Nabee (Prophet) to exercise patience and tolerance. However when his evil crossed all limits Nabee (Prophet) permitted action against him and Muhammad bin Maslamah and other finally carried out a mission in which they annihilated this enemy of Allah from the face of the earth.” (Seerah Sayyidul Ambiyaa – The Noble Life of Prophet Muhammad By Muhammad Ali Bin Zubair Ali, page 139)

he went to the Quraish, weeping over their killed (at Badr) and inciting them to fight with the Prophet.’ (Zurqani, vol ii, p. 10)
The Prophet said): ‘He (Ka’b) has openly assumed enmity to us and speaks evil of us and he has gone over to the polytheists (who were at war with Muslims) and has made them gather against us for fighting’ (Zurqani, vol. ii, p. 11)

‘And according to Kalbi, he united in a league with the Quraish before the curtains of the Ka’bah, to fight against the Muslims.’ (Zurqani, vol. ii, p. 11)
‘And he prepared a feast, and conspired with some Jews that he would invite the prophet, and when he came they should fall on him all of a sudden.’ (Zurqani, vol. ii, p. 12)
Ka’b used to incite people to murder the Muslims. Ka’b had broken his agreement with the Prophet, he had revolted against him, he had entered into a league to fight against Muslims till they were extirpated, and he had secretly planned to take away the Prophet’s life. Muhammad the Prophet: by Maulana Muhammad Ali, page 202 – 206)

So the guy treasoned a pact with muhammad and insticated hate against the muslims wanted to make a pact of coalition with the non muslim enemies of the muslims and muhammad in order to wage war against him and to kill muhammad SAWS.

« on: January 30, 2018, 07:03:24 AM »
Assalamu alaikum,

I was wondering if you guys could help me with a doubt/question i had.

I saw this video of david wood and i didnt really know an answer. I obviously wont post the link as it isnt allowed but basically what he does is show a video of a pshychologist saying with the research done it shows men and women are of the same intellect and that the men arent smarter. However we have multiple ahadith claiming that women hsve a deficiency in the mind and intellect, however this would then be incorrect with the evidence we have.

Also could you help me answer his series which he made in december called paul vs muhammad. They are 25 short videos in which he tries to disprove the prophethood of muhammad saws and affirm the apostlehood of paul.

If you guys could help me with those 2 points that would be great

Jazakallah khair.

« on: October 09, 2017, 07:07:16 PM »
Hey br osama

With regard to thw music prohibtion could you show your view on it i thought it was prohibited by the following evdiences. But if you have counterevidence id love to see inshaAllah

The evidence thats usually brought:

The quran: 31:6 And of the people is he who buys the amusement of speech to mislead [others] from the way of Allah without knowledge and who takes it in ridicule. Those will have a humiliating punishment.

Tafsir: The scholar of the ummah, Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: this means singing. Mujaahid (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: this means playing the drum (tabl). (Tafseer al-Tabari, 21/40).

 Al-Hasan al-Basri (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: this aayah was revealed concerning singing and musical instruments (lit. woodwind instruments). (Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 3/451).

 Al-Sa’di (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: this includes all manner of haraam speech, all idle talk and falsehood, and all nonsense that encourages kufr and disobedience; the words of those who say things to refute the truth and argue in support of falsehood to defeat the truth; and backbiting, slander, lies, insults and curses; the singing and musical instruments of the Shaytaan; and musical instruments which are of no spiritual or worldly benefit. (Tafseer al-Sa’di, 6/150)

 Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The interpretation of the Sahaabah and Taabi’in, that ‘idle talk’ refers to singing, is sufficient. This was reported with saheeh isnaads from Ibn ‘Abbaas and Ibn Mas’ood. Abu’l-Sahbaa’ said: I asked Ibn Mas’ood about the aayah (interpretation of the meaning), ‘“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks’ [Luqmaan 31:6]. He said: By Allaah, besides Whom there is no other god, this means singing – and he repeated it three times. It was also reported with a saheeh isnaad from Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them both) that this means singing( Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, 1/258-259).

Do you then wonder at this recitation (the Qur’aan)?

And you laugh at it and weep not,

Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)”

[al-Najm 53:59-61]

  ‘Ikrimah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: it was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas that al-sumood [verbal noun from saamidoon, translated here as “Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)”] means “singing”, in the dialect of Himyar; it might be said “Ismidi lanaa” [‘sing for us’ – from the same root as saamidoon/sumood] meaning “ghaniy” [sing]. And he said (may Allaah have mercy on him): When they [the kuffaar] heard the Qur’aan, they would sing, then this aayah was revealed.

Ibn Katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning) “Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)” – Sufyaan al-Thawri said, narrating from his father from Ibn ‘Abbaas: (this means) singing. This is Yemeni (dialect): ismad lana means ghan lana [sing to us]. This was also the view of ‘Ikrimah. (Tafseer Ibn Katheer).

 It was reported from Abu Umaamah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not sell singing slave women, do not buy them and do not teach them. There is nothing good in this trade, and their price is haraam. Concerning such things as this the aayah was revealed (interpretation of the meaning): ‘And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…’ [Luqmaan 31:6].” (Hasan hadeeth)

The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

 “Among my ummah there will certainly be people who permit zinaa, silk, alcohol and musical instruments…” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari ta’leeqan, no. 5590; narrated as mawsool by al-Tabaraani and al-Bayhaqi. See al-Silsilah al-Saheehah by al-Albaani, 91).

« on: October 09, 2017, 06:59:24 PM »
Its not an ahad hadith though br osama.

Dawud 4596: Narrated AbuHurayrah:
The Prophet (ﷺ) said: The Jews were split up into seventy-one or seventy-two sects; and the Christians were split up into seventy one or seventy-two sects; and my community will be split up into seventy-three sects.

Ibn maajah 3992: It was narrated from ‘Awf bin Malik that the Messenger of Allah(ﷺ) said:
“The Jews split into seventy-one sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy in Hell. The Christians split into seventy-two sects, seventy-one of which will be in Hell and one in Paradise. I swear by the One Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad, my nation will split into seventy-three sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy-two in Hell.” It was said: “O Messenger of Allah, who are they?” He said: “The main body.

Ibn majah 3992: It was narrated from Anas bin Malik that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
‘The Children of Israel split into seventy-one sects, and my nation will split into seventy-two, all of which will be in Hell apart from one, which is the main body.”
حَدَّثَنَا هِشَامُ بْنُ عَمَّارٍ، حَدَّثَنَا الْوَلِيدُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَمْرٍو، حَدَّثَنَا قَتَادَةُ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ ‏ "‏ إِنَّ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ افْتَرَقَتْ عَلَى إِحْدَى وَسَبْعِينَ فِرْقَةً وَإِنَّ أُمَّتِي سَتَفْتَرِقُ عَلَى ثِنْتَيْنِ وَسَبْعِينَ فِرْقَةً كُلُّهَا فِي النَّارِ إِلاَّ وَاحِدَةً وَهِيَ الْجَمَاعَةُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏

« on: October 08, 2017, 04:08:37 PM »
Assalamu alaikum

We all know the hadith of jews breakinf in 71 sects the christians in 72 and the muslims will break in to 73 sects.

So my question is what ar e the 71 sects of jews that existed at the time of muhammad saws similarly with the christiand

And what are the 73 sects of islam

Jazakallah khair

« on: October 04, 2017, 03:06:51 PM »
asslamau alaikum

how do we respond to people that the black stone was set into there by the jahiliyyah and did not come from the heaven at all as there is no proof of it coming from heaven but they do have proof that they used to worship stones and do tawaf around them

bukhari 4376: We used to worship stones, and when we found a better stone than the first one, we would throw the first one and take the latter, but if we could not get a stone then we would collect some earth (i.e. soil) and then bring a sheep and milk that sheep over it, and perform the Tawaf around it. When the month of Rajab came, we used (to stop the military actions), calling this month the iron remover, for we used to remove and throw away the iron parts of every spear and arrow in the month of Rajab. Abu Raja' added: When the Prophet (ﷺ) sent with (Allah's) Message, I was a boy working as a shepherd of my family camels. When we heard the news about the appearance of the Prophet, we ran to the fire, i.e. to Musailima al-Kadhdhab.

so how do we respond to people that say muhammad stole their stone and rituals of tawaf made them his own and made a legend about it by proof of this hadith they used to take rocks and to tawaf with them

« on: October 03, 2017, 10:01:38 AM »

Quran says that every living thing was made from water

1. Bacteria are living things are they made from wate r
2. Angels were made from light so how were they made by water
3. Jinn were made by smokeless fire so what does water mean in this case.

Jazakallah khair

« on: September 28, 2017, 01:29:20 PM »
assalamu alaikum

a christian made the following claim i will copy and paste how do we answer:

quran 6:101 says: [He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a son when He does not have a companion (wife) and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing.

why is allah here saying that he needs a wife to have a son, allah is almighty why does he need a wife to have a son, doesnt this go against his almightyness? also cant allah say be and it is to have a son . why then does he need a wife to have a son.

also christians believe god has a son but he does not have a wife, how then does the quran say that god cant have a son without a wife

also allah says in this verse: HOW CAN HE or HOW COULD HE. if someone says HOW CAN HE. it seems to say that god cannot do something and if god cannot do something this seems to say god cannot do anything, when in the quran allah says allah can do everything.

if allah is almighthy why then does he say: how can he have a son, holw can he applies to non divine people who cant do all, but someone who can do all is supposed to be able to have a son without a wifew by saying be and it is.

it seems as if allah is making himself into a human in this verse because he is sayig he needs a wife to have a son, this is what humans do, humans need a wife or a consort to have a on, but an almigthy god doesnt need that. but allah is here saying he needs a wife to have a son, like a human being. why is allah making himself to the level of a human here and why is allah not able to have a son by saying be and it is nor through his almigthyness

please help me answer him jazakallah khair

« on: September 28, 2017, 12:38:54 PM »
osama to respond to your beating point

firstly no you are not allowed to hit her face as, bukhari 2559: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "If somebody fights (or beats somebody) then he should avoid the face."
Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2137:
Narrated Mu'awiyah al-Qushayri:
Mu'awiyah asked: Apostle of Allah, what is the right of the wife of one of us over him? He replied: That you should give her food when you eat, clothe her when you clothe yourself, do not strike her on the face, do not revile her or separate yourself from her except in the house.
 and many other ahadith state

with regard to leaving a mark, no not allowed, tafsir maududi says: the Holy Prophet has instructed that she would not be beaten on the face, or cruelly, or with anything which might leave a mark on the body.

according to "Fear Allah concerning women! Verily you have taken them on the security of Allah, and intercourse with them has been made lawful unto you by words of Allah. You too have right over them, and that they should not allow anyone to sit on your bed whom you do not like. But if they do that, (in that case) chastise them in a way that leaves no mark (i.e. not severe). Their rights upon you are that you should provide them with food and clothing in a fitting manner."
(Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2137)

Do not cause harm or return harm.

Source: Sunan ibn Majah 2340, Grade: Hasan

Do not harm them in order to straighten them.

Surah At-Talaq 65:6

Strike them if they disobey you concerning good conduct, a striking without severity.

Source: Tafseer At-Tabari 9377, Grade: Hasan

also with regard the siwak being a lie, osama brother this is false.

ta’ reported: Ibn Abbas said:

ضَرْبًا غَيْرَ مُبَرِّحٍ

It is a striking without severity.

I said to Ibn Abbas, “What is a striking without severity?” Ibn Abbas said:

 بِالسِّوَاكِ وَنَحْوِهِ

It is with a toothstick or something similar.

Source: Tafseer At-Tabari 9387

Rather than being a physical punishment, this striking is a teaching mechanism intended to direct the wife’s attention to the severity of her behavior. The Prophet would do so with his male companions as a means of catching their attention.

Abu Dharr reported:

فَضَرَبَ بِيَدِهِ عَلَى مَنْكِبِي ثُمَّ قَالَ

The Prophet struck my chest with his hand and he said…

Source: Sahih Muslim 1825, Grade: Sahih

some ahadith proving you cannot harm your wife by beating them

Tafsir Ibn Kathir, chapter 68:
Imam Ahmad recorded that `A'ishah said, "The Messenger of Allah never struck a servant of his with his hand, nor did he ever hit a woman. He never hit anything with his hand, except for when he was fighting Jihad in the cause of Allah. And he was never given the option between two things except that the most beloved of the two to him was the easiest of them, as long as it did not involve sin. If it did involve sin, then he stayed farther away from sin than any of the people. He would not avenge himself concerning anything that was done to him, except if the limits of Allah were transgressed. Then, in that case he would avenge for the sake of Allah.''

Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2139:
Narrated Mu'awiyah al-Qushayri:
I went to the Apostle of Allah and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them

Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2138:
Narrated Mu'awiyah ibn Haydah:
I said: Apostle of Allah, how should we approach our wives and how should we leave them? He replied: Approach your tilth when or how you will, give her (your wife) food when you take food, clothe when you clothe yourself, do not revile her face, and do not beat her.

Narrated by al-Tirmidhi (3895) and Ibn Majaah (1977), also quoted in Imam Ghazzali's Ihya Ulum-Id-Din, Marriage section:
"The best of you is the one who is best to his wife, and I am the best of you to my wives."

also refuted here:

next up the meaning of daraba could also mean seperate, proof this book:

« on: September 27, 2017, 05:44:05 PM »

Bukhari 2: O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! How is the Divine Inspiration revealed to you?" Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) replied, "Sometimes it is (revealed) like the ringing of a bell,

Muslim 2114: The bell is the musical instrument of the Satan.

Both of these ahadith are sahih found in the sahihayn and mentioned multiple times.

So one hadith says the bell is from the fevil the next says muhammad saws received revelation in the form of a bell  how do we reconcile these

« on: September 27, 2017, 10:42:42 AM »
Aisha had a slave-girl from that tribe, and the Prophet (ﷺ) said to `Aisha, "Manumit her as she is a descendant of Ishmael (the Prophet). Bukhari

How do we redpons to people thst muhammad saws was for favorism ans tbat just because she was from ishmael she cant be enslaved but if she wasnt she wouls be.

Jazakallah khair

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Refuting quran 4:3 error help
« on: September 26, 2017, 11:43:27 AM »
A christian claims this is an error in the quran i found out he copied it from wikiislam but s till how do we answer

Transliteration: "fainkihoo ma taba lakum mina alnnisa-i mathna wathulatha warubaAAa"
Yusuf Ali: .. marry women of your choice, Two or three or four;..
Pickthal: .. marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four;
Shakir: .. marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four;
Transliteration and Translation of Quran 4:3
Yusuf Ali and Pikthal are both using "or". Shakir is using "and".
The Arabic version is using "and" (the transliteration of 4:3 is using the conjuntive symbol wa (and)).
Thus this verse is telling men that they can marry two and three and four women. The total happens to be nine women, whereas Islamic law allows maximum four.
A grammatically correct verse should be using the disjunctive symbol aw (or); "Marry two or three or four."
If one were to re-write 4:3 and correct the logic mistake, then the Qur'anic challenge to write a 'better verse' would be met.

« on: September 25, 2017, 05:49:37 PM »

Thanka for the answers but i dont believe my questions have been answered.

1. Why does it never say that they worship the holy spirit
2. Nobody answere the quran 5:73-75  part where in 5:73 it speaks of a trinity and just 2 verses later they clarify in 5:75 that jesus and mary are not actually god which would only make sense if they are the persons of the trinity.

3. Why have big scholars like ibn taymiyyah and ibn kathir said that mary was 1 of the 3 persons in the trinity.


Pages: [1] 2 3

What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube