Cookiee raised an important concern on “Muslim Laws on Polygamy and Triple Talaq”.
As far InterfaithShaadi’s knowledge, this is a fact and not fiction. In India and most Islamic countries, a Muslim guy could have up to 4 wives (certain conditions apply but it is feasible by “country’s law”).
For example, actor Dharmendra Kumar wished to marry to Hema Malini as a “legal” second wife. This privilege is not there in India to non-Muslims, so Dharmendra converted to Islam and “legally” married to Hema Malini.
Further, an Islamic Nikaah marriage contract is null and void after the Muslim husband says talaak, talaak, talaak to his wife (whenever he chooses to do so for reasons good, bad or indifferent indeed for no reason at all). Contrary to that, for a Muslim wife to initiate and win a divorce is difficult (read laws: She has to prove in court that not heard for 4 years, failure to provide maintenance for two years, husband sentenced for 7 years imprisonment, failure to platform martial obligations for three years, impotency, insanity, cruelty, associating with women of evil repute, etc.).
If a Hindu or Christian girl in love with a Muslims and do not wish her husband to have additional wives and one day saying talaak, talaak, talaak, a simple solution to this concern is NEVER CONVERT TO ISLAM. There is not a single country in this world “legally” allow a Hindu husband more than one wife (alternatively a “Hindu” wife is not allowed “legally” to share husband with three other women). Further, a Muslim saying talaak, talaak, talaak to his “Hindu” or “Christian” wife is NOT legally enforceable and the Muslim will have to go through regular difficult divorce proceeding of the country.
Those who do not agree to above statements about legal matters, please add your correction below.
Return to Home, Blogs, How to Share? Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Book, Media.
Admin you gave wrong info, triple talaq through phone is invalid as per muslim personal law board. aimplboard.in/index.php?language=english
Talaaq and polygamy are evil systems of Muslim society. We hope Muslim women will wake up to eradicate such male dominated unjust practices.
LOL 😀
Look at admin’s reply, i pointed out that admin gave wrong info when he published a piece saying even muslim women will get divorced by their husband through mobile sms, and he has been spreading that false information ever since … Recently i came to know that Indian Muslim Personel Law board had already declared it illegal many years ago. But admin instead of correcting a wrong info which he gave unknowingly is spitting hate against muslims. His above reply calling muslims ways of life as evil is clear indication of it.
Hello dear readers,
Tripe Talaq is the most disapproved, detestable, and draconian form of dissolutionof Muslim marriage. It was not there during the life time of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).It was a post-prophet innovation of Umayyad Oligarchs in second century of the Hijri eraand subsequently approbated by the jurists of Hanafi Law, the most strong and dominantschool of Islamic jurisprudence conspicuous on the canvass of Sunni sect of Muslimsacross the world. Triple Talaqis a tryst with tyranny, which is innovatively impregnatedwith torture, trauma and tormentation.
Triple Talaq is a weapon of victimisation of womenin the hands of Muslim men devoid of any ethics, arbitration, and reconciliation. Triple Talaq destroys a woman emotionally, socially and economically. Despite the fact, Islam isthe first religion that recognised and legitimised the indivisibility of individuality of awoman. Her personality and personhood is independent and revendicated by the Islamicinjunctions as ordained in the Holy Quran. She has been endowed with certain inherentnon-derogable human rights. But Triple
Talaq symbolises the subordination, subjugationand suppression of human rights of women, which have already been made available tothem by the Holy Quran. Moreover, Islam treated rights of women as human rights.Triple Talaq is a recognised form of divorce in the contemporary legal regime inIndia or Muslim Law as administered in many muslim countries.
Muslim jurists have perceived it as a novel innovation in Sharia Law. It was not there in the initial two years of the lifetime of the firstCaliph Abu Bakr and second Caliph Umar, the great. But, subsequently, Triple Talaq was allowed exclusively in some special circumstances. For example, when Arabs hadconquered Egypt, Iraq and Syria etc, they found that women of these countries were more beautiful than those of their own wives. Consequently, they decided to marry with them.But these women of Egypt and Syria insisted upon divorcing their existing wives with2 immediate effect by pronouncing
Talaq and therefore in one sitting so that they couldmarry with them. Arabs readily accepted this condition because they knew that in IslamTalaq is pronounced twice between the period of purity (Tuhr) and its repetition at thesame time is against Islam, therefore, it would be void and ineffective.
In this way, they not only could marry with beautiful damsels but also retained their present wives. This nefarious design was brought to the cognisance of Caliph Umar the great. Upon beinginformed, Caliph Umar, the great for preventing the misuse of religion on this point ruledthat if anybody pronouncing Talaq thrice in one sitting would result in irrevocable dissolution of marriage, although it was an administrative measure to meet an emergency and not to institutionalise it as permanent law.
But, unfortunately, Hanafi jurists declaredthis ephemeral arrangement of administrative nature issued by Caliph Umar, the great, aslawful and divorce thereupon valid under the law.
Human,
Be truthful and post the source of information, please.
Mohammad,
Is it your real name? Are you the same Mohammad who raped and murdered thousands of innocents and preaching all vulgarities in the evil book Koran. You Mutta product and terrorist, creating havoc in your own muslim countries. Thousands of women have been raped, murdered, assaulted sexually, being auctioned in open markets to run prostitution.
Your Koran is suitably only for horny criminals, involved in terrorist activities and after death hoping sexual pleasure of 72 virgins in the heaven? What an evil book, you believe? Idot, son of bitch, be kind to the humanity. What is reality about muslim women, they are denied natural justice, keeping in burqa, giving talak any time,raping them and seeking 4 witnesses. If your sister is raped, where from she will get 4 witnesses? those supposed to be witness if see rape incident, they will also not hesitate to rape your sister. How many mutta marriages your mother had so far, do you know your actual father?
All the time you and bastard Mac talking irrelevant matters. Mac who was sodomized by Imam many times in the Madaras, never reported matter to the police. Perhaps he wanted his anus to be widened to keep bomb inside, like other terrorists.
Guys and girls (to all), instead of throwing dirt at each other, can you get back to helping youths in love? Please stop this before we are forced to start deleting comments.
but admin you didn`t ask the same questions that you asked me, why didn`t you asked him to produce proof, can he produce proof that women needs 4 eye-witness and etc.
I know Aamir is a hindu person who is been there from beginning and now commenting here and there under different muslim male or female name, thats the reality of you hindus, you are just liars
Dear readers,
Here is an example of child abuse in madaras, where victim has got no relief. Sodomy is a common practice in madarasas and only a very few cases are reported and 99% cases are not discussed due to insult and defame by the parents.
Lahore, Sabzazar police has not yet arrested the three accused who sodomized an 8-year-old eight days ago, police sources said on Wednesday.
Sources said that the victim Umer Shahzad, a resident of Shadiwal, studied at a local madrassa, Noor-ul-Furqan, located a few yards away from his house. Some eight days ago, second to the administrator of the aforementioned Madrasa, Qari Sadaqat, along with his two unidentified accomplices, took Umer Shahzad to an under construction house and sexually assaulted the minor boy. As a result, Umer was injured and shifted to the Children Hospital. Police has registered a case but they have not yet made any arrests. Umer’s brother, Ghulam Abbas, said Umer had told about the three men, after coming into his senses, over which they had requested the police too take stern action against the criminals. He said that in Umer’s case the accused were identified and were traceable but he could not understand why police was not arresting them.
Show me the proof of those things which you have said
else shut up your mouth and go away
you have not guts to tell ur real name
idiot
Hi readers,
Source: https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/statistics-muslim-countries-obsessed-with-womens-honour-have-one-of-the-highest-rape-scales-in-the-world/
Islam, Muhammad, mosques, five prayers per day, rigid control of their religious duties hasn’t done one thing to transform the Muslim male to a normal human being or a normal man. On the contrary, the Muslim male according to statistics is the most violent, oppressive, forceful and deranged human beast on earth. They also rule the world’s highest rape incidents – which seem to coordinate with rape statistics in the West that are dominated by Muslims.
All these facts and statistics according to collected studies on crimes against women around the world in collaboration with various non-profit organizations that deal with these issues on a daily basis. Other studies have shown that Muslim majority nations are afflicted with amongst the highest drug rate, homosexuality rate, murder rate, and sodomy rate.
— Saudi celebrity cleric raped and murdered his 5-year old daughter because he doubted her virgin.
Muslim countries obsessed with women’s honor have the highest rape scales in the world
Saudi Arabia is considered one of the most conservative countries in the world, especially in regard to the status of women. Saudi Arabia is an extreme Islamic country where its legal code is based on Shari’a Law. They therefore believe that there is no separation between church and state and the state’s laws are heavily based on Islamic teachings. Because of this strict Islamic culture, women in Saudi Arabia are treated and acknowledged very differently than the women who live in the west. For example, in Saudi Arabia, there are laws that require women to wear a hijab, a head scarf, as well as dress in loose, long garments that do not show the shape of the woman’s body. To do so would be shameful and secular. There are other laws such as this one that are meant to protect the virtue of women in Saudi Arabia.
ha ha ha chand osmani or what ever your real hindu male name is you again brought a stupid point and this time its so loughable, coz you copy pasted wordpress links,anyone can create a wordpress link, even you can create yout wordpress website, i can make a wordpres website by siting 100 rape cases links and out of 100 i will post 99 as hindus and will show that 99% rapist are hindus, if you have little bit of IQ you will and others will understand what i am saying here.
you are wrong here ” Muslim majority nations are afflicted with amongst the highest drug rate, homosexuality rate, murder rate, and sodomy rate” truth is that non-muslim countries have highest drug consumption rate, homosexuality(an by the way this homosexuality is legal in your god father`s country lol) sodomy, lol murder rate, go to any independent site and see, muslim countries are low in murder rate.
Saudi cleric raped a 5 years old girl ha ha ha and thats makes a news here, in india every day god knows how many teachers are raping their students in school, and you are stuck with one rape case ha ha ha thats shows your double standar, have you shown concern for your country!! where rape stats r meausred in seconds ha ha ha
YOLO
Hindu News !
Woman gang-raped on orders of ‘kangaroo court’…
BBC News.
…. “Her family could not pay, so go enjoy the girl and have fun,” the headman reportedly told villagers !!!
http://m.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-25855325
Source: http://www.centerforinquiry.net/isis/islamic_viewpoints/girls_nightmare_in_muslim_families_forced_marriages_in_europe/
Every year, many thousands of young girls, living in Muslim inhabited communities in European countries face forced marriages. In Muslim immigrant families, often from the Middle East, North Africa and Turkey, teenage girls are struggling against the pressure of tribal culture and Islamic customs imposed on them by their parents; and forced marriage is often their fate.
A women group against sexual mutilation of women, formed in 1980s in France, estimates that more than 30,000 young girls have been involved in forced marriage since 1990. In Britain, south Asian women groups have records of numerous cases of young girls who have been forced to marry by their parents.
This nightmare started in 1990s, when young girls from Muslim immigrant families in Europe reached their early teenage years and were considered mature and marriageable by their parents. Teenage girls from Turkish immigrant families are especially under intense pressure. According to statistics provided by women groups in France and Britain, in 1990s, 43% of girls from Turkish families, and 36% of girls from South Asian families in Britain, have been involved in forced marriages.
Forced marriage is a taboo, untouchable, and is performed secretly. The secret is revealed when the girl suddenly behaves strangely, gets isolated and is not doing well at school. She often breaks the silence and talks about her painful ordeal with a friend or some teacher at school. In this way, she unveils the bitter reality that is awaiting her. Once the forced marriage becomes known outside the family, the real fight starts. Zahia Hasan, chair of a women association; “Women’s Voice” in France, and a victim of forced marriages says: ” it is a painful experience, it was a nightmare for me for many years. I was deeply ashamed, I lied about my life and hid my misery”
Girls, who reveal the terrible secret outside family, often clash with their parents and leave home. They even feel ashamed and guilty of revealing the secret and having betrayed their families and relatives. Many young girls under a heavy family and community pressure undergo forced marriage because they don’t want to lose their families and relatives. Forced marriage is their inevitable fate, because there is no government or social support network to protect their rights. Forced marriages are practiced in France, Britain, Scandinavian countries and among Turkish community in Germany.
Early marriage is another aspect of forced marriages. Girls, 15 or younger, undergo forced marriages, are considered as part – times wives, continue to live with their parents and go to school, living with their dark and heavy secret.
In most cases, these marriages end to divorce; according to statistics; two out of three. Rape, teenage pregnancy, disrupted education; nervous breakdown, neurological disorders and suicide are all fruits of forced marriages for young girls. But, their families insist that their act is decent and good for the girls. They defend it by referring to Islam and Islamic Law; according to which, a girl cannot marry without the consent of her father, and in the absence of her father, that of her paternal grandfather. These families, not only haven’t been affected by advanced and modern culture in Europe, but also are out of tune with the current situation in their countries of origin, where social and cultural norms and values have moved forward. By marrying their young girls in this way, Muslim parents try to block the integration of their daughters into a modern and European life style. As a result, parents deprive their own children of enjoying the civil rights and individual freedom entitled to them. They harm their children physically, emotionally and psychologically.
Under French law, a forced marriage can be annulled if there has been lack of consent. But if the marriage ceremony is a customary one, the French courts cannot act. However, magistrates can intervene before a marriage takes place if an underage girl, who has broken with her family, is in physical danger.
Under the guise of respecting ‘others’ traditions and Islamic values, the legal system and authorities tend to overlook forced marriages. They say: “there are customs and religion, which are different from those, practiced here. It is not for us to judge these traditions and religion, unless the young girls are in physical danger and there should be proof for that.”
Consider a young girl under legal age, undergoing the ordeal of a forced marriage, clashing with her family, without a legal help or a supporting social network, who must provide proof against her own parents in the court, in order to get rid of this nightmare. Isn’t it inhumane and shameful? What is respectable in this misery imposed on these innocent young girls? What is respectable in destroying and wasting lives, hopes and dreams of these girls? And of course, both ‘Western’ and Eastern ‘intellectuals’, shamelessly, tell us that “to talk of forced marriages is an Euro – centric way of looking at things.”
Young girls in Muslim inhabited communities in Europe are victims of tribal and Islamic values and traditions, as well as a racist treatment by government authorities, intellectuals and mainstream media. These girls are born and have grown up in European countries, and should be entitled to all rights and freedom like other European citizens. Forced marriages must be prohibited by law as rape; and mental and emotional damages to teenage girls.
Girls from Muslim families are not the belongings of their families; they should be treated as equal citizens. The governments and the legal system must protect them from the harm caused by their parents. Society is duty bound to help the victims of forced marriages to recover from the emotional, mental and physical damages they suffer.
Dear readers,
Source: http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/08/30/Dozens-of-Yazidi-women-sold-into-marriage-by-ISIS.html
Several thousands Yazidi and Kurdish women kidnapped by Islamic State in Syria and Iraq militants (ISIS) have been taken from Iraq to Syria, forced to convert and sold into marriage to militants, an activist group says.
The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) said it had confirmed that at least1127 Yazidi women had been sold for around $1,000 each to ISIS fighters.
The group said it was aware that some 300 Yazidi women had been kidnapped and transported to Syria by the militants, but it had so far documented the sale into marriage of 1127.
“In recent weeks, some 300 women and girls of the Yazidi faith who were abducted in Iraq have been distributed as spoils of war to fighters from the Islamic State,” a statement said.
The group said it had documented several cases in which the fighters then sold the women as brides for $1,000 each to other ISIS members after forcing them to convert to Islam.
“The Observatory documented at least 27 cases of those being sold into marriage by Islamic State members in the north-east of Aleppo province, and parts of Raqqa and Hassakeh province,” SOHR said.
It added that some Syrian Arabs and Kurds had tried to buy some of the women in a bid to set them free, but they were only being sold to ISIS members.
The Observatory said it was unclear what had happened to the rest of the 300 women, and strongly denounced the “sale of these women who are being treated as though they are objects to buy and sell”.
Both U.N. officials and Yazidis fleeing ISIS advances in Iraq have said fighters kidnapped women to be sold into forced marriages.
U.N. religious right monitor Heiner Beilefeldt warned earlier this month of reports of women being executed and kidnapped by ISIS militants.
“We have reports of women being executed and unverified reports that strongly suggest that hundreds of women and children have been kidnapped – many of the teenagers have been sexually assaulted, and women have been assigned or sold to IS fighters,” she said.
Yazidis, a Kurdish-speaking minority who follow an ancient faith rooted in Zoroastrianism, are dubbed “devil worshippers” by ISIS militants because of their unorthodox blend of beliefs and practices.
The ISIS emerged from the one-time Iraqi affiliate of al-Qaeda but has since broken with that group and espouses an interpretation of Islam that has been widely rejected.
It has pressed a campaign of terror in the areas under its control in Syria and Iraq, which it deems an Islamic caliphate, carrying out decapitations, crucifixions and public stonings.
In October, the group launched a lightning offensive in Iraq, overrunning parts of five provinces.
Source: http://godofreason.com/new-page-281.htm
Quran 3:151 “Soon shall We cast terror into the Hearts of the Unbelievers”
Muhammad was a mass murderer – he killed over 3,000 and raped thousands more – he was the first ISIS.
What makes Islam so disgustingly evil and All Muslims so disgustingly evil is that they take God and turn Him into a Monster of the Universe. It is central to Islam that God transmitted every word of the Quran to Angel Gabriel to be re transmitted to Muhammad. The verse quoted above 3:151 is from God. God told Gabriel to order Muhammad to – “cast terror into the Hearts of the Unbelievers”
Angel Gabriel is no longer a Guardian Angel but a mass murderer. At the massacre of Banu Qurayza in which Muhammad personally beheaded 2 Jewish Chieftains and ordered 600 to 900 more beheaded having young Jews pants pulled down by his SS known as the Companions and those poor Jewish boys with the slightest trace of pubis were dragged away and beheaded, it is Angel Gabriel and his legion of jihadi angels who lead the charge. http://www.godofmoralperfection.net/new-page-45.htm
This is the epitome of evil. How can anybody believe that God would order such an order. But the Quran is filled with far worse verses then this one.
Why do Muslims read the Quran and then go out and kill. The answer to this question that no political or media is asking is that they read the Quran and the murderous Sunna of Muhammad and do exactly as God has commanded in the thousands of teachings like verse 47.4 “So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens. That [is the command]. And if Allah had willed, He could have taken vengeance upon them [Himself], but [He ordered armed struggle] to test some of you by means of others. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah – never will He waste their deeds.
Both these 2 good, moral Canadian Muslims did exactly as God commands” strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them” only they used a gun and car not a sword to inflict God’s justice of death to these soldier kafirs.
What of Verse 5:33 “ The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom” or
(Sura 8.12-13) “Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: ‘I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!’ That was because they defied Allah and His apostle. He that defies Allah and his apostle shall be sternly punished by Allah.”
Quran-8:17—“It is not ye who Slew them; it is God; when thou threwest a handful of dust, it was not Thy act, but God’s…..” (Allah said, the killing of surrendered soldiers were done by the wish of Allah)
Quran-8:67—“It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land. Ye desire the lure of this world and Allah desireth (for you) the Hereafter, and Allah is Mighty, Wise.” (Allah insisting Prophet to kill all the prisoners, and should not keep any surrendered prisoners alive until He (Prophet) occupied entire Arabia.
How can you believe in a God who instructs the murder of all prisoners? These are CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. THESE ARE CRIMES AGAINST GOD. This law was an order from Allah (the AntiGod) to murder all prisoners until Arabia was conquered for Islam. Take no prisoners. Kill them all. “Make slaughter in the land.” MASS MURDER. The word “slaughter” is so outrageous that only evil people can believe in Islam. If God murdered human beings – just one human being, He would no longer be Moral Perfection and therefore, no longer God. He would be nothing more than just a murderer. IT WAS EVIL MUSLIMS WHO SLEW THE JEWS NOT GOD.
The Quran is God talking to Muslims. These are the verses that are motivating these killers to go out and kill.
These killers are killing in the name of God yelling Allah Akbar obeying the orders of God to kill. For a Muslim to declare that no God would ever order such evil means death (except when committing Taqiyya ).
The punishment for apostasy (changing or discarding one’s Islamic religion) is death. Fatwa 4400, Part No. 1, Page 334 & 335
Mocking anything in the Qur’an or the Sunnah of the prophet Muhammad is apostasy and therefore punishable by death.Fatwa 2196, Part No. 2, Page 42
Criticizing Islam, shari’ah law or the Sunnah of the prophet Muhammad is apostasy and therefore punishable by death.Fatwa 21021, Part No. 1, Page 414
But Quran 47:4 and ALL teachings of the Quran are not from God. No God would ever order verse 47:4. These words are from Muhammad. No Canadian politician, media and Islamic professor will ever dare tell the above truth about this “distorted ideological propaganda”.}
These are teachings not of God but of an evil man and that man was Muhammad. Every word of the Quran is from the brain and mouth of Muhammad. To a good, moral human being, these teachings are pure evil but to a good, moral, moderate Muslim these verses are the word of God and all those who refuse to become Muslims are the epitome of evil and must be exterminated. The Quran is a book of extermination.
Muslims know the difference between right and wrong, good and evil because they murder those Muslims as apostates who challenge these evil teachings and engage in an elaborate campaign of lying called taqiyya to deceive the kafir as to the true meaning of these verses and Sunna. Part of their taqiyya is to condemn the acts of these Muslims who act out the Quran and Sunna but will NEVER condemn the teachings which because of Abrogration http://www.godofmoralperfection.net/new-page-34make up 100% of the Quran.
Taqiyya
Quran:16.106
YUSUFALI: Any one who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief,- except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith – but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty.
3.054
PICKTHAL: And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.
3:28 Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.
What of the nonsense that most Muslims are wonderful peace loving people and only very few are murderers. The reality is that there can be no Islam without Muslims. These Muslims give legitimacy to this evil.
Very few Klu Klux Klan actually went out and murdered black people but ALL of them were/are evil because they belong to the evil ideology. Not all Nazis/Gestapo/SS murdered and tortured. But all were equally guilty in the crimes committed by those who did. By Muslims belonging to the evil ideology of Islam that was created by a killer prophet who created his killer god called Allah and not walking from it, but in many cases lying in defending this evil then ALL Muslims are evil.
I will make the statement that WHEN YOU BELONG TO AN EVIL IDEOLOGY YOU ARE AS EVIL AS THAT IDEOLOGY WHETHER YOU PERSONALLY COMMIT ACTS OF EVIL IN THE NAME OF THE IDEOLOGY OR NOT. INDEED YOU ARE AS EVIL IF NOT MORE EVILER THAN THE PEOPLE COMMITTING THESE HORRENDOUS ACTS OF EVIL. THEY ALSO SERVE WHO ONLY STAND AND WATCH.
For article: Moderate Islam: What Freedom of Religion Means to A Muslim Man
go to:http://www.godofmoralperfection.net/new-page-44.htm
Shame on All Muslims. Shame on ALL the political, media and intellectual elites supporting them.
My brother Massey have not understanded correctlythose verse which have given in the Holy Quran
1. [Quran 3:151] “The promise of casting awe and fear into the hearts of the disbelievers ”
In this verse was made in the background of the battle of Uhud when the disbelievers of Arabia marched back to Makkah without any obvious reason and inspite of defeat overtaking Muslim (Baydawi).
However, after having covered a certain distance on their way to Makkah, they awoke to their folly. When they thought of marching
back to Madinah, Allah Almighty filled their hearts with such awe and fear that
they could not muster the courage to do so . The most they could do was to hire a Madinah-bound villager to go there and tell Muslims that theu were coming back.
But, this whole deal came into the knowledge of the oly Prophet (p.b.u.h) in Madinah through revelation. He
marched to Hamra al-Asad to apprehend them but they had already run away from there. This was the
background in which the present verse was revealed.”
2. [Quran 47.4]” So, when you meet those who disbelieve in war[it is at the time of war not know], smite at their necks (without giving them the opportunity to defeat you). At length, when you have sufficiently suppressed them (without continuing fighting), bind a firm bond of captivity on them. Then set them free either as a favor without demanding anything in return, or for ransom (which may consist of a reciprocal exchange of prisoners of war), so that the war may lay down its burdens (and come to an end). That (is God’s command). Had God so willed, He would certainly exact retribution
from them (Himself), but (He orders you to fight) in order to try you by means of one another. As for those who are killed in God’s cause, He will never render their deeds vain.”
3. [Quran 5:33] ” The recompense of those who fight against God and His Messenger, and hasten about the
earth causing disorder and corruption: they shall (according to the nature of their crime) either be executed, or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off alternately, or be banished from the land. Such is their disgrace in the world, and for them is a
mighty punishment in the Hereafter.”
4.[Quran 8.17]” You (O believers) did not kill them (by yourselves in the battle), but God killed them;[That is, “but for God’s plan and help, you could not have killed them and won the war.” This is a warning to those who thought, with pride, that they won the war by their valor and war skills]. and when you (O Messenger) threw (dust at them at the start of the battle), it was not you who threw but God threw.[ This phrase refers to the occasion when the Muslim and Makkan armies stood face to- face in the Battle of Badr. At that moment, God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, threw a handful of dust at the enemy saying, “May their faces be scorched,” and every enemy soldier felt as if he had become blind.]
(He did all this) so that He might put the believers to a test by a fair testing from Him (so that they could attain their goal and should know that victory is from God). Surely, God is All-
Hearing, All-Knowing.
5.[Quran 8:65] O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a
hundred (steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk without intelligence.
[Quran 8:66.]Now hath Allah lightened your burden, for He knoweth that there is weakness in you. So if there be
of you a steadfast hundred they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a thousand (steadfast) they shall overcome two thousand by permission of Allah. Allah is with the steadfast.
According to the above two verses, a hadith is there to understand
Narrated Ibn Abbas
When the Verse:– “If there are twenty steadfast amongst you, they will overcome two hundred.” (8.65) was revealed, then it became obligatory for the Muslims that one (Muslim) should not flee from ten (non-Muslims). Sufyan (the sub-narrator) once said, “Twenty (Muslims) should not flee before two hundred (non Muslims).” Then there was revealed: ‘But now Allah has lightened your (task)..’ (8.66)
So it became obligatory that one hundred (Muslims) should not flee before two hundred (non-muslims). (Once Sufyan said extra, “The Verse: ‘Urge the believers to the fight. If there are twenty steadfast amongst you (Muslims) ..’ was revealed.) Sufyan said, “Ibn Shabrama said, “I see that this order is applicable to the obligation of enjoining good and forbidding evil.”
6.[Quran 47:4] “When you meet the
unbelievers (in battle), smite
their necks until you have crushed them, then bind your captives firmly; thereafter(you are entitled to) set them
free, either by an act of grace, or against ransom, until the war ends.[The words of this verse as well as the context in which it occurs clearly show that it was sent down after the revelation of the command for fighting and before the actual fighting began. The words, “So when you meet (in battle) those who disbelieve”, indicate that the fighting has not yet taken place and the Muslims are being instructed that when it does take place, what they
should do]. That is for you to do. If Allah had so willed, He would have Himself exacted retribution from them. (But He did not do so) that He may test some of you by means of others. As for those who are slain in the way of Allah, He shall never let their works go to waste.
All these verses have camed at the time of war and enimies like you ,are always wants to fight with the islam
unneccerly
Its ur religion which is evil, criminal, ideological teach that always wants to fight with other religion and dont know how to behave others
Most of the hindu scientist have researched the holy quran and accepted Islam
Iam proud to be a muslim that islam has thoght us to live our life peacefully..
Mac,
What Rampal? How many women have been raped, killed by ISIS, Alquaida,
Hizbolla, Baghdadi, Saddam Hussain,Gaddafi, and other 1200 terrorist organizationS.
What is mutta and Halala, only to patronize illegal sexual relations.
You are product of these practices. SHAME ON YOU.
Idiot Rakesh, you failed to answer single question on hinduism that i asked, Idiot, gaddafi was the first person who declared laden as terrorist not your god father america, RAMpal,AshaRAM and others are doing this RAPE business in india from years, so count how many hindu ladies got raped by them
Who created al quida , me or your god father america https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnLvzV9xAHA
Dear readers,
ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION, BUT A CRIMINAL AND ANTI HUMAN IDEOLOGY.
Source: http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/ten_reasons.htm
A Muslim missionary or polemicist who believes that Islam is the best religion in the world and who wants it to spread around the globe attempted to refute this top ten list. But attempting to refute such a list is like reviewing a book only from the last chapter. The reviewer has skipped over the hard work of reading all of the chapters. In the same way, the Muslim polemicist or missionary has skipped over the hard work found in the back-up articles and the links. This top ten list is only a summary of many articles and a lot of strenuous labor from the present author and many other authors. The answers to the Muslim’s criticisms are all found in these articles. So his criticism is hollow, and his scholarship is shallow, since he has not done the hard work. He certainly does not understand the Bible. Plus, he whitewashes Islam in his attempted refutation. The back-up articles will show how. Thus, he whitewashes Islam either deliberately or unknowingly, which means he does not know his own religion or he knows it, but covers it up. Whatever the case, the truth about the real Islam must get out.
10. Muhammad nicknames his weapons.
Tabari (AD 839-923) is an early Muslim historian who is considered largely reliable by scholars today. In fact, the State University of New York Press selected his history to be translated into 38 volumes. (We use The Last Years of the Prophet, trans. Ismail K. Poonawala, 9:153-55.)
In the context of the list of Muhammad’s assets at the end of his life (horses, camels, milch sheep, and so on), Tabari records the nicknames of Muhammad weapons.
Muhammad nicknames three swords that he took from the Jewish tribe Qaynuqa after he banished them from Medina in April 624: “Pluck Out,” “Very Sharp,” and “Death.” Two other swords from elsewhere are named: “Sharp” and “That is wont to sink” (presumably into human flesh). After his Hijrah or Emigration from Mecca to Medina in 622, he owned two swords called “Sharp” and “Having the vertebrae of the back.” This last sword he collected as booty after his victory at the Battle of Badr in March 624.
Next, Muhammad took three bows from the Qaynuqa tribe and named them as follows: “Most conducive to ease, or wide,” “white,” and “of nab wood” (species of tree from which bows are made).
The name of a coat of mail implies “ampleness” or “redundant portions,” probably because Muhammad was portly (cf. Ibn Ishaq, Life of Muhammad, trans. Guillaume, p. 383).
Finally, even Muhammad himself has a nickname. After Tabari lists the positive ones, he matter-of-factly provides one that is not so positive: “The obliterator.”
Muslim apologists may object that Tabari is not authoritative (except when he shows Muhammad as heroic or victorious) and that he is not on the same level as the Quran and some hadiths (words and deeds of Muhammad outside of the Quran). This is true. But Muslim apologists still must answer why such a tradition of naming weapons developed about Muhammad. After all, later, unauthoritative traditions about Christ developed, but they do not show him even owning weapons, let alone naming them. The answer to this question about Muhammad is found in the next nine reasons.
This article explains Christ’s attitude about swords more thoroughly, as does this one. Certainly he never fondled swords or nicknamed them, displaying them proudly, delighting in them.
Thus, violence sits at the heart of early Islam—in the life of Muhammad. Islam is therefore not the religion of peace.
9. Muhammad commands in his Quran that adulterers and adulteresses should receive a hundred lashes.
24:2 Strike the adulteress and the adulterer one hundred times. Do not let compassion for them keep you from carrying out God’s law—if you believe in God and the Last Day—and ensure that a group of believers witnesses the punishment. (MAS Abdel Haleem, The Quran, New York: Oxford UP, 2004)
The supposed historical context of this sura occurs during a raid of a tribe in December 627 or January 628, on which Muhammad brought his favorite and youngest wife, Aisha, also the daughter of Abu Bakr, his right-hand lieutenant. After the Muslims’ victory, they journeyed back to Medina, one hundred and fifty miles to the north. On their last halt, Aisha answered the call of nature, but lost her necklace in the dark, just as the army was setting out from their encampment early in the morning. She left her litter, returned to look for the necklace, and found it. Meanwhile, the man leading her camel assumed she was in her curtained litter and led the animal away by the halter. Returning, Aisha saw that she was left behind.
However, a handsome young Muslim named Safwan saw her and accompanied her back to Medina, though both the Muslims and Muhammad’s opposition wagged their tongues at seeing the two youngsters entering the city together. Eventually, revelation came that Aisha was not guilty of any immorality.
Sura 24 thus establishes some ground rules against adultery, of which flogging one hundred times is one of the rules. Amazingly, 24:2 exhorts the accusers and judges not to let compassion keep them from carrying out God’s law.
Moreover, early and reliable traditions depict Muhammad and his Muslims stoning adulterers and adulteresses, as recorded by the two most reliable collectors and editors of the hadith, Bukhari (AD 810-870) and Muslim (c. AD 817-875):
Umar said: God sent Muhammad with the truth and sent down the Book [Quran] to him, and the verse of stoning was included in what God most high sent down. God’s messenger [Muhammad] had people stoned to death, and we have done it also since his death. Stoning is a duty laid down in God’s Book for married men and women who commit fornication when proof is established, or if there is pregnancy, or a confession. (Muslim no. 4194)
Umar was Muhammad’s right-hand lieutenant (along with Abu Bakr), and even shortly after Muhammad’s death he tried very hard to get a verse allowing stoning into the Quran, but he did not succeed (Ibn Ishaq, Life of Muhammad, trans. Guillaume, p. 684). Be that as it may, this and the next hadith are sufficient for many Muslims today to endorse stoning, as seen here: [1], [2], [3], [4].
Perhaps the most gruesome hadith is the following. A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification (by being punished for her sin). He told her to go away and seek God’s forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted that she was pregnant as a result of fornication. He told her to wait until she had given birth. Then he said that the Muslim community should wait until she had weaned her child. When the day arrived for the child to take solid food, Muhammad handed the child over to the community and ordered the woman’s death by stoning.
And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al-Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on his face he cursed her … (Muslim, no. 4206)
It is true that Muhammad told Khalid to be gentler, but how gentle does one have to be when one throws a rock at a woman buried up to her breasts? Is the rock required to go only 30 miles per hour or 40? Perhaps Muhammad was ordering Khalid not to curse her. In any case, the prophet prayed over her dead body and then buried her. Truthfully, how effective was the prayer when Muhammad and his community murdered her in cold blood? They should have forgiven her and let her go to raise her child.
Even if some Muslim apologists today do not accept these hadiths, then they still have to answer why the true God would send down the harsh punishment of lashing in the Quran (Sura 24:2), when the New Testament says nothing about this. Christians should therefore rightly reject this verse, for Christ forgave the woman caught in adultery and told her to go and sin no more (John 8:1-11). He showed us the better way and taught the will of the true God.
For more information on this early punishment and how it is applied today, refer to this article, which also answers Muslim apologists and explains John 8:1-11 more thoroughly.
Thus, cruel violence sits at the heart of early Islam—in Muhammad’s life and in his Quran. Islam is therefore not the religion of peace.
8. Muhammad in his Quran permits husbands to beat their wives.
4:34 Husbands should take full care of their wives, with [the bounties] God has given to some more than others and with what they spend out of their own money. Righteous wives are devout and guard what God would have them guard in the husbands’ absence. If you fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great. (Haleem)
Written in the historical context of the Battle of Uhud (March 625), in which Islam lost 70 holy warriors, this verse belongs to a larger collection of verses that outlines laws for the family, such as how to divide the inheritance and to how to oversee the assets of orphans (vv. 1-35).
Plainly said, Sura 4:34 specifies that husbands may beat their unruly wives if the husbands “fear” highhandedness, quite apart from whether the wives are actually being highhanded. This puts the interpretation of the wives’ behavior squarely in the husbands’ judgment, and this swings the door to abuse wide open. This verse embodies a gigantic cultural and social step backwards and should be rejected by all fair-minded and reasonable people.
The hadith says that Muslim women in the time of Muhammad were suffering from domestic violence in the context of confusing marriage laws:
Bukhari reports this incident about the wives in the early Muslim community in the context of marital confusion and an odd remarriage law:
Rifa’a divorced his wife whereupon ‘AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. ‘Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s Apostle came, ‘Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!” (Bukhari, emphasis added)
This hadith shows Muhammad hitting his girl-bride, Aisha (see rule no. 1, below), daughter of Abu Bakr, his right-hand Companion:
“He [Muhammad] struck me [Aisha] on the chest which caused me pain.” (Muslim no. 2127)
For a more thorough analysis of this hurtful practice, refer to this article, which has many links to modern discussions of this policy (scroll down to the end).
This article, though long, offers a clear analysis of wife-beating, examining the hadith and other early source documents, as well as refuting modern Muslim polemics. This mid-length article answers a Muslim defense. This article is a superb analysis of the subject, giving various translations of 4:34. It cites the hadith and classical commentaries and refutes modern defenses. Finally, this article written by an Arab Christian is thorough in examining the Quran and hadith and Muslim polemics, offering many translations of 4:34.
Thus, domestic violence sits at the heart of early Islam—in the life of Muhammad and his Quran. Islam is therefore not the religion of peace.
7. Muhammad in his Quran commands that the hands of male or female thieves should be cut off.
5:38 Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done—a deterrent from God: God is almighty and wise. 39 But if anyone repents after his wrongdoing and makes amends, God will accept his repentance: God is most forgiving and merciful. (Haleem)
Three passages in the hadith interpret Muhammad’s policy and provide its context. This is a quick compilation taken from Bukhari and Muslim:
Aisha [favorite wife of Muhammad] reported the Prophet saying, “A thief’s hand should be cut off for only a quarter of a dinar and upwards.” (Bukhari and note two other hadith below this one).
A dinar, a word taken from the Roman denarius, was not a small sum, but not exorbitant either, yet one-fourth of a dinar merits the loss of a hand in Muhammad’s view.
Ibn Umar said the Prophet had a thief’s hand cut off for a shield worth three dirhams. (Bukhari and note the three hadith below this one)
The shield was fairly expensive. The poor in Muhammad’s armies could not afford one. But is a shield equal to a hand?
Abu Huraira reported the Prophet as saying, “God curse a thief who steals an egg and has his hand cut off, and steals a rope and has his hand cut off!” (Bukhari, see this parallel hadith here)
Some commentators are quick to say that an “egg” is really a helmet, and the rope is a ship’s rope, which is sizable and costly. However, the translation above is usually accepted, and this means that the penalty could be imposed for trivial thefts. But even if the more expensive items are in view here, they still do not measure up to a hand.
For more information on this gruesome practice and its historical context, consult this article, which answers Muslim apologists who seek to defend this practice and which also contrasts Christ with Muhammad. Suffice it to say here, Christ never endorsed this. And Paul the Apostle says that thieves should work with their hands in order to share with those in need, not get their hand cut off (Ephesians 4:28). So Paul excels Muhammad.
Thus, harsh and excessive punitive violence sits at the heart of early Islam—in Muhammad’s life and in the Quran. Islam is therefore not the religion of peace.
6. Muhammad assassinates poets and poetesses.
These two poets represent others in early Islam.
March 624: Uqba bin Abu Muayt
Uqba mocked Muhammad in Mecca and wrote derogatory verses about him. He was captured during the Battle of Badr, and Muhammad ordered him to be executed. “But who will look after my children, O Muhammad?” Uqba cried with anguish. “Hell,” retorted the prophet coldly. Then the sword of one of his followers cut through Uqba’s neck.
March 624: Asma bint Marwan
Asma was a poetess who belonged to a tribe of Medinan pagans, and whose husband was named Yazid b. Zayd. She composed a poem blaming the Medinan pagans for obeying a stranger (Muhammad) and for not taking the initiative to attack him by surprise. When the prophet heard what she had said, he asked, “Who will rid me of Marwan’s daughter?” A member of her husband’s tribe volunteered and crept into her house that night. She had five children, and the youngest was sleeping at her breast. The assassin gently removed the child, drew his sword, and plunged it into her, killing her in her sleep.
The following morning, the assassin defied anyone to take revenge. No one took him up on his challenge, not even her husband. In fact, Islam became powerful among his tribe. Previously, some members who had kept their conversion secret now became Muslims openly, “because they saw the power of Islam,” so conjectures an early Muslim source that reports the assassination.
In addition to the sources that recount these and other assassinations, the Quran also supports harsh punishments for mockers and insulters (Suras 3:186; 33:57; 33:59-61; and 9:61-63).
However, even if Muslims reject the early non-Quranic sources where these assassinations are found, they still must answer these questions: Why would such a tradition grow up around Muhammad in friendly Islamic sources? What was it about Muhammad that produced such reports? Why are these friendly sources eager to present their prophet in a “positive” way?
For an in-depth analysis of Muhammad’s assassinations of poets and how they justify assassinations of artists today, like the one of Theo van Gogh, the Dutch filmmaker, refer to this article, which also answers the Muslim apologists who try to justify Muhammad’s deadly policy, and which contrasts early Christianity with early Islam—Jesus assassinated no one, neither did he order this in the Gospels.
Go here, here, here, and here for more information on three of the assassinations of poets, along with other assassinations of non-poets. This page has some links to articles about how Muhammad dealt with his personal enemies.
Thus, bullying and murderous violence sits at the heart of early Islam—in Muhammad’s life and in the Quran. Islam is therefore not the religion of peace.
5. Muhammad in his Quran commands death or the cutting off of hands and feet for fighting and corrupting the land.
5:33 Indeed, the punishment of those who fight Allah and His Messenger and who go around corrupting the land is to be killed, crucified, have their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, or to be banished from the land. That is a disgrace for them in this life, and in the life to come theirs will be a terrible punishment. 34 Except for those who repent before you overpower them. Know, then, that Allah is All-Forgiving, Merciful. (Majid Fakhry, An Interpretation of the Quran, New York: NYUP, 2000, 2004)
According to the hadith, the historical context of these verses runs as follows and clarifies “fighting” and “corrupting” the land.
Some Arab tribesmen visited the prophet, but fell sick in the uncongenial climate of Medina, so he recommended an old folk belief: drinking the milk and urine of a camel. Subsequently, they are reported to have felt better. However, for some reason, after departing from Medina, they killed some of Muhammad’s shepherds, turned apostate, and drove off the prophet’s camels.
This news reached him, and he ordered them to be hunted down and brought before him. He decreed that their hands and feet should be cut off, their eyes gouged out, and their bodies thrown upon stony ground until they died.
For more information on this policy that punishes people today based on Sura 5:33, even on ambiguous charges like colonialism, racism, and the disintegration of family relationships see here, and for a reply to Muslim apologists, refer to this article, which also contrasts Christ with Muhammad. This shorter article explains the background of these verses and this gruesome law. Muhammad tortured people.
Thus, gruesome violence sits at the heart of early Islam—in Muhammad’s life and in the Quran. Islam is therefore not the religion of peace.
4. Muhammad aggressively attacks Meccan caravans.
A year or so after Muhammad’s Hijrah from Mecca to Medina in 622, he attacks Meccan caravans six times, and sent out a punitive expedition three-days away against an Arab tribe that stole some Medinan grazing camels (or cattle), totaling seven raids.
W. Montgomery Watt, a highly reputable Western Islamologist who writes in favor of Muhammad and whose two-volume history of early Islam (Muhammad at Mecca (1953) and Muhammad at Medina (1956)) has won wide acceptance, tells us why geography matters:
The chief point to notice is that the Muslims took the offensive. With one exception the seven expeditions were directed against Meccan caravans. The geographical situation lent itself to this. Caravans from Mecca to Syria had to pass between Medina and the coast. Even if they kept as close to the Red Sea as possible, they had to pass within about eighty miles of Medina, and, while at this distance from the enemy base, would be twice as far from their own base. (Muhammad at Medina, emphasis added, p. 2)
It must be emphatically stated that the Meccans never sent a force up to the doorstep of Medina at this time—they did later on when they were fed up with Muhammad’s aggressions. It is true that the Meccans gathered forces to protect their caravans, but when Muhammad confronted them, they were many days’ journeys away from Medina, often more than eighty miles. (Medina and Mecca are around 200-250 miles from each other, taking seven to eleven days of travel by foot, horse, or camel.)
Hence, two Muslim scholar-apologists are misleading when they assert that the caravans “passed through” Medina, adding that the Muslims haphazardly sought for whatever spoils they could get, whereas the Meccans mobilized for war (Isma’il R. al-Faruqi and Lois Lamya’al Faruqi, The Cultural Atlas of Islam, New York: Macmillan, 1986, 134). Rather, it is more accurate to say that the Muslims were aggressively harassing the Meccans.
To complete the picture of expeditions, raids and wars in Muhammad’s life from 622 to 632, Watt totals up the number that Muhammad either sent out or went out on: seventy-four (Muhammad at Medina, pp. 2; 339-43). They range from negotiations (only a few compared to the violent expeditions), to small assassination hit squads, to the conquest of Mecca with 10,000 jihadists, and to the confrontation of Byzantine Christians (who never showed up), with 30,000 holy warriors to Tabuk (see below).
For a fuller account of these six early aggressive attacks against Meccan caravans, go to this article, which explains more thoroughly why these attacks are not defensive.
Thus, aggressive military violence sits at the heart of early Islam—in Muhammad’s life and in the Quran. Islam is therefore not the religion of peace.
3. Muhammad in his Quran promises sensuous Gardens for martyrs dying in a military holy war.
Throughout the Quran, Muhammad promises the men in his fledgling Muslim community that if they die fighting for Allah and for him, Allah will reward them with a “virgin-rich” Garden (Suras 44:51-56; 52:17-29; 55:46-78).
In the following Quranic passage, representing others (Suras 4:74, 9:111; 3:140-143), the Arabic word “jihad” (root is j-h-d) is the means or currency to trade in this life for the life to come in an economic bargain.
61:10 You who believe, shall I show you a bargain that will save you from painful punishment? 11 Have faith in God and His Messenger and struggle [j-h-d] for His cause with your possessions and your persons—that is better for you, if only you knew—12 and He will forgive your sins, admit you into Gardens graced with flowing streams, into pleasant dwellings in the Gardens of Eternity. That is the supreme triumph. (Haleem)
These verses are found in the historical context of the Battle of Uhud (625), in which Muhammad lost 70 of his fighters. Thus, he must make the loss of life appear worth the sacrifice, so he frames their deaths in an economic bargain (note the word in bold print). If his jihadists trade in or sell their lives down here, they will be granted Islamic heaven—it is a done deal.
For an in-depth analysis of Islamic martyrdom and how Biblical martyrdom opposes it, consult this article. Christ’s “Martyrdom” on the cross opens the way to heaven so that Christians do not have to die in a holy war to reach heaven.
Thus, deadly, ‘heavenly violence’ sits at the heart of early Islam—in Muhammad’s life and in the Quran. Islam is therefore not the religion of peace.
2. Muhammad unjustly executes around 600 male Jews and enslaves the women and children.
After the Battle of the Trench in March 627 (named after a trench that the Muslims dug around parts of Medina) against a large coalition of Meccans and their allies, Muhammad imposed the ultimate penalty on the men in the Jewish clan, Qurayzah, his third and final Jewish rivals (he banished the Qaynuqa tribe in April 624 and the Nadir tribe in August 625). The Qurayzah tribe was supposed to remain neutral in the Battle, but they seem to have intrigued with the Meccans and to have been on the verge of attacking Muhammad from the rear. They were judged guilty by one of their Medinan Muslim allies, though Muhammad could have shown mercy, exiled them (as indeed they requested), or executed only a few.
The sentence: Death by decapitation for around 600 men (some Islamic sources say 900), and enslavement for the women and children (he took a beautiful Jewess as his own prize). Muhammad was wise enough to have six clans execute two Jews each in order to stop any blood-feuds. The rest of the executions were probably carried out by his fellow Emigrants from Mecca and lasted the whole night.
The prophet says the following in Sura 33:25-26 about the Battle of the Trench and his treatment of Qurayzah:
33:25 God sent back the disbelievers along with their rage—they gained no benefit—and spared the believers from fighting. He is strong and mighty. 26 He brought those People of the Book [Qurayza] who supported them down from their strongholds and put terror into their hearts. Some of them you [believers] killed and some you took captive. 27 He passed on to you their land, their homes, their possessions, and a land where you had not set foot. God has power over everything. (Haleem)
Now this atrocity has been enshrined in the eternal word of Allah—and the Quran seems to celebrate it. But these questions must be answered: Is intriguing with the enemy equal to slaughtering 600 men and enslaving the women and children? Who decides? The Arab tribal chief with the most powerful army? Muhammad said around the time of his Hijrah in 622 the following:
16:126 If you [people] have to respond to an attack, make your response proportionate, but it is better to be steadfast. (Haleem)
Any reasonable and fair-minded person would judge that Muhammad was not making his response (execution) proportionate to the breach of the agreement. The Qurayzah tribe never attacked the Muslims, and even if a few were to have done so, the punishment does not fit the crime. Therefore, Muhammad was being excessive and disproportionate because he used an irreversible penalty to express his human wrath.
For a fuller account of this atrocity, refer to this article. This one explores Muhammad’s relations with the Jews, answering the standard replies by Muslims for their prophet’s indefensible atrocity (scroll down to “Politics, Warfare, and Conquests,” no. 5). See this series of articles for more information about Muhammad’s atrocity against the Banu Qurayza. This online index provides other links.
Thus, anti-Semitic violence sits at the heart of early Islam—in Muhammad’s life and in his Quran. Islam is therefore not the religion of peace.
1. Muhammad launches his own Crusades.
In the following verse, Muhammad uses the Arabic word qital (root is q-t-l), which means warring, fighting, or killing:
9:29 Fight [q-t-l] those among the people of the Book [Christians] who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day, do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden and do not profess the true religion, till they pay the poll-tax out of hand and submissively. (Fakhry)
The two most interesting clauses in this violent verse are (1) People of the Book (Christians in this verse late in Muhammad’s life) are to be attacked if they do not profess the true religion: Islam. This leaves the door wide open for terrorists today to attack and fight Christians because they do not adhere to Islam; (2) Christians must pay a tax for the “privilege” of living under the “protection” of Islam—submissively or in humiliation.
The historical context of Sura 9:29 finds Muhammad preparing for a military expedition against the Byzantine Empire in 630, two years before his ordinary death of a fever in 632. Indeed, some scholars regard Sura 9 as the last sura to be revealed from on high. Therefore, it sets many policies for Muslims today, and is often interpreted as abrogating or canceling previous verses, even peaceful ones.
Muhammad heard a rumor that the Byzantines amassed an army some 700 miles to the north in Tabuk (northern Arabia today) in order to attack Islam, so he led an army of 30,000 holy warriors to counter-strike preemptively. However, the Byzantines failed to materialize, so Muhammad’s belief in the false rumor was misguided and his expedition was fruitless, except he managed to extract (extort) agreements from northern Christian Arab tribes that they would not attack him and his community. An army of 30,000 soldiers from the south must have deeply impressed the northern tribes, so they posed no real threat to Islam. They are the ones who paid the “protection” tax mentioned in Sura 9:29 (and so do tribes and cities after Muhammad’s death). Therefore, Muhammad’s forced tax was aggressive and hence unjust, not defensive and hence just.
Muhammad’s military expedition qualifies as an Islamic Crusade long before the European ones. After all, in 638, only six years after Muhammad’s death, Muslim armies conquer Jerusalem. Today, Muslims should never again complain about European Crusades, unless they first come to grips with their own.
For more information on the Muslim Crusades after Muhammad’s death and their atrocities and motives, refer to these articles (one, two).
Thus, crusading violence sits at the heart of early Islam—in Muhammad’s life and in his Quran—and beyond, even reaching to today’s western world. Islam is therefore not the religion peace.
What the ten reasons mean for us today
These ten aspects of violence that have burrowed into the hemorrhaging heart of early Islam have eight implications for us today. The first three are theological; the rest are practical.
The theological implications are as follows:
First, as each reason in this article has hinted at and the links explain more thoroughly, Christ never, ever engaged in such violence. For example, he never assassinated opponents, whipped adulterers, cut off the hands of thieves, or launched his own Crusades (what the Medieval Europeans did is not foundational to Christianity). Christ expresses the love of God. Therefore, Christians and all fair-minded persons have the right to question whether the true God would reveal the Quran when it contains such violent verses that conveniently support Muhammad’s violence, whereas the New Testament does not have such violence.
Second, Muslims believe that the New Testament is corrupted, whereas the Quran is inerrant. Even if we assume only for the sake of argument that these claims are true (but they actually are not), then why would reasonable seekers of the truth prefer the “pure” but violence-filled Quran over the “corrupted” but peaceful New Testament?
Before Muhammad is allowed to throw around unsubstantiated charges about alleged New Testament corruption, he and his Quran must pass a down-to-earth test regarding his dubious, violent practices. But he and it fail the test badly, as this article demonstrates, whereas Christ and the New Testament pass with a perfect score. Therefore, if Muhammad is so wrong about down-to-earth matters like whipping adulterers and cutting off the hands of thieves and beating wives, then he is likely wrong about unresearched accusations of New Testament corruption—and factually he is wrong.
Please refer to the articles listed on these pages for more information: [1], [2].
Third, since Muhammad who claims divine guidance is so wrong about practical matters, why should we believe him about theoretical matters like the deity of Christ and the Trinity, both of which he denies? Clearly, he was not divinely guided in practical matters because the true God would not degrade religion by endorsing such gruesome violence six hundred years after Christ came—the historical span is critical. Christ and the New Testament do not have even one example of such violence. Again, if Muhammad first fails the down-to-earth test, then he likely fails the theological or theoretical test—we have no reason to believe him in such high doctrines, especially since he was no theologian and his revelations are now empirically suspect.
The practical implications of the top ten reasons are as follows:
Fourth, nominal Christians who no longer take their faith seriously, but who are tempted to convert to Islam, must stop to think a second time. Christ the Son of God demonstrates the love of God (Matt. 3:16-17), not the wrath of an ordinary, self-described human messenger (Sura 3:144). Why would they trade in the religion of God’s peace and love for Allah’s human religion of violence?
Fifth, fanatical Muslims today are simply carrying on their prophet’s mission. Why should we be surprised if they want to conquer the West, in order to impose Allah’s will on non-Islamic societies? They are still working out Muhammad’s Crusades and trying to put a halt to the reality embodied in this simple logic:
(1) If A, then B. If Allah endorses Islam, then it should expand endlessly.
(2) Not-B. But it is not expanding endlessly (see this analysis).
(3) Therefore, not-A. Therefore, Allah does not endorse Islam.
This logic eats away at the heart of fanatics, especially premise two, even if they are not conscious of it in this logical form. What is stopping the endless expansion of Islam, according to the fanatics? Their answer: the US and even the very existence of the Jewish State of Israel in the heart of the Middle East. The fanatics have yet to uproot the Jews, despite three wars, which the Arabs lost. This tiny non-Islamic, Jewish State in their neighborhood slaps them in the face every day. How could Allah let this happen? Hence, premise two is the deepest reason that they have been launching attacks on the US and the West and Israel for the last two decades and why Osama bin Laden ignited 9/11. For more information on three Quranic verses that predict the worldwide dominance of Islam and that provide the motives for fanatics, refer to this article. And for more information on bin Laden’s motives specifically, go here.
Sixth, as noted in the introduction to this article, Muslim apologists who have access to the national media and who constantly assert that Islam is the religion of peace must stop misleading unsuspecting Westerners. Factually, Islam is not the religion of peace. True, it had peaceful moments, but not for very long. Muhammad sent out or went out on seventy-four expeditions, raids, and wars in only ten years (622-632), most of which were violent.
Seventh, western civilization must never accept the lie that Muhammad’s life, the Quran, and sharia (the law derived from the hadith and the Quran) are benefits to society. Rather, Islam represents many gigantic steps backwards, culturally and socially. One of the most tragic events in the western world in recent years—and one of the most underreported—is the existence of an Islamic court in Canada. Muslims are pushing for a sharia divorce court in Australia, as well. The Canadian government should promptly shut it down, and Australia should never allow one. And such a court must never be allowed to exist here in the US or elsewhere in the West. Sharia does not benefit society, bluntly stated.
Eighth and finally, Islam should never be taught in our public schools, K through 11. Perhaps grade 12 is acceptable, but only on one condition. If school administrators insist on teaching it, Islamic violence must be included in the lesson plans because it is part and parcel of early Islam and Muhammad’s life.
Of course, Muslim apologists assert that Christianity is filled with violence, citing the Roman Emperor Constantine and the Medieval Crusaders. However, to repeat, they are not foundational for Christianity—only Christ and the New Testament are. And he and the New Testament authors never practiced or endorsed such violence.
On the other hand, Muhammad and his Quran are foundational for Islam, and violence fills his life and its pages.
Therefore, for ten clear and verifiable reasons, Islam is not the religion of peace.
Whatever may be laws of muslims on the subject matter, their focuss is always on sexual pleasure with virgin females. Give them divorce, and bring another one.
What is ISIS doing? Their fighters are marrying 9-15 years old girls forcibly, then giving them talak and selling them openly. All this is happening in the name of Islam,expand islam, multiply muslim population.
It is a religion with numerous evils against females.
An what RAMpal did, raped thousands of women, what krishna did, raped thousands of women
I have read from this site that one of the writers, imam dad married 7 times on the basis of abuse of tripple talak.
Islam is a heaven for criminal, horny males to enjoy all sorts of privileges. Mutta and halala are the worst practices against females.
Its ur religion which cruel and evil practises…
ur men treating as sex toys and objects for womens….
ur women roaming and showing every thing of her body to the public
shame on your religion that it didnt prompt like this things
bludy idiot
Source: http://www.wunrn.com/news/2007/10_07/10_01_07/100707_india.htm
Dear readers,
Triple Talaq is a form of divorce that is practiced only amongst Muslims and only the husband can say to his wife, instantly divorcing her and many times leaving her destitute. As an example, a man, who maybe does not like his wife’s dinner, or a comment she has made to him, can utter, “Talaq, talaq, talaq,” and he will consider the marriage completely over. However, the issue here is that the proper form of Talaq allowed within the realm of Islamic Law and that is sanctioned in the Qur’an and the Hadith, (Traditions revealed from the Prophet Muhammad), do not allow for this form of divorce. As Sona Khan writes on the use of Triple Talaq in India in a very recent article from Express India, The Indian Express Group, “[Triple Talaq is a] social evil and not [an] Islamic practice and only continues to be propagated because of the ignorance of community leaders as well as the community as a whole.”
Triple Talaq is allowed in many other countries as well—Algeria, Iran, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Egypt, Philippines, Malaysia, Morocco, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Gambia, and Nigeria all recognize Talaq. Indonesia, Tunisia, Tanzania and Yemen do not recognize Talaq at all. India seems to be struggling immensely with Triple Talaq, and in fact, it is so out of control that husbands are even Triple Talaqing their wives by email, text message and cell phone, and women are avoiding the threat of this by not answering their phones when their husbands call. The practice of Triple Talaq by post is very popular in India as well. In the book, Knowing Our Rights—Women, Family Laws, and Customs in The Muslim World, released by Women Living Under Muslim Laws in 2003, this form of Triple Talaq is explained.
The cultural diversity of the Muslim community in India means that Talaq practices differ from community to community, although ‘Triple Talaq’ is uniformly recognized. Talaq by post has recently become popular. In this practice, a wife is sent to her natal home where she will receive a postal talaqnama, which may mention the reasons for divorce.
In many cases, if the woman has been Triple Talaqed outside her home, she is unable to go back to her home and retrieve her belongings, essentially leaving her destitute if she has no family to help her.
What of women’s rights when referring to divorce? Are woman allowed to Talaq their husbands? Or maybe the question is, does she have any rights whatsoever in her marriage? What do both the Qur’an and Hadith actually say about divorce and in respect to women in general? There are many factors to consider here. When referencing the law in India which is obviously a large factor in this issue, one must remember that at one time Colonial Law ruled India, and as we will read, colonial law still affects both civil and Islamic Law in India today. With that, colonial law also oppressed women, and the oppression of all East Indian women continues to this day as well. And, as many are aware, Muslims are struggling all over the world at this time in history to create and comprehend a woman’s place within the religion of Islam, and how to establish her as an equal partner, not only in marriage, but in all aspects of Islam. Triple Talaq is a cultural, oppressive form of emotional abuse toward Muslim women that is not sanctioned in the Qur’an but stems from ancient and contemporary practices. This paper will explore the roots of Talaq, the basic laws surrounding Muslim marriages in India, what Islamic Law states about the use of Talaq including what the Qur’an and Hadith say about divorce, and what actions are taking place to ban the use of Triple Talaq.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam and others
Hi readers,
Marriage customs vary in Muslim dominated countries. Islamic law allows polygamy, where a Muslim man can be married to four wives at the same time, under certain conditions. Some countries allow Muslim men to enter into additional temporary marriages, beyond the four allowed marriages, such as the practice of sigheh marriages in Iran, and Nikah al-Mutah elsewhere in some Middle East countries.
In some countries, polygamy is restricted by new family codes, for example the Moudawwana in Morocco. Polygamy is permitted under restricted conditions, but it is not widespread. The Sharia requires that polygamous men treat all wives equally. Muslim women are not allowed to engage in polyandry, whereas men are allowed to engage in polygyny.
A marriage of pleasure, where a man pays a sum of money to a woman or her family in exchange for a temporary spousal relationship, is found and considered legal among Shia sect of Islam, for example in Iran after 1979. Temporary marriages are forbidden among Sunni sect of Islam. Among Shia, the number of temporary marriages can be unlimited, for a duration that is less than an hour to few months, recognized with an official temporary marriage certificate, and divorce is unnecessary because the temporary marriage automatically expires on the date and time specified on the certificate. Payment to the woman by the man is mandatory, in every temporary marriage and considered as mahr. Its practitioners cite sharia law as permitting the practise. Women’s rights groups have condemned it as a form of legalized prostitution.
Endogamy
Consanguineous endogamous marriages are common for women in Islam. Over 250 million women of Islamic faith are in endogamous consanguineous marriages, typically with first cousin marriages. Over 65% of all marriages in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are endogamous and consanguineous arranged marriages; more than 40% of all marriages are endogamous and consanguineous in Mauritania, Libya, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Kuwait, UAE and Oman.
Endogamy is common in Islamic countries. The observed endogamy is primarily consanguineous marriages, where the bride and the groom share a biological grandparent or other near ancestor. The most common observed marriages are first cousin marriages, followed by second cousin marriages. Consanguineous endogamous marriages are most common for women in Muslim communities in the Middle East, North Africa and Islamic Central Asia. About 1 in 3 of all marriages in Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan are first cousin marriages; while overall consanguineous endogamous marriages exceed 65 to 80% in various Islamic populations of the Middle East, North Africa and Islamic Central Asia.
Some marriages are forbidden between Muslim women and Muslim men, according to sharia. Examples include marrying one’s biological father, biological son, biological brother, biological sister’s son, milk son or milk brother she has nursed, husband of her biological daughter, and a step father who has had sexual relations with her biological mother. There are disputes between Hanafis, Malikis, Shafi’is and Hanabalis schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence on whether and which such marriages are irregular but not void if already in place (fasid), and which are void (batil) marriages.
Age of marriage
The age of marriage in Islam for women varies with country. Traditionally, Islam has permitted marriage of girls below the age of 10, because Sharia considers practices of Muhammad, the Prophet, as a basis for Islamic law. According to Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, the two authentic hadiths, the Prophet married Aisha, his third wife when she was 6, and consummated the marriage before she reached the age of 10.
Narrated ‘Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his passing away).
—Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:64
There is a debate among Islamic scholars what the above sunnah means. Some scholars suggest that it is not the calendar age that matters, rather it is the biological age of the girl that determines when she can be married under Islamic law. According to these Islamic scholars, marriageable age in Islam is when a girl has reached sexual maturity, as determined by her nearest male guardian; this age can be, claim these Islamic scholars, less than 10 years, or 12, or another age depending on each girl. There is a strong belief among most Muslims and scholars, based on Sharia, that marrying a girl less than 15, or 12 years old is an acceptable practice for Muslims. Muslim communities in Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia,Egypt, Nigeria and elsewhere have insisted that it is their Islamic right to marry girls below age 15.
In Indonesia, the largest muslim populated country, legal marriage age is 19, which is above than UNICEF`s standard of 18 years
check the great explanation for Hadith sahih Bukhari 7:62:64
http://www.islamhelpline.net/node/7153
its u hindus which is impuried doing sexuality with any un related girls.. . and make a new type of diseases like aids etc…
bludy idiots
Is this your equality[50%-50%] admin as you have said before to me. .
Again you are coming against to islam
with the lier matter. . .
Here is the full concept of Nikaah and Divorce in Islam :
check this site with clear definition :
http://www.islamawareness.net/Talaq/talaq_book.html
Our religious is great and proud becoz It gives three chances to husband and wife with equality
not like ur religion which is giving only one divorce. . .that is shamefull
Adim
why men can marry four wives and women cant according to islamic law’s
check this site :
https://www.islamswomen.com/marriage/man_can_marry_four_why_not_women_marry_four.php
without reading and understand which have given in the above two sites
i say them they are foolish,brain washed and so on,
It is the hindu religion which is cruel, evil and so on of ram and gita.. .
they are idiots that they dont know which is right and which is wrong.,
which will do and which will not do
which will accept and which will not accept
Cookie should know legality. Let us know what is wrong on this legal web site
https://www.interfaithshaadi.org/?p=8748&cpage=1#comment-339285 ?
MAC should be invited to give comments on mutta marriages, as he
is well known about this evil procedure to legalize prostitution.
Indian laws: Muslims are governed by their personal laws under which “Nikah” (i.e. marriage) is a contract and may be permanent or temporary and permits a man to have four wives if he treats all of them equally. To have a valid “Nikah” under the Muslim Law, presence of a Qazi (Priest) is not necessary. Merely a proposal in the presence and hearing of two sane males or one sane male and two sane female adults, all Muslims and acceptance of the said proposals at the same time constitute a valid “Nikah”. Under Indian laws, a husband can divorce his wife without any reasons merely by pronouncing three times the word “Talak”. However for a Muslim woman to obtain divorce certain conditions are necessary.
Concept of Marriage and Divorce under Muslim Law. From: http://www.legalight.in/muslimsmarriageact.html
Marriage or “Nikah” in Islamic law is a contract pure and simple needing no writing and no scared rites. All that is necessary is offer and acceptance made in the presence and hearing of two male or female witnesses and recording the factum of marriage in the “Nikah” Register maintained in every mosque signed by the parties and attested by witnesses. It is payable to the wife on the dissolution of marriage or death or divorce. In India, there is no need to register the Muslim marriage, as there is no law requiring registration.
There are six forms of divorce recognized under Islamic Law. They are Talaq, Talaq bu Tafweez, Kula and Mubaraat, Illah, Zibar and Lian. Talaq confers on Muslim husband the privilege of being able to discard his wife whenever he chooses to do so for reasons good, bad or indifferent indeed for no reason at all. Talaq-i-Tufeez is the exercise of the right of divorce by the wife by virtue of the power delegated to her husband at the time of marriage or even thereafter, Kula and Maturate are two forms of dissolution of marriage by consent. It is thus a kind of divorce by mutual consent. Illah is a constructive divorce in which the husband swears not to have sexual intercourse with his wife for 4 months and abstains from doing so. Zihar is a mode of divorce in which the husband compares his wife with his mother or any other female within prohibited degree. Lian is a divorce in which there is imputation of adultery to the wife by the husband and the wife is entitled to file a suit for dissolution of marriage on the false charge of adultery.
The Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 enables a Muslim wife to seek divorce through court on the ground of, whereabouts of the husband are unknowns for 4 years, failure of husband to provide for the maintenance of the wife for 2 years, sentence of imprisonment of the husband for 7 years, failure to perform martial obligations, impotency of the husband, or insanity of the husband, Repudiation of marriage by the wife before attaining the of 18 years cruelty of the husband and any other ground relevant at that point of time.
Muslim Marriage Laws
Under Muslim personal law a suit has to be filed either by husband or wife on withdrawal from the society of other without lawful ground.
No provision so far enabling parties to the marriage parties to the marriage to seek the remedy of judicial separation.
No provision in Mohammedan Law for declaration of marriage as nullity for it can be annuted, though it may be repudiated by a Muslim wife and husband.
Muslim Law recognizes two forms of divorce by mutual consent khul or khula (divorce at the request of wife) and Mubaraa or mubaraat (dissolution of marriage by agreement).
Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939. Grounds for Muslim Woman.
Not heard for 4 years.
Failure to provide maintenance for two years.
Husband sentenced for 7 years imprisonment or upwards.
Failure to platform martial obligations for three years.
Impotency at the time of marriage and continuation.
Insanity for two years or suffering from leprosy or a virulent venereal disease.
Marriage before attaining age of 15 years and repudiation before attaining the age of 18 years.
Cruelty in the form of habitually assaulting, associating with women of evil repute, force to lead an immoral life, interfering into the wife’s property, obstruction to observe her religious practice, not equally treating with other wives etc.,
mac, this is a legal matter applicable today around the world. Please do not bring discussion on what Veda says because it is not legally enforceable. You may bring up Koran to prove or disprove this claim, but again focus on what are current “laws” (Sharia or other).