Tuesday, July 31, 2007

More Issues On Anti Hadeeth Methodology


9.0 Anti Hadeeth claims that books on Arabic grammar and language should not be used in interpreting and understanding the Quran. We must let the Quran explain itself.

REPLY: This is the funniest statement ever made by the Anti Hadeeth sect. The humor sticks out like a sore thumb after one understands the process explained below:


Major Translators of Quran learns Arabic from grammar books written by people (except Anti Hadeeth translators, of course).


They translate the Quran based on what they learned from the Arabic grammar books and others


Anti Hadeeth exponents reads the translations to try to understand the Quran


Anti Hadeeth derive rules, regulations and methodologies in understanding the Quran


Anti hadeeth says that Arabic Grammar books are written by humans and therefore they cannot be used to understand the Quran.

BUT, all that the Anti Hadeeth has understood of the Quran comes from translations based upon the rules written in these grammar books?

In other words, anti hadeeth has effectively rejected everything they’ve come to understand from the Quran. This is the humor.

10.0 But, what about translations from the likes of Rashad Khalifah. They too have translation of the Quran

REPLY: Rashad’s work is a translation upon translation of the Quran. In other words, he writes his translation by reading other translation of the Quran. So, his translation can be summed up as the translation of the translation of the Quran.

That also explains why Rashad’s translation is “politically correct” from the perspective of secular liberalists.

For instance, the verse 16:44, Rashad translates as

(Rashad) ….And we sent down to you this message, to proclaim for the people……..

Compare it with the other reliable translators:

(Yusuf Ali)………and We have sent down unto thee (also) the Message; that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them…………..

(Pickhall)…… Remembrance that thou mayst explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them……”

Noticed that Rashad deliberately change the the word “to explain” to become “to proclaim” simply to justify his demented and backward anti hadeeth ideology. He knows that if the meaning of 16:44 is not twisted beyond recognition, it will serve as a deadly blow to his twisted anti hadeeth ideology.

Such is the reason why I say that when quoting translation of the Quran, do not quote Rashad’s along with the other names as Rashad’s translation is not ion the same stature of the rest.

Rashad’s can be characterized as plagerized from other translation while inserting his demented and sick anti hadeeth ideology.

11.0 Why does the Anti Hadeeth needs to reject Arabic Grammar and basically the entire discipline of the Arabic language?

REPLY: If the actual Arabic language methodology is used, then the Quran cannot be interpreted as they will. The Quran will also have to be understood contradictory to their sick and demented ideology. One example is quoted above in my commentary on Rashad Khalifa’ translation.

Other examples are as such:

  1. They cannot claim that Al Kitab and Kitab is the same anymore. This destroys many of their interpretation of the Quran.
  2. They cannot claim that Al Kitab and Al Hikmah is the same anymore. This will force them to accept the Al Hadeeth as Revelations from God.
  3. They cannot claim that “faqtulu anfusakum” as “ neutralize your ego”
  4. They cannot claim that masjid and yasjudan means the same; submission
  5. They cannot claim that Ar Ruh is Al Ilm because it just doesn’t make sense
  6. They cannot claim that there is no Majaz in the Quran
  7. They cannot claim that there is no Balaghah in the Quran
  8. They cannot claim that wau atfa in the Quran has no significance in terms of meaning.
  9. They cannot claim that “faqtau aidiyahuma” as cutting of their means of living
  10. They cannot claim that there is no aborogation in the Quran
  11. They cannot claim that there is no Al Am Wal Khas in the Quran
  12. They cannot claim that the Hadeeth of the Prophet contradicts the Quran anymore
  13. They cannot claim that the Quran rejects the AlHadeeth An Nabawiy anymore.

Seeing that the Arabic Language discipline results in the Quran contradicting their ideology, they decide to do the next best thing, to reject the Arabic language itself.

They don’t realize by doing so, they are also rejecting their entire understanding of the Quran. Since, their entire understanding of the Quran is based upon Quran’s translations which is made based upon the Arabic language discipline.

12.0 Anti Hadeeth cited this particular hadeeth as evidence of the hadeeth being stupid:

Narrated 'Aisha:

“The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, "Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people)." I said, "You have made us (i.e. women) dogs. I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away. for I disliked to face him"

The likes of True Muslim representing the Anti Hadeeth sect has this to say about this hadeeth:

According to this precious piece of magnificence from Bukhari, women are like dogs and donkeys. And exactly which verse in the Quran is explained by this precious pearl?”

REPLY: Clearly True Muslim and his kind does not have the mental capability to understand a simple hadeeth like this.

The part- “They said, "Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman” is something which is mentioned to Saidatina Aisyah by someone else other than the Prophet SAW. The next part “I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qibla” is meant to refute what Saidatina Aisya has heard.

The hadeeth makes no reference to the Prophet equalizing women with dogs and donkeys. Or maybe the anti hadeeth sect needs to get their eyes examine. While they’re at it why don’t they get their brains checked as well.

CONCLUSION: I’m beginning to appreciate why certain quarters of the ulama resisted the idea of allowing the translation of the Quran. Apparently, they foresaw the appearance of the likes of Anti Hadeeth sect that will do nothing but disrespect and confuse the message of the Quran even more.

It’s safe to say that Anti Hadeeth is a sect that is based upon an English Quran from the Planet Uranuz.

Read more!

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Anti Hadeeth’s Quran is From The Planet Uranus

Anti Hadeeth’s Quran is From The Planet Uranus

After a series of debates with many of the Anti Hadeeth exponents, I have come to one very important discovery - that the Anti Hadeeth’s Quran is not the Quran that was sent down by God. Their Quran comes from the Planet Uranus.

Why do I say this? Because of the way they whimsically rearrange the meaning of the Quran,so much so, they changed completely the message originally intended by a verse. I will quote to you a number of examples below.

But first, allow me to express several observation made during my debate with Anti Hadeeth and a few Anti hadeeth individuals in the forum like Farook, AdmiralTojo, ShameonYou5, LadyMessiah and so on and so forth.

Observation 1: The Anti Hadeeth seems to have mutated into a more disgusting form. The Rashad Khalifah version is bad enough, but, it seems that there is a new mutation led by a new “Prophet” called AididSafar. Among the differences between the group are the prohibition of alcohol, the prohibition of pigs and many more. The Old “Anti Hadeeth” agrees on the prohibition while the new anti hadeeth seems rejects the prohibition.

Observation 2: The Anti-Hadeeth, old and new, relies on the changing of God’s words to support their case and to give a false pretense that their ideology is Quran-based. The sad truth is that their ideology is anything but the Quran. Their sole basis of existence is nothing more than their whimsical interpretation of the Quran’s translation.

Observation 3: They are not very good at answering difficult question related to their ideology. To date, the True Muslim character has failed to provide the readers any significant information as to what constitutes their ideology. At least, the AdmiralTojo character (from the new anti hadeeth clan) is pretty straightforward in his methodology (he is pretty proud of the fact that his sect changes the meaning of the Quran to fit his agenda)

Observation 4: While these people keep reading the verses of the Quran in Arabic, none of their conclusion adheres the Quran, when it is understood in the Arabic language. For Admiraltojo, despite quoting several passages from his “Uranus Based” Quran, he has failed to quote the 10 verses in the Quran that states specifically the language of the Quran. TM, on the other hand, unequivocally rejects the entire Arabic language despite quoting verses from the Quran stating the Quran is in Arabic.

Observation 5: The Anti Hadeeth, new and old, has a sort of superiority complex based upon their notion that the muslims are backwards and under-developed. They seems to feel that the West will accept them should they change and contort Islam into a shape that is liked by the West. (Note : Tell that to the Bosnians).

Observation 6: They seem to have this thing against Arabs. Despite the fact that Rashad Khalifah was an Egyptian Arab. So, I speculate that the old Anti Hadeeth consist of those less hateful of Arabs while the new anti hadeeth are more. I suspect the New Anti Hadeeth is based in Turkey.

Now, let me quote to you several examples that I’ve noticed

1.0 “Al Masjid Al Haram” - They translate it as “Sacred Submission”. They justify by saying that the word “masjid” comes from the word “sajada” which means “to submit”. I quote AdmiralTojo: “As mentioned in the Reading the word sujud means submit or being subservient.”


The word “sajada” means “to prostrate” and not “to submit”. The word “masjid” is means “a place to prostrate”. For example the verse 55:6

“wal-najmu wal-sajaru yasjudan”(55:3-7) – “and the stars and the trees all are prostrating

Prostrating is a physical act, whereby submitting is a concept. Prostrating is specific while submitting is general.

I’m not going to dwell on this topic too long, but suffice to comment on a passage quoted from AididSafr/Admiraltojo and show you how ignorant these people are:

“The forms sujud, yas-judan, sujadan, sajid and masjid derive from the root sajada which means submit. None of these words refers to the act of physical prostration.”

It’s amazing at how anyone can make this type of statement. If they all mean the same, why then are they PRONOUNCED differently?. It doesn’t take an educated man to see the difference between these words. In fact, you don’t have to be educated to see there is a difference in these words. All u need to be is literate. Even an illiterate Arab can tell u that these words are different.

I think from kindergarten we were taught that words means differently because they are meant to refer to different meanings.

Suffice to say, these people would stop at nothing to support their perverted and demented brand of religion, even to the extent of changing the meaning of the Quran.

2.0 In 02:54, they changed the meaning of the word “anfusakum” to either mean “your ego” (from TM) or (your souls) (AdmiralTojo/Aididsafr’s Quran).

TRUTH: It means “yourselves” and it refers to the Bani Israel and their order for them to kill themselves for the crime of apostasy. The word “anfusakum” comes from the word “nafs” which means “oneself”. “Anfusakum” refers to “yourselves” in plural. It could not mean “soul” because “soul” is “ruh” in Arabic. It cannot mean “ego” because “ego” is “ana” or “ilat” or “gharur” in Arabic.

3.0 The main motivation for Anti Hadeeth in changing the meaning of 02:54 is because they have mistakenly went to town telling others that there is no death penalty for apostasy in the Quran. However, when 02:54 was made to light to them, they had to resort to acts of contortioning of the Quran in order to preserve their credibility. Like they have any to start with.

4.0 Anti hadeeth claims that amputation (for the crime of theft) doesn’t exist in the Quran. They change the meaning of the word from “your hands” to “your means of living”

TRUTH : In the Arabic language, the word “Aydi” stands for hands and nothing else. If God wanted to say “ means of living” he would have said so. God doesn’t need Farook, True Muslim, AdmiralTojo and all the Anti Hadeeth to put words in His mouth.

Notice, that the word “Aydi” is given in the “jama’-nakirah” form and not “ma’rifah” form to point to the common meaning of the word “aydi” in the Arabic language. In short, it means “hands”.

5.0 “Al Kitab and Kitab is the same”. They claim that the “Al(alif lam)” at the start of a word is the same with words without it.

TRUTH: Any street Arabs will tell u that this is an idiotic statement. Even idiots among the arabs knows that there is a different between the two. In short, the anti hadeeth has reduced themselves to a level lower than idiots.

6.0 TM renounced “wau atfa” completely. He says that the “wau” between “al kitab” and “al hikmah” does not differentiate between “al kitab” and “al hikmah”. They both can mean the same.

TRUTH: When God says “Wasyamsi wa dhuhaha” is God saying that “the Sun” is the same as “the dusk” (in verse 91:01) ? Does TM assumes that "Asy Syams" is the same as "Ad Dhuha"

7.0 Anti Hadeeth claims that there is only 3 salat in the Quran.

TRUTH: There is more than 3 salah in the Quran BASED ON THE QURAN. Noticed the wordings in the verses I shall quote u below:

a. 11:114 – the word used in “zulufayn” which indicates a quantity of 2,

b. 02:238 – the word used is “salawat” which is “plural” which indicates a quantity of 3.

As a result, the number of salat mentioned in the Quran is at least 3+2 = 5. However u look at it, the Quran has never advocated the idea that there is only 3 salat.

8.0 Lastly, there are other instances like “no Majaz in the Quran” or “al Khamr” does not mean liquor etc which is clearly based upon their abject ignorance of the Arabic language.

Please heed God’s directive on the language of the Quran. 12:02 “We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur'an, in order that ye may learn wisdom.”.

The Anti Hadeeth and it’s spawn or mutations have one fundamental trait: they all interpret their Quran from it’s translation, not in the original language of the Quran.

And, by just writing down how a certain verse is read in Arabic does not constitute the action of understanding the Quran in its original language, Arabic. (One may have noticed that Anti Hadeeth frequently cites the Arabic reading of the Quran in their writings but when they give their interpretation, they completely blew it)

Lastly, to those who are about to start adopting the Anti hadeeth ideology, please aware that their methodology is nothing more than interpreting the Quran directly from the Translations and nothing more. Remember, that the translation of a Quran is not the Quran.

Read more!

Tuesday, July 3, 2007

Another Attack on Anti Hadeeth Character Named True Muslim

02/07: True Muslim has truly blown a gasket this time

[print] Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
by Rahman Celcom

Before I start, I wish to beg for forgiveness from the readers. I understand how frustrated you are having to go through TM’s rants and spit. Even though he writes plenty, but we are left begging for substance.

Let’s analyze TM’s answers shall we.

TM’S ANSWER 1: “There is no such thing as the al Hadeeth of the Prophet. If you believe that there is such a thing as the al hadeeth of the Prophet, then please show us your proof. The Prophet said in the Quran ‘ Haatu burhanukum inkuntum sadikin’. This means ‘show your proof if you are truthful’.

TRUTH : The proof is simple, go to the bookstore and you will find books of Hadeeth. Right now, no one doubts the existence of hadeeth except for a small group of demented and mentally-besieged individuals in the muslim world who thinks otherwise.

The Quran does one more and that is confirming the DIVINITY of the Hadeeth of Nabi SAW. To which until today, TM has failed to prove otherwise.

Another Proof of existence of Hadeeth Al Nabiy is the Quran itself. The same people that carries the Quran carries the hadeeth too. In short, we receive our Quran in this day of age from the same chain of individuals that carries the hadeeth of the Prophet.

TM’S ANSWER 2: TM rants that the Quran is THE ONLY hadeeth of the Prophet. He then quotes these verses: 69:38 – 40, 39:23 and 39:23.

Truth : Yet none of the verses above states what TM claims. The verses a. Doesn’t deny the existence of the Hadeeth Al Nabiy, b. The verses doesn’t deny the existence of the word of the Prophet c. The verses doesn’t state unequivocally that Prophet’s word is only the Quran, d. In 39:23, the word ahsan means “beautiful” and it is because the quran is consistent yet it can repeat itself. See how these people whimsically twist the meaning of the Quran.

It’s all TM’s whimsical interpretation. That’s why he keeps evading my question abt his methodology of understanding the Quran. At this point, it is safe to say that much, if not all, of TM’s belief is not based on the Quran but simply based upon what he wants the Quran to be.

TM’s ANSWER 3: TM claims that there is no death penalty for apostasy in the Quran and he denies ever making reference to Sigmund Freud

Truth : First, TM needs to get his brains checked. I think he’s having memory lapses. Secondly, I quoted 02:54 which states clearly about death penalty to apostates.

The verse quotes Musa AS as saying …Fatubuilabariikum faqutulu anfusakum…, which means “…make repentance to your Maker and kill yourselves…”.

TM, at one time, says that ..anfusakum.. stands for “one’s ego”. When pressed for reason, he resorted to Sigmund Freud to justify his claim. Do you remember now TM?.

Not only I proved TM wrong on this issue, I also show part of TM’s methodology in interpreting the Quran. In one word, WHIMSICAL.

TM’S ANSWER 4: TM argues that grammars are inert upon the native speaker and has to be learnt by non-native speakers. So, then he argues that Arabic grammar is not a big deal and need not be learnt. There is no need for methodology etc. For Arab villagers, they don’t need to learn the methodologies cause they speak the language


a. In Arabic countries, the Arabic language is taught to the Arabs. They teach Arabic in all their schools from Morrocco to Iraq. They even offer Bachelor, Masters and Phd in Arabic language. Why is this so since every Arab is born knowing how to speak the language?.
b. The same goes to our country, why the hell do we need to learn Bahasa Malaysia in school when it’s already our mother-tounge?.
c. The answer is simple. The Quran is “formal language” of Arabic. Arabs do not use their formal language when they speak. This would mean that the chances of Arab villagers understanding the Quran without learning is close to zero..
d. “Formal language” has methodology and system. And this goes to any language in the world.
e. In TM’s case, he has totally rejected the Arabic grammar. So, that prompts me to ask TM what is his method of understanding the Quran since he has rejected Arabic grammar.
f. Example of his rejection is he says that “Al Kitab” and “Kitab” are the same thing when anyone who knows Arabic grammar knows that they are different.

TM’S ANSWER 5A : Here TM again demonstrates his evasive maneuvering. He once claimed that Imam Bukhari has declared other than the 7000+ in his Aj Jami to be unauthentic. I asked him for evidence of this claim and to date, there is no proof furnished by TM.

TRUTH: Imam Bukhari never declared that other than the 7000 in his Aj Jami’s to be unauthentic. And to answer TM, the rest of the hadeeth is recorded in another book by Imam Bukhari called “At Tarikh Al Kabeer”.

TM’S ANSWER 5B: TM claims that Sahih Bukhari is not written by Imam Bukhari. He claims that he’s read a couple of books convincing him that the “Aj Jami” was never written by Imam Bukhari

TRUTH: All of his sources are secondary sources. None of them are written based on direct study on the primary source. Anyone who studies the “Aj Jami” directly would never come to such conclusion.

That explains if u buy any copies of AJ Jami As Sahih u will find that they all contained the same list of hadeeth. That’s because they are published from the same manuscript.

Here in Egypt, no one makes this type of issue. Reason being, all it takes is a taxi ride to Al Azhar University library where manuscripts of “Aj Jami’” is kept.. Such issue is only effective in countries where the manuscript are not present.

TM’S ANSWER 6: TM says that the Quran is of the confirming nature. So it confirms everything that is true and everything that is not true. So, the Quran cannot come from the Bible

TRUTH: That doesn’t answer the question TM. The Quran cannot confirm the truth anymore since it is now proven to be extracted or taken from the Bible (based on your logic, of course). The Quran has lost it’s credibility to confirm what is right and what is wrong because it’s content has been found to be taken from the Bible?

Please bear in mind that, to date, you have never furnished us with any evidence showing the Hadeeth is taken from the Bible. All u showed were similarities. These mere similarities led you to conclude that hadeeth is from the Bible.

By the same logic, u have but no choice to admit that the Quran is also from the Bible and therefore, the Quran’s ability to confirm what is right and what is wrong is nullified.

Of course, I happen to know that the Hadeeth is Revelations from God. S hould there be any similarities with others, then it is the Hadeeth confirming the truth. What’s more, I can prove that Hadeeth is a Revelations from God based on the Quran.

TM applied his evasive maneuver tactics yet again. Whether the Quran confirms the truth or not is a totally separate issue and it’s irrelevant. I too can say that the Hadeeth confirms the truth because the hadeeth since the hadeeth Revelation from God. And my argument is based on the Quran as well.

TM’S ANSWER 7: TM didn’t understand what I wrote because he has selective memory.

TRUTH: In proving the Hadeeth as Revelation, I quote verse that contains the phrase ..al kitab wal hikmah…. TM then quotes verses that contains only the word …al hikmah.. without the ..Al Kitab… to mean that the al hikmah means al Kitab.

I told TM that his interpretation is a serious error based on the Arabic grammar. The “wau” in the middle of “…al kitab wal hikmah..” indicates that both al Kitab and Al Hikmah are two different entities.

It was at this point that TM renounced the Arabic grammar completely. He dismisses them as being man-made. Therefore, it is unacceptable.

So that led me to question TM on what methodology he utilizes in interpreting the Quran since he has already rejected the Arabic grammar?.

Remember his famous statement: “ Al Kitab and Kitab is the same”.

TM’S ANSWER 8: TM equates formal language with spoken language.

TRUTH: TM is completely out of whack. I asked him for his methodology since he completely disregards Arabic Grammar and all he can say is about whether my grandfather can speak Malay or not. TM is simply pathetic.

Note: TM wants us to believe, that the understanding of the language of the Quran exists in every Arab without the Arabs having to go to school and learn, is because his Prophet, Rashah Khalifah, is an Egyptian. Rashad had never had any formal training in the Arabic language but still went ahead to interpret the Quran as he sees fit. He ended up making a hell of a lot of mistakes and became the laughing stock of the Muslim world.

Unfortunate souls like TM decided to follow Rashad and his ‘mysterious methodology” in interpreting the Quran. When studied carefully, Rashad’s interpretation has been the laughing stock of the muslim world for years.

TM’S ANSWER 9: TM says that “due process” is not mentioned in the Quran.

TRUTH: Let me rephrase my sentence so that TM can understand. Where does it say in the Quran that a thief must be subjected to a trial and then found guilty in a court of law before his hands can be amputated? I dunno, but I understand the above process as “due process”

Please answer that TM.

After that TM went ballistics with so many of the issues I raised. I’ll just highlight some of the out of whack statement he made and explain why it’s corny.

TM’S ANSWER 10: TM says that in a case of parents being murdered by their children, we have to use our brain because the Quran doesn’t say anything abt it.

TRUTH: The Quran does say in 04:11 that when a when their parents dies, their children inherits their wealth. Is TM trying to imply that we should disobey the Quran whenever an incident like above occurs?.

I had a good laugh when TM raised a number of possible scenarios. I laughed because I’m sure the likes of TM will be pressured to provide some kind of a decent answer. I’m sure they won’t be able to. They’ll end up having to reward murderers.

Anti Hadeeth is limited to 04:11, while the people who follows the truth has the hadeeth as guidance. The Prophet says:

“ Murderer does not inherit anything from the murdered” (Abi Dawud)

TM’S ANSWER 11: TM says that the concept of “properly slaughtered” is not mention in the Quran. So, all u need to do is drain the blood of a dead animal and u basically can eat the animal

TRUTH: The Quran in 05:03 says that it is forbidden for us to eat “al mayyit” which means “carcass of dead animals”. Read 05:03 completely, please. There is the word “al Maitata” before the word “Ad Damu” (blood).

Oh wait, to TM, “Ad Dam” and “ al Maitata” is the same. Just like “Al Kitab” and “Al Hikmah” is the same. Right TM??? Is this another one of your anti Arabic grammar stand?

Also, how do you drain the blood of a fish???

TM’S ANSWER 12A: He says that there is no “amputation” in the Quran

TRUTH: I wonder what faqtau aidiyahuma means to TM? I bet he’s gonna say it means cutting off his means of living. But, in the Arabic language, Aydi refers to “hands” in reference to the As Sariqah which means “thieves”.

Here we see the real motivation behind anti hadeeth, to fit into the secular liberal mould. Without the hadeeth present, they are free to reinterpret the Quran as they see fit i.e. no amputations, no crucifixion, no 100 lashes for fornicators. Everything must be given a new meaning. The hadeeth is not an obstacle anymore. We are free, free, free.

TM’S ANSWER 13:TM says “Zakat means to purify. There is no such thing as paying money for zakat in the Quran.”

TRUTH: The word in the Quran is Az Zakah not mere zakah. Since it is “ism maarifah”, it therefore has a special meaning.

Oh wait, TM doesn’t believe in Arabic grammar. So, I’m wrong and he’s right. God might be wasting his time for adhering to the Arabic grammar in the Quran. God is not as smart as TM. TM rejects the entire Arabic Quran and instead goes for Rashah Khalifa wacky Quran.

Notice how TM evades my question on his methodology. He still haven’t told us how he understands the Quran despite rejecting just about every aspect of the Arabic language.

Instead he went to rambling about village arabs knowing how to speak Arabic. I’m not asking him about how village arabs understands the Quran, I’m asking how TM understands it.

TM’S ANSWER 14: TM says that some dudes named Saim Bakar and Hasan Qalami told him that Imam Bukhari didn’t write Sahih Bukhari

TRUTH: Who the hell are these guys? Can somebody tell me. I did sneeked a peak at the Saim Bakar book and let me tell u, now I know where TM gets his simplistic approach to hadeeth and just about everything else.

I am pretty sure that both Saim and Hasan has never even seen the manuscripts of Sahih Bukhari when they did their so-call research.

Now, if u come to, say, Al Azhar University, you’ll probably be able to see scholars who actually studies the work of Imam Bukhari direct from the manuscript. At this point, who do I listen to?: a bunch of nobodies like Saim and Hassan or to Azhar scholars who actually studied the book direct from the primary source.

Explains why you’re such a screwed up TM. You listen to screwed up sources.

TM’S QUESTION 1 : TM started asking a bunch of questions about Abu Hurairah

TRUTH: Refer to this url for more explanation http://www.allaahuakbar.net/shiites/in_defense_of_abu_hurairah.htm

Suffice to say that scholars who studies the classical texts in it’s original language have a completely good opinion of Abu Hurairah. Scholars such as:

(a) Dr. Mustafa al-Siba'i (founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria), in his thesis, al-Sunna wa Makanatuha fi l-Tashri' al-Islami, (Cairo: 1380/1961);
(b) 'Abd al-Razzaq Hamza (the head of Dar al-Ahaadeeth in Makka and Imam of Masjid al-Haram),Zulumat Abi Raya amam Adwa' al-Sunna al-Muhammadiya, (Cairo: n.d.); and
(c) the definitive response by 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Yahya al-Mu'allami al-Yamani (the Librarian of Masjid al-Haram), al-Anwar al-Kashifa lima fi Kitab Adwa' 'ala al-Sunna min al-Zallal wa l-Tadlil wa l-Mujazafa, (Cairo: 1378) - may Allah have mercy with them Read more!

Debate With An Anti Hadeeth On The Issue Of Apostasy

Based on Farook’s input, I can conclude:

1.0 He assigns meaning to words in the Quran as he pleases without any justification. For instance, when he translates “nafs” as soul, it is without any basis in the Arabic language. It’s just his wish and pleasure. Many will want to know where Farook gets the authority to change the word of God in ways that pleases Farook?

2.0 He will ignore parts of a verse as he pleases. The verses 02:54 and 02:55 starts with the words; <>, which means “and when”. These words means something, and in this context, it referring to two DIFFERENT INCIDENCES. Tell me Farook, why is it that there are no at the start of 02:56?. Same passage doesn’t mean same story.

3.0 At this point you will notice that Farook’s methodology is the same for all Anti-Hadeeth ideologue. They assign meanings to the Quran just as they please and start calling others disjointed and confused for not following their ways. I’m going to assume that all this is a form of “defence mechanism” on their part for deep in their heart, they know that their ways are far from the Quran.

4.0 Farook attempts to confuse the language by citing this example:
“Have a look at 5/116: Faqad `Alimtahu Ta`lamu Mâ Fî Nafsî Wa Lâ 'A`lamu Mâ Fî Nafsika . The 'nafsika' here, who does it refer to please? Does Allah have a body?”

Reply: Is Farook saying that God has a soul? It works both ways Farook. “Nafs” means “oneself”, If it’s referring to humans, then it’s referring to the entire human, body and soul. If it’s referring to God, then it’s referring to God. How God looks like we don’t know <….laisakmislihi shaiun..>. Only God knows.
How is that so difficult to understand?

5.0 Farook asks “Have a look at 61/14, the phrase 'thaifatan min bani israil' (a group from bani israil'. Why is that phraseology missing from 2/54?”

Reply : Simple, in 02:54 “qaum” refers to one tribe. In 16:14, the word “Thaifah” refers to a group among the Bani Israel without reference to any tribe. It’s that simple.

6.0 Farook is also confused about the concept of apostasy. He says “It makes sense for
you to command a people who left Islam to follow an Islamic law. Good stuff.”.

Reply : If they didn’t leave Islam, then it wouldn’t be called apostasy. Thus, all this
will not be an issue anymore. The punishment is for the act of leaving Islam after one
has converted to Islam uncoerced. Smart people don’t ask stupid question like this.
7.0 Farook also accused me of having disjointed and manipulative reading. Yet, he changed the meanings of the words in the Quran whimsically, ignore words in the Quran when he sees fit, introduced inconsistency in the Quran by adopting silly and dumb methodology.

8.0 Prophet Sulaiman did build statues as stated in the Quran, Farook. But, we are told by the second Revalation, the Sunnah, it is prohibited for the UMMAH OF MUHAMMAD. It was not prohibited to the people of Solomon, then. However, the second Revelations tells us that the punishment for apostasy stays.
03/07 02:55:38
Read more!