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