Help IslamDunk with your generous contribution.

The haters are growing in numbers, Islam is being attacked every day by people working full time (as Shamoun claims). We as Muslims need to work even harder to let people know the truth of Islam. To do that we need your help. We need your contribution to this project. Donate towards our work and support our cause. Use the Donate Tab on your right hand side in the home window.

Teeth Breaking Responses To Those Who Want To Extinguish The Light Of Allah

TTT is our brother/sister site that deals with writing articles responding to the most common attacks on Islam. The articles are unarguable and most scholastic (in the English language) following a unique traditional style, giving explanations of scholars, expositions of commentaries and most important of all in a simple short and clear way that everyone can understand.

Help Us Spread The Message

In order to reach as many people as possible IslamDunk needs your help. Almost everyone has a facebook account, an email list or other social connections on the web. All you need to do is use one of our logos or post a link or post our articles and videos, favor them, rate them and keep doing that over and over. This work that we are doing needs to reach every corner of the Earth so that everyone will know the truth of Islam

Shamoun's Lowly Character

Sam thinks he can beat everyone in a debate and that he has already done so. Things have not even happened yet he can predict with certainty outcomes. He thinks no one can answer him. Check out a list of answers right here.

Sunday, August 10, 2008

Rebuttal to Ahmadiah's claim on Khatamu nabee

The Issue of Termination of Prophethood
That the Holy Prophet was the last of the prophets who has sealed
and thus terminated prophethood, and that no other prophet is to be
appointed after him and every claimant to prophethood is a liar and an
infidel are well-settled issues on which there has been complete unanimity
and consensus right from the days of the noble companions & upto the
date. Therefore there was no need for a lengthy discussion on this subject.
But the QadiyZni sect has put in a lot of effort to create doubts in the
minds of Muslims on this issue; by publishing hundreds of pamphlets and
books they have tried to misguide those Muslims who are not well versed
in religious knowledge. So this humble author has written a book titled
in which this issue has been fully detailed and
clarified in the light of one hundred Qur'Znic verses, more than two
hundred ahEdith and hundreds of dictum of the classic as well as later
scholars and learned people; the QadiyZni deception and doubts created
thereby have been fully refuted. Some important points from that book
are being reproduced here.
The Holy Prophet's $!
$ Being the Last Prophet does not negate
the descent of SayyidnZ 'is5 in the last days
It is proved from many verses of the Qur'an and from rnutawatir
ahEdith that in the last days before the doomsday, Sayyidna 'Is5
would come into this world again, kill Dajjal ( the Antichrist ) and bring
all misguidance to an end. The detailed proofs of this fact are given in my
Arabic book 'At-tasrih'.
Mirza QadiyanI, denying the descent of Sayyidna
'Is% m1, has proclaimed himself to be the predicted Masih with the
reasoning that if reappearance of SayyidnZ ?sa Ibn Maryam i.M-il L&
who was a prophet of Israelites, is accepted, then it would negate the Holy
Prophet's being the last of the prophets.
The clear reply is that the Holy Prophet's &!$ being the last prophet
means that nobody would be appointed as a prophet after him; it does not
imply that somebody who was appointed a prophet earlier would be
dismissed from his prophethood or that such a prophet would not be able
to return to this world. But, of course, the prophet who returns to this
world for the reformation of the Ummah of the Holy Prophet % while
maintaining his prophethood, would carry out the reforms in the Ummah
in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Prophet g,
as clarified in
authentic ahadzth.
Imam Ibn Kathir, in explanation of this verse, has said:
"The Holy Prophet $$ being the last of the prophets means that
the office of prophethood stands terminated after him. No one
would get this office after him. But it does not have any effect on
the fact of the descent and reappearance of SayyidnZ '7s~
&%\ in
the last days on which there is a consensus of the whole
Ummah and which is proved by a large number of ahadtth that
are almost mutawatir and by the Qur'Zn itself according to
some interpretations, because he had been given prophethood
before the Holy Prophet %."
Distortion of the Meaning of Prophethood and invention of new
kinds of Prophethood
This claimant of prophethood adopted a new trick to pave the way for
his claim by inventing a new kind of prophethood which simply does not
exist in Qur'iin and Sunnah and neither is there any proof for it, but
according to him this new kind of prophethood does not negate the decree
of Qur'iin regarding the termination of prophethood. Briefly, he has
introduced in prophethood the concept of reincarnation, which is well
known in Hinduism and other religions. His contention is that if a person
is dyed in the color of the Holy Prophet @, by virtue of his complete
obedience to him and by following his footsteps, his coming to this world is
the coming of the Holy Prophet & himself; such a person is in fact the
shadow and incarnate demonstration of none else but the Holy Prophet
Therefore, his claim does not negate the belief in the termination of
prophethood after him.
But how can this invented kind of prophethood find its way to Islamic
beliefs? There is no proof of it. Besides, the belief in termination of
prophethood is a basic belief of Islam and as such it has been so
thoroughly clarified by the Holy Prophet @ under different topics at
various times that no imposter can distort it. The full details can be seen
in this author's book referred to earlier, but only some necessary proofs of
this belief are being presented here.
Sahih of Bukhiir?, Sahih of Muslim and almost all books of Hadith
have reported from Sayyidnii AbE Hurairah & with authentic chain of
narrators that the Holy Prophet has said,

"The example of a;l the prophets before me and of myself is like
a Inan has built a very strong and well decorated house in one
corner wall of which space has been left vacant for one brick;
people roam about in the home to see it and admire the
construction but all of them say that why did not the builder
put a brick in that space also which would have completed the
construction. I am that last brick (of the palace of prophethood)"
and in some versions he said "I have filled up that vacant space
and thus completed the palace of prophethood."
The gist of this eloquent simile is that prophethood is like a grand
palace composed of Prophets $&. This grand palace was complete in all
respects before the Holy Prophet except for the placement of one brick.
The Holy Prophet #!
$ completed this grand palace by filling up that
vacant space for one brick. Now there is no more space for any prophet or
messenger. Even if it is supposed that there are other kinds of prophets
and messengers, there is just no more space for them in the palace of
In another Hadith narrated by SayyidnZ Abii Hurairah & reported
in SahThs of BukhSS, Muslim, Musnad of Ahmad, etc., the Holy Prophet
$!$ has said:
"The politics and administration of Banu IsrZ'il was being
handled by the prophets themselves. When one prophet expired,
another prophet would take his place. And after me there is no
prophet, but of course, there would be my khulam (caliphs -
successors) who would be numerous."
This HadTth has made it clear that there would be no prophet after
the Holy Prophet $!$ and the education and instruction of the Ummah
would be carried out by his Khulaf?. The Holy Prophet has explicitly
and clearly told us that there is no prophethood of any kind after him,
otherwise he would have mentioned it in this Hadith where he has
mentioned KhulaG'.
Sahihs of BukhSri and Muslim have reported a HadTth narrated by
SayyidnZ Abii Hurairah & :-
"Nothing is left of prophethood except mubashshirat (true
dreams )".
As reported in Musnad of Ahmad, etc., Sayyidah Siddiqah 'A'ishah
y &, and Sayyidah Umm Kurz al- Kabiyyah ki &I
have stated
that the Holy Prophet % has said:
"Nothing is left of prophethood after me except mubashshirat.
The noble companions & asked: 0 Holy Prophet @! What is
mubashshirat? He replied, 'True dreams that a Muslim sees
himself or somebody else sees about him."
This Hadith has so explicitly told that no kind of prophethood, either
one with a new law or without it, either Zilli (shadowy) or Buruzi
(incarnate), is possible after the Holy Prophet &; people would only have
mubashshirat (true dreams) through which they would find out a few
Musnad of Ahmad and Tirmidhi carry a narration of SayyidnZ Anas
Ibn MZlik &$6 wherein the Holy Prophet % has said:
"No doubt risalah (messengership) and nubuwwah
(prophethood) stand terminated after me; after me there would
neither be a rasiil (messenger) nor a Nabi(prophet)".
This HadTth has made it clear that prophethood even without a new
law is simply not there after the Holy Prophet % what to say of zilli or
buruzi prophethood which are neither any form of prophethood nor are
they recognized as such in Islam.
The objective is not to collect here all the ahEdith pertaining to the
issue of termination of prophethood; more than two hundred ahEdith on
this subject have been put together in my book "Khatm-e-Nabuwwat".
The objective, by quoting a few of them is to advise that the categories of
gilli and buruzi prophethood invented by Mirzii Qadiyiini is without any
basis or proof, and moreover the ahEdith quoted above have told
explicitly that there is no kind of of prophethood whatsoever left to come
after the Holy Prophet %. That is why, right from the days of the noble companions & uptill
today, all the schools of Muslim Ummah are unanimous on the belief that
there cannot be any kind of Nabi or Rasfil after the Holy Prophet and
whoever claims to be so is a liar and denier of the Qur'an and is a
disbeliever. The first general consensus of the noble companions & had
evolved on this very issue as a result of which a holy war ('jihad) was
fought with Musaylimah, the liar, the false claimant of prophethood,
during the period of the first Khal2ah Sayyidna Abii Bakr &,
.in which
he (Musailimah) and his followers were killed.
The dictums and clarifications of the past Imams and wise scholars of
the Ummah are reproduced in considerable detail in the book
"Khatm-e-Nabuwwat", some of them are being copied here also.
Ibn Kathir, in his tafsir, writes under this verse: "Allah Ta'ZlE in this Book and the Holy Prophet % in successive
ahGdTth has informed that there is no Nab: after the Holy
Prophet % so that people should know that whoever claims to
be a prophet after him is a liar, a cheat, an imposter, a deviator
who misguides others, no matter how many conjuring tricks he
shows, magic spells he binds or talismanic wonders and
sorceries he performs which are, in fact, sheer fallacies
recognized as such by the people who have have knowledge and
understanding. Allah Ta'ZlE had let such perverse acts and
utterances manifested at the hands of Aswad Al-'Ansi (claimant
of prophethood) in Yemen and Musaylimah, the liar, (another
claimant of prophethood) in Yamamah in a way that every
intelligent and comprehending person, after hearing and seeing
them, knew that both of them were liars and misguided. May
Allah curse them. In the same way anyone who claims to be a
prophet upto the Doomsday is a liar and an infidel and this
stream of claimants of prophethood would end at Dajjal, the
Imam Ghazzali, ,while explaining the above mentioned verse and
discussing the belief in the termination of prophethood, has observed in
his book 'Al-IqtisEd fil TtiqEd' as follows,
"The entire Ummah has unanimously understood from these
words and from circumstantial evidences that there will never
be a prophet after him ever, nor will ever come a messenger of
Allah. These words (of the verse) can neither be interpreted in
any other sense, nor can their generality be restricted."
Qadi 'IyZd in his book 'Ash-shifa', after declaring that a person who
claims to prophethood after the Holy Prophet $& is a liar and an infidel
who does not believe in this verse, has observed as follows:
"The Ummah holds by consensus that this discourse bears the
obvious meaning and that this verse means what it says,
without any other interpretation or any exception. Therefore,
there is no doubt in the kufr (infidelity) of all those sects (who
follow any claim out of prophethood) rather their kufr stands
absolutely proved in view of the consensus of the Ummah and
the express texts of the Qur'Zn and Sunnah.

Extracted from Mariful Quran Mufti Shafi Usmani vol 7 pg169-221

Journey of faith trailer

Saturday, August 9, 2008

Children imitating shuyukh

Friday, August 8, 2008

Why did God wait so long to sent Muhammad?

Thursday, August 7, 2008

Who was the 1st Muslim?

This attack against Islam is a pretty interesting one, but yet again most of them are quite interesting, and a Muslim wonders how can they come up with such? Are they that desperate to find something to confuse people with?
The argument is: in the Quran there are several contradictory statements when it comes to the question of who was the first muslim. The following verses show the contradictions:

Say, verily my Lord hath directed me into a right way, a true religion, the sect of Abraham the orthodox; and he was no idolater. Say, verily my prayers, and my worship, and my life, and my death are dedicated unto God, the Lord of all creatures: He hath no companion. This have I been commanded: I am the first Moslem (Wa 'Ana 'Awwalu Al-Muslimin). S. 6:161-163

THE VERSE ABOVE IS ABOUT PROPHET MUHAMMAD, YET IT COULD BE INTERPRETED FOR US AS WELL, BECAUSE OF THE ORDER QUL OR SAY AT THE BEGINING. In simple language it applies to me, I am the first of the Muslims. Stay with me we will explain it in a few. So far the argument is that prophet Muhammad was the first Muslim. How about Abraham and Jesus? They came before prophet Muhammad and they claim they were the first Muslims.

When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said: "Who will be My helpers to (the work of) Allah?" Said the disciples: "We are Allah's helpers: We believe in Allah, and do thou bear witness that we are Muslims. S. 3:52

Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian but he was (an) upright (man), a Muslim (musliman), and he was not one of the polytheists. S. 3:67

So who was the first anyway?

They were all the first Muslims. Again let us keep it as simple and brief as possible: If I tell you I'm the first to be obedient, does it mean that in the whole world I was the first ? No person who is reasonable enought and speaks any language would say that's what I meant. Language carries a meaning, and words describe that meaning. I was the first to be obedient. So was John and so was Davide and Abdullah and Stacy and Fatima. If they claim that they were the first to obey that does not mean they were the first in the whole word. Our attacker here uses different translations to fit his arugment. This is an oft repeated technique of islam haters. The word Muslim should also be translated in the English language in the above quotes (sometimes even authors of the Quran translations leave it as such - they should not). Muslim means the one who submits. So in plain English language prophet Muhammad is saying: I am the first to submit. He heard the message, he was the first to believe, he submited, he was the first to submit. Jesus hear the message of God about 500 years before Muhammad and he was the first to submit. So did Abraham. There is not contradiction for anyone who professes any kind of understanding of language.
If Muhammad was to say: I am the first person in the whole world to be a prophet and Jesus who came before him would have said the same, and Abraham would have said the same, then it would be an argument. If David was to say I am the first engineer in the world yet 100 before him Ahmad was allready an engineer, we would have a contradiction. If I say I am the first to obey my father, doest that mean that I am the first in the whole word? You look at the context and meaning behind my statement and you understand what I mean.

It is too simple yet people are still blind to see.

My book is ready now I need some help publishing

Salamo Aleikum
By the grace of Allah swt I was able to finish my first book. It is not the way I wanted it to be but insh Allah I hope that it will bring some benefit. It is mostly geared towards new Muslims and people who have returned to Islam. insh Allah I will be working on my second book on the same topic but more detailed and comprehensive.
I would like to thank from the bottom of my heart Rob Lipham for editing it: may Allah give you the highest place in paradise
Salamo Aleikum

Aisha's age: was it strange?

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Are there grammar mistakes in the Quran?

Some time ago I read a post by an infamous Christian whose name I will not mention, which claimed that the Quran had grammatical mistakes. There is a short book on this topic that lists the mistakes and gives the corrections. In simple words the way they put it, the Quran’s author did not know Arabic. As I mentioned before we will write the simplest yet most effective and concise rebuttals.
I would like every reader who studied any language to think about grammar and linguistics. The ones that never studied a different language can use their rational and intellect that God gave them. Are you ready? Which comes first the speaking of the language or the writing of it? Which comes first, the spoken language or grammar? Did the old Arabs have grammar class? Some of them did not even know how to read and write yet they were the most proficient in the language. Grammar is a set of rules that breaks down the language and analyzes it in order for those who do not speak it to learn it. It is not the other way around. Grammar did not come first; it was the language that came first. Therefore all the alleged mistakes are actually lack of knowledge of the Arabic from the accusers. The Arabic that most people speak today is washed out into slang and so is most of the grammar. We need the grammar lessons in order to go back to the original language that was spoken by the people who had the organic Arabic in the first place. An example should clarify my point: Shakespearean English is so different than American English. I remember the first time I heard it I thought that Shakespeare did not know how to speak English. The truth is his English was the closer to the original English and without a doubt he did not have to explain to people the past tense, the active and passive speaker, nouns and so on. They all understood his language and they all praised his compositions.
The truth is that there are not grammatical mistakes in the Quran. The Quran is the highest authority in the Arabic language, and keeping in mind rhetoric of the Fusha (Quran Arabic Eloquence), the people who accuse the Quran of having mistakes are the ones who should attend some Arabic grammar classes.

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

support this program please

Half Date
Approaching jannah half a date at a timeHomeDate DrivesDuaNewsContactPolls
Posted by admin on February 23rd 2008
First of all, date is the fruit, okay?

HalfDate is inspired by the teaching of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and prayer be upon him) where he called us to be part of the solution even if our contribution is as small as half a date, or a pleasant word.

اتقوا النار ولو بشق تمرة
“Save yourself from the (Hell) Fire even with half a date (to be given in charity). And if you do not find a half date, then with a good pleasant word.” - Collected by Al-Bukhari
**HalfDate is MERELY a promotion site for good deeds, not a not-for-profit organization.**

Our goal is to utilize the means that Allah (swt) has given us (you + the Internet) to do something good for this life and the hereafter, in-sha-Allah.

Each Hijri month, you will suggest a specific cause (specific goal and due date) and will feature it as a DateDrive. For example, through HalfDate, Muslims around the globe (from Trinidad to California) have:

Donated over $5,127.54 for textbook
Showed their care for convert Muslims
Expressed their appreciations to halal businesses, and
Donated to publish five teacher study guides for children books
As you can see, HalfDate is not only about monetary donation drives, because in Islam, the concept of Sadaqa (charity) is much broader than that.

Narrated by Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “To judge justly between two persons is regarded as Sadaqa, and to help a man concerning his riding animal by helping him to ride it or by lifting his luggage on to it, is also regarded as Sadaqa, and (saying) a good word is also Sadaqa, and every step taken on one’s way to offer the compulsory prayer (in the mosque) is also Sadaqa and to remove a harmful thing from the way is also Sadaqa.” -collected by Al-Bukhari

Our DateDream:

Working together to get a specific task done even with our differences
Reviving the broad concept of Sadaqa
Putting the neglected (non-sizzling/boring) causes to the center stage
Incorporating fun, creativity, and ingenuity into philanthropy
Nourishing both the contributors and the beneficiaries
Leading the research and development efforts of Islamic philanthropy
O ye who believe!
Enough day-dreaming, it’s time for Date Dreaming!
Let’s show Allah some real work. Help with your supplications, money, expertise, word of mouth and influence.

May Allah (swt) grant you the sweetest date in Jannah


Monday, August 4, 2008

Islam's contribution to the West by A. Deif (notes taken by O. Malik)

Are you not tired of people calling Muslims barbarians and backwards. While it is true that we as an ummah today are not in the fore front of things, and there are very good causes for that which we can discuss later, our history is full of achievements that show that the West should at least say THANK YOU to our great grand fathers.

Islam’s contribution to the West

When this deen dominates the mind and heart of people, the actions will be great for humanity.
Islamic civilization. What is it?

This civilization has not been fairly treated. Huge gap on Muslim side in exploring and investigating the Islamic history. Most link it to the political history but we need to get other aspects of the Islamic civilization also. On Non Muslim side we need more objectivity and fairness in dealing with the Islamic civilization.

What was the driver of this civilization? To continuously produce and move ahead on to contribute to human knowledge and literature. Only thing that kept going up was the knowledge and literature. Economically, politically, socially all had their ups and downs. So the driver was the knowledge from the Sharia, that motivated the Muslim to contribute. E.g. Hadith. Seeking knowledge is an obligation for every male and female Muslim. Hadith. Angels honor the knowledge seeker and every creation of Allah, even fish in the sea makes asks for forgiveness for such people. Surat Hashr - Allah SWT says He elevates people of knowledge to high levels of Jannah. Also Allah SWT says people of knowledge are not equal to the people of no knowledge. So the knowledge is not just Sharia knowledge that we are asked to seek. But the primary driver was the spiritual driver that motivated Muslims to seek knowledge for pleasure of Allah SWT.

Muslims 1) Preserved 2) modified and corrected 3) added and contributed . Most Muslims preserved the Greek, Romans, Chinese and Indian knowledge of humanity. Very tough task but they put a lot of effort in doing so. Imagine you are given a book in Chinese or a book in trigonometry, and you need to learn Chinese and putting things together. So Muslims impacted greatly in human civilization. Secondly Muslim started to critique and think deeply of this treasure they got and started to analyze e.g. How Plato is contradicting Aristotle or other contradictions were critiqued by Muslims. Gary Nose, father of medicine, the only people that got up to challenge what he had proposed were Muslims. So the literature was critiqued and modify. And now, lastly, they were at a position to add. So in summary this is what is meant by contribution of Muslim civilization in area of knowledge and literature.

Spain (Andalusia) and Cecily were 2 places of this sharing of knowledge to the West. Royal families of Europe used to seek permission from Muslim rulers to send to them their smart children to learn from them. E.g. England’s Henry 5th’s famous letter to Al Hakam the ruler at the time. 15th century was the peak of conflict of secular thoughts and the Church. Church portrayal of Muslims that they are just bunch of barbarians and the more the Church control started to fade, the more people were able to learn from Muslims and it shows anytime there is lack of integration between any religions, its bad for humanity.

Stereotype that when we talk about Muslims its just Arabs. The main contributors were the non Arabs and non Muslims who were living within the Muslim civilization and contribute in the language which is not just a language of a tribe but it’s a language of humanity, Quran and people of Jannah and that was ARABIC. Today you can’t get into a University without TOEFL, MELAB etc but at that time you could not navigate any type of knowledge unless you knew Arabic. Ibn Habban, Bukhari, Tabari, Muslim, Ibn Hakkam, and many scholars of hadith were non arabs.

Universal Scholars (Encyclopedia like scholars). This was the default for someone to be worth listening to and to be called a Scholar. Someone who was strong in different fields e.g. engineering, Quran, Fiqh, astronomy etc. Tabari’s tafseer is very famous. He contributed to philosophy but had knowledge of other fields as well. They really had knowledge. You can’t understand Fiqh without being an expert of Arabic, knowing the lineage of chains of narrators, and that’s why there books are living for centuries. E.g. books for Razi, and Imam Ghazali were books of real minds (not developed in an era of fast food philosophy) and their books continue to move on over the centuries.

One hadith for Muslims scholars would be enough. Hadith. Wisdom is the pray or hunt of every Muslim, whenever its there, then he is the most eligible person to seek the wisdom from. So the primary driver to go into philosophy was 1) that Prophet SAW told us to seek wisdom and 2) philosophy was supposed to be rational and practical.
This was the number one driver and rationally the best way to promote the religion of Islam. Fight with same weapon those who attacked Islam. The amount of effort e.g. by Motazilat made and unacceptable philosophy that challenged the mercy of Allah.

Philosophy was supposed to be rational and Islam was rational enough to not just shut down these people’s wrong philosophies but to challenge them. Farabi who died in 950, Ibn Seena died in 1077, Ibn Rushd (second teacher of Plato after Aristotle) 1198. These names were people who preserved, explained and contributed to the Greek philosophy. Ibn Seena even though a controversial name, he used philosophical approach and used the debate to prove the applicability of the Shareeah and the Islamic state. Ibn Rushd used Aristotle philosophy to show that Quran addresses 3 people that Aristotle talked about 1) people of deep thought and 2) those who understand evidence and 3) those who were normal emotional human beings. So they were promoting Islam. Kindi, Farabi and Ibn Seena took a lot from Greek philosophy that respected mind and rational and they added to that a role of mind coming from Quranic perspective.

Muslims were known as people of dictionaries. Muslims were first ones to propose the societal sciences (how societies interact). Pioneer of this was Ibn Qhuddun.

Many famous cities in Baghdad, Spain and other places, many art and architectural contributions. In Guttural Island in Sweden they found a lot of Muslim coins and even in Island, showing how Muslims even crossed the sea and

Till 18th century there was nothing available to students the only curriculum was books like Al Hawi (written by Razi the philosopher) and Qanood by (Ibn Seena). 5 star treatment in Muslim hospitals. Full service. No OHIP, no Green Shield. But that’s how they looked at the human aspect of things.

First people to do C section and come up with stitches were Muslims. Without C section, many died. Anesthesia was by Muslims first. Before that they used to get Iron rod and hit you with a strong blow and loose conscious and then they would go at you if you survive. Small blood circulation system, first to explain how the eyes work. First people to discover diseases like Diabetes.
First ones to produce an accurate Map of world, given by Idrisi, showing the world as a bowl, and bundled it with 70 maps and Phasgodegama who discovered the path along Africa, were maps drawn by Idrisi. Christopher Columbus, had a map in his journey to the unknown west, from a Turkish person.

First to invent the compass (finding Qiblah direction) and the clock, and the instrument that measures the distance between the stars and the Earth, optics and camera, rainbow, composition of light beam.
Pendulum experiment was done by Ibn Yunus. Algebra (Al Khawrismi) and development of number zero. First to propose the square root, the pie (radius of circle, circumference).

Muslims did a lot to Music. There is difference between Music and singing even though some of the singers were accepted by the Mashaikh at that time. Amazing thing was that Muslims approached Music based on Math. E.g. the Music ladder. Created devices to achieve these. How the vocal chords and sounds come out of instruments.

For fair historians, it’s fair to say that the contribution of Muslim civilization is huge. There are many more examples and books about this.
Extremism and not accepting a religion creates problems for humanity to integrate together.
Its Allah SWT’s will and wisdom that human beings and Muslims in particular would contribute in all these fields. This is how Allah SWT wanted us to live. “construct civilization”. We Muslim worship Allah SWT, by contribution to innovation, to get Jannah. Ibn Hatam said I didn’t write a word but with the intention that this word will reach people . That’s why it is said that Imam Shafee reached by his Fiqh exactly how Farabi reached Allah by contributing to medicine.
We are not listening to this to say WOW we were great. Only weak people talk about past, but we use it to show people that this is the only way of life not only to enter Jannah but to take people out of the suffering that we have now and add thousands of contributions at technical levels and science. And this is how me and you will make contribution to humanity and please Allah SWT.
We have to bridge the gap between spirituality and science. Today science has come to strip away peoples spiritual and everything has excelled except for people and how there are so many problems around the world. Whereas the contribution in Muslim civilization was to free people, to raise them out of darkness, to help them financially and every other aspect of humanity.

Technique in refuting attacks against Islam

Recently I have been thinking about how to refute attacks against Islam in the most efficient way. I was pondering over this issue for quite some time, and then it came to me: after reading many attacks on Islam and on other faiths from different places, I realized that most faiths when they are defending themselves, will us a technique that I call: DROWN ME IN THE OCEAN. They begin to answer the attack and soon you find yourself drowned in the amount of information, big words, and quotations. It is a technique applied by many christians especially Sam Shammoun and others of answeringislam web site. They loose you in their arguments, and after reading an essay that sounds amazing, uses quotes from different books, names that cannot even be pronounced and words that would take you time to find in the dictionary and even more time to digest, you find yourself satisfied by the quantity and not the quality.
So what I decided to do is the opposite. I will try to keep it as simple as possible when refuting attacks. My articles will still be lengthy for those who can follow them, but the argument will be refuted in a couple of lines at the beginning. I am convinced based on experience that this can be easily done by the will of Allah.
For example:
attack (from a Christian who believes in the Old testament and New Testament): Muhammad was not a prophet because he had more than one wife.
answer: so did Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon and you still consider them as prophets. According to that criteria you did not prove anything.

Sunday, August 3, 2008

Pure monotheism (Judaism, Christianity and Islam)

"O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians): Come to a word that is common between us and you, that we worship none but Allâh (god), and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allâh..." (3:64)
قال شيخ الإسلام إبن تيمية:" الراد على أهل البدع مجاهد"

This is the purest form of monotheism that exists between all of the world's religions. However most religions claim that they adhere to monotheism. Judaism claims that they worship one God and I must say that I agree on the claim, but disagree with the fact. Christianity claims that it worships one God and I must say I disagree with both the claim and the actuality of the fact. Even Hinduism claims that they worship one God. Amongst the millions of idols that they have named, they still manage to claim that there is in actuality only one supreme God. Islam has a claim as well, and it is called tawheed. In the light of simple proof we will analyze the claims and understand which faith can actually boast of pure monotheism.

Judaism claims that God is one, He has no partners, He has certain attributes and qualities, and He is the originator of everything. Is that monotheism? Before we go further we must make a disclaimer: Islam's definition of monotheism is much different than that of any other religion. Many have screamed and swore monotheism however when you analyze the concept in the light of practice and text, you find that it was nothing more than a claim made through a sentence that only satisfied the grammatical requirements for being a sentence. Nothing more! So what is monotheism according to Islam: according to Islam monotheism or the concept of tawheed is the oneness of God in person and in worship. God is one without a partner, He is unique, there is nothing like onto Him. All things come from Him, and without Him there is no life, there is not creation, there is no sustenance. He is the Lord of everything. Being the Lord and Owner of everything the second part of tawheed comes in which is a very logical consequence: If someone gives you everything you have will you go and thank someone else? No! screams the crowd, NO! This is one of the greatest separation points between Islam and all the other faiths which claim monotheism. God gives everything, therefore all our services, prayers, sacrifices and our lives should be directed to Him alone, and nothing else. Just in case you did not get that: TO HIM ALONE! But the Jews will say: we do that.
Let us put that claim to test. Part of directing your service and worship to God alone is that you obey Him. The Jews claim to follow the Torah but any scrutiny of the text and practices that the Jews have put together for themselves will find that they are not of divine origin. My purpose here is not to prove that, however any inquisitive mind can find such information in the volumes of scholars who have been proving this for ages. If you do not follow the word of God than how can you claim that you are on a monotheistic religion. It is a crippled monotheism. You claim there is only one God, however you follow men who have made up scriptures claiming they are from God. They have invented laws, legislations, and services that you follow and thus you have taken them as gods besides God. THAT IS WHY WHEN ONE OF THE COMPANIONS WHO WAS A CHRISTIAN BEFORE WHEN HEARING OF THE VERSE THAT SAYS : "YOU HAVE TAKEN YOUR RABIES AND MONKS AS YOUR GODS", HE SAID WE DID NOT DO THAT. THE PROPHET ASKED HIM, DID THEY NOT MAKE FOR YOU THINGS ALLOWED AND FORBIDDEN? HE ANSWERED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. Only God can make things lawful and unlawful, therefore whoever takes such from other than God, know that they have ascribed a partner with God.

Another extreme point of separation is the attributes of God. I will only give one example that covers but the Jews and Christians: God rested on the 7th day after creation, according to both faiths. Islam says that no slumber, no tiredness overtook God after creation, because He is perfect and free from weaknesses. Needing to rest is a form of imperfection and the God is free from that. So Islam affirms God's monotheism in His attributes as well (asma wal sifat). People get tired. So if both people and God get tired, they have something in common, which is again a claim that discards monotheism.

Christians will come quick to say that they worship only one God, however that is so far from the fact. First of all their theology teaches that God is not one in person but three in person and one in essence. Of course after centuries of comparing God to clover leafs, eggs and recently to water states, the modern Christian thinker has given up and said you cannot really understand the essence of God: three distinct persons but one god. One father, one son, one holly ghost, one god. Monotheism everyone? But it does not stop there. One person of the perfect monotheistic family died for 3 days. Now of course the claim was that the persons were three but still there was only one perfect united god. If that was the case than when the son died, did the father die? Did the holy ghost die? Of course they will say no. It gets more complicated than that, that is why I really respect the Christian that just says WE CANNOT UNDERSTAND IT. This goes beyond my scope here but the claim to monotheism at this point is only satisfying the grammatical requirements for a sentence and nothing more. Christians do not worship the same God Muslims do. Muslims who are involved in inviting Christians to Islam should stop using this point of communality because it's not there. That should be the point that one should focus on in showing the true God and His perfect attributes. Muslims worship the God that Christians should worship. That is the correct stance. At this point the Christians would try to convince us that they are still monotheistic no matter what the Muslims think. However that can be easily dispelled. Ask the Christian a few questions: who do you love the most, Jesus or God the Father? If you have not noticed till now, most of the Christian talk is around Jesus. Ask them if God had a son? They will say, yes. Ask them if Jesus had a son? They will say no. Ask them if Jesus is God? They will say yes. Put one and two together. Is this monotheism? Any non-indoctrinated person who picks up the Gospels and studies them will get the clear impression that Jesus and God the Father are not the same person. They do not hold the same deity, and clearly Jesus never claims such. Of course later in Paul's attempts to explain this, he brushes it away saying: Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. (Phillipians ch 2). And we all agree, however beyond the shadow of a doubt Christianity is not a pure monotheistic faith. It ascribes partners to God, denies the attributes of perfection of God, and gives the rights of God to other than God.

We need to put the right things in the right place. God gave us, we need to worship Him alone. We cannot give the rights of God to other than God. That is the biggest injustice. We need to come back and shave all the extras off. We need to loose the fat that is not healthy and return to the organic faith. God created us to worship him alone, so let us do so. O christian, O jew, O hindu, O people of the world, worship your Lord and enter Islam, where you will find your peace.

“Say: Surely my prayer and my sacrifice and my life and my death are (all) for Allah, the Lord of the worlds. (The Cattle 6.162)”

Click and Order Today

IslamDunkTV © 2010 Design by New WP Themes | Bloggerized by Lasantha -
Powered by Blogger