|
|
|
Pages Hinduism & Quantum PhysicsHinduism-Brief Sketch
|
Top ======= Understanding Hinduism ======= Islam Stagnant Click on underlined words to open paragraph Islam in the Light of the ‘Sruti’ and the ‘Smrti’ The Anti-Christ (1) The Anti-Christ (2) Islamic Timebomb - The Islamic Tidalwave http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU We received the following Email: Noble Sirs Can your web site feature such scholarly analysis about Islam, Buddhism, Judaism and
other world religions? The Message of Prophet Muhammad Based on a public lecture delivered, on the occasion Introductory I am very thankful to the Muslim Students Society of Rangoon for organizing this public
function in this spacious City Hall and inviting me to speak on The Message of Prophet
Muhammad. I belong to a movement, which was started by Sri Ramakrishna and Swami
Vivekananda over 50 years ago, and which stands for the fostering of the spirit of harmony
and fellowship among the world religions, for fostering the expression of the religious
impulse in the service of man, irrespective of caste and creed and race and sex, and for
the deepening of the spiritual life of man everywhere in the modern age. The Character of Prophet Muhammad The character of Prophet Muhammad has been misrepresented, not only by many prejudiced
non-Muslim critics, but also by the violent, ambitious, and worldly-minded faithful
Muslims as well. In his personal life, the prophet shines as a man of high character,
integrity, and humanity. He lived a simple Spartan life, exemplifying the truth of the
dignity of labour. In his later life, he felt that he had a mission to deliver to humanity
in general, and to his own Arab people in particular, and he set about implementing this
mission and succeeded, before his death, in uniting the Arab people through a
religio-politico ideology and making them conscious of their destiny to be a civilizing
force in the world. He also instilled love of knowledge in the Arab people. His inspiration soon
transformed Arabia from a backward Bedouin-inhabited desert area into the political and
cultural hub of Eurasia for four centuries, marked by advancement of sciences and
learning, trade and commerce, and dynamic international contacts. This is the period when
the universal spiritual message of Islam and its rational and scientific temper dominated
the Muslim mind, which endowed them with an insatiable spirit of curiosity, which inspired
them to learn from contemporary civilizations like the Indian, the Chinese, and the
Greco-Roman, and which stimulated them to advance science, philosophy, and the arts in
many directions. But, after the Mongolian invasion of the thirteenth century A.D. and the complete
destruction of Baghdad in 1258, when many millions were killed, whole areas were laid
waste, and political rule in the centre of the Islamic world passed into the hands of
barbarian infidels, leaving only Egypt and Spain to nourish Arab culture for another two
centuries. There set in the slow and steady erosion of these universal and rational
elements and the rising, to dominance, of its dogmatic and intolerant elements. The Mongol
invaders, and later the Turks, were soon converted to Islam and became the carriers of
Islamic religion, culture, and political power. With some great exceptions, these new
Muslim groups came under the influence, less of Islam’s rational and universal, and
more of its dogmatic and intolerant elements. This led to the increasing exploitation of
the name of Islam by several military conquerors to destroy and rob and pillage other
countries and cultures, which has given a bad name to this great religion. The Message of the Prophet: Its Universal Elements As in the case of every religion, there is, in the message of Prophet Muhammad also, a
mixture of the eternal and universal ethical and spiritual elements along with the
temporary and local socio-political elements. These represent the two aspects of every
religious tradition, firstly, as a path to God, and next, as a socio-political ordering of
human life. The followers of Islam derive their inspiration primarily from the Quran and
secondly, as deriving from the Quran (from the Suriah and the Hadith). All the three
contain elements, what the Indian Sanatan Dharma, or Hinduism calls, Sruti, representing
the first, and Smrti, representing the second, in varying proportions. [Note: For proper understanding of this article ‘ The Message of Prophet
Muhammad’, the meanings of the two terms Sruti and Smrti
should be understood. Sruti stands for the eternal values of human freedom, dignity, equality, and
fearlessness, irrespective of caste, creed, colour or sex. Sruti alone is eternal, because
it deals with eternal varieties, universal and human. That is why in India’s long
national history, we had many Smrtis but only one Sruti – the immortal Vedas, more
particularly their spiritual and philosophical portions, the Upanishads. The message of
the Upanishads is, therefore, called the Sanatan Dharma, Eternal Dharma, or perennial
philosophy, as different from the teachings of the Smrti, which constitute only the Yuga
Dharma, the dharma for a particular yuga or age. The Smrti, which is relevant in one age,
or in one country, has no relevance in another age or another country; and all social
changes involve abrogation of the current Smrti and adoption of a new Smrti relevant to
the new times. ] The stagnation and decay of Islam commenced, as in the case of Sanatan Dharma in recent
centuries, with the dominance of the Smrti over the Sruti elements. It was a dominance of
the fundamentalist group over the ever-diminishing rational and humanist group which
advocated the scientific approach and the stressing more and more of the eternal,
universal, spiritual elements and the soft-pedalling of the temporal and local elements,
in response to the advance of history. The following select passages of the Quran breathe the spirit of the Sruti or the
eternal and the universal: (We commence) with the name of God The Quran speaks of Muhammad and the universal ‘We have not sent thee but as a mercy and blessing for the world.’ The second Sura of the Quran commands us to believe, in not only what was revealed to
Muhammad, but also in what was revealed to those who went before him. This clearly
indicates the Prophet’s acceptance of many true religions of which Islam is one. The
universality of the Prophet’s message is also revealed in his teaching that only
those are nearest to his heart and to God who do what is right. In several Suras of the
Quran, we come across this universal approach. ‘To every one we have given a law and a way. And if God has pleased, He would have
made you all one people (believers in one religion); but he has done otherwise that He
might try you in that which He hath severally given unto you. Wherefore press forward in
good works. Unto God shall ye return and He will tell you that concerning which ye
disagree.’ ‘Shall I not inform you of a better act than fasting, alms, and prayer? Making
peace between one and another; enmity and malice tear up rewards by roots.’ ‘It is not righteousness that ye turn your face to the east and the west; but
righteous is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the scripture
and the prophets; and gives his wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk, and to orphans, and
to the needy, and to the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and set slaves free, and
observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due; and those who keep their treaty when
they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are
they who are sincere. Such are the God-fearing.’ ‘Say (O Muslims): We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us, and that
which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and
that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the prophets received, from their
Lord. We make no distinction between any of them and unto Him we have surrendered.’ ‘Lo! Religion with Allah (is) the Surrender (to His will and guidance).’ ‘Oh ye who believe! Be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity, and let not hatred
of any people seduce you that ye deal not justly. Deal justly, that is nearer to your
duty. Observe your duty towards Allah. Lo! Allah is informed of what ye do.’ In the course of his farewell sermon before his passing away, the Prophet gave the
message of a universal and humanistic ethics: ‘And hearken, O mankind! An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab and a non-Arab
is not superior to an Arab, a white man is not superior to a black man nor a black man
superior to a white man, except by virtue of his conduct. The noblest in the sight of
Allah is he who is noblest in conduct.’ Says the Quran elsewhere: ‘Man’s actions are judged by his intention.’ ‘He is not of us who sleeps with his stomach full while his neighbour is
hungry.’ There is an oft-quoted saying in the Quran, which also has the ring of universality: ‘Let there be no compulsion in religion.’ That God is one and that He is beyond man’s sensory experience is highlighted in
another beautiful verse of the Quran: ‘Sight perceives Him not, but He perceives men’s sights; He is the knower of
secrets, the Aware.’ This teaching is exactly similar to the teaching of the Kena Upanishad (1.7): ‘Yacchaksusaa na pashyati ‘That which cannot be seen by the eye but through which the eye itself sees, know
That to be Brahman and not what people worship here (in the manifested world).’ Islam
in the Light of the ‘Sruti’ and the ‘Smrti’ Some Muslim thinkers have made a distinction between Islam and Muhammadanism and they
have preferred the word Islam to Muhammadanism. The former is a more universal concept
than the latter, the truths taught in it being impersonal in origin. This is the meaning
of Sruti in the Hindu or the Sanatan Dharma tradition of India; the sages of the
Upanishads, or of the Srutis, were only discoverers of eternal spiritual truths, which can
be rediscovered by any one else also at any time. But the latter, namely, Muhammadanism,
refers to a person as the sanction for the teachings it expounds. Without the personal
founder, the teaching cannot stand. Such teachings constitute, as I said earlier, the
Smrti dimension of a religion, which is limited by place, time, and history. The Hindus
consider even their Bhagavad-Gita as a Smrti in form though a Sruti in content, since it
deals with ethical and spiritual truths only and not social rules and regulations. In the Hindu tradition, unlike in all other religious traditions, there is a clear
distinction between its Sruti and its Smrti elements. The Sruti stands for the body of
eternal and impersonal truths valid for all times and peoples. And the Smrti stands for
the temporal and the local elements; and because they are temporal and local, they cannot
be universal. And Hinduism emphasizes that they need to be changed age after age, in
response to changing socio-economic conditions. The Sruti is represented by the Vedas
generally, and by the Upanishads particularly. They contain truths of the spiritual
dimension of life discovered by different sages, among whom were many women also. These
truths, like any truth, about the physical world, are eternal and are capable of being
re-discovered by any human being equipped with moral purity and mental penetration. Among
these truths is the innate divinity of man, the unity of God as infinite and non-dual
consciousness, which is the Self of man and nature, man’s capacity to realize this
truth in life, and the availability of different paths to realize God. The Hindu mind
discovered the presence of these truths in every world religion. And the mystics of every
religion, including the Sufi mystics of Islam, apart from the Prophet himself, have borne
witness to these eternal spiritual truths. This is what India calls the Sanatana Dharma of
any religious tradition. The Smrti is represented by the various law books of the Hindu tradition, like Manu
Smrti, Yajnavalkya Smrti, Apasthamba dharma-sutras etc. They deal with rules to regulate
the day-to-day life of people individually and collectively; they deal with subjects such
as food, dress, marriage, inheritance etc. This is what India calls the yuga dharma
dimension of any religious tradition, the dharma relevant for a particular yuga, age or
epoch. The Hindu tradition, even in its orthodox form, provides for the giving up of old
Smrtis and the creation and adoption of new Smrtis. That is why, in the long history of the Hindu tradition, there have been many Smrtis,
but only one Sruti; and in this modern period, the most arresting fact of Hindu life is
the rejection of the authority of the old Smrtis, and the free and fearless adoption of a
new Smrti by the people, in response to the onward march of history and the demands of the
modern age. The age-old experience of the Hindu tradition demonstrates the truth that the
changing of these Smrti elements of any tradition, which become at a later age, what in
Greek mythology is called, procrustean beds, not only will not harm that tradition but, on
the contrary, will only strengthen that tradition, and make it better fitted to achieve
human development. The Hindu tradition recognizes the fact that, with respect to human development and
fulfilment, these Smrti elements of a tradition are like the bark of a tree; as the tree
grows, the bark also must grow side by side; if not, the bark will choke the tree and
destroy it. But a living tree will cast off its old bark and create for itself a new bark
suitable to its growth. With regard to Smrti, in general, this far seeing and orthodox
national wisdom finds beautiful expression in the pithy saying of Sri Ramakrishna
(1836-1886), which presents the essence of Hindu wisdom aptly: ‘The Mughal coins have no currency under the (British East India) Company’s
rule.’ One of the features that helped to sustain the impressive millennia-long continuity of
the Hindu tradition is the general acceptance of this dominance of the Sruti over the
Smrti. This produced two great results, namely, the emergence of a galaxy of mystics and
saints and reformers, and the high respect they commanded from the people, even though
some of them preached openly against several aspects of the teachings of the current Hindu
Smrtis. If, on the other hand, the Smrtis, what in Islam is called the Sariyah, had
dominated the Hindu tradition, these mystics and saints and reformers would have been
silenced or destroyed. In our own time, a Vivekananda (1863-1902) appeared, and he
preached strongly against several beliefs and practices advocated by the Hindu Smrtis,
showing them to be obsolete and enemies of human development and fulfilment; and yet he
was accepted, respected, and honoured even by the orthodox tradition. This stands in sharp
contrast to the tragic fate of several lovable saints and innovators in the wide spectrum
of the Semitic tradition. Islam; Creative versus Stagnant Islam has produced some of the most lovable men and women of God, the Sufis. The
Prophet’s teachings contained inspiration for this God-ward direction of human life,
and mystics began to appear in Islam within a century of his death. The earliest
outstanding Sufi mystic was a woman, Rabia of Basra (717-801 A.D.), who has inspired most
of the later Sufis. She and several other Sufis were monastics, a state of life condemned
by Islamic Sariah or law books. Many of them had a hard time to express their deep-felt
spiritual urges and experiences, for fear of offending the rigid Sariah or fundamentalist
orthodoxy of Islam, which has even put to death some of the noblest among them. This is
the bitter fruit of a stagnant Islam. If Islam were dominated by its creative, by its eternal and universal elements, this
would not have taken place. In the first four centuries of Islam, when it was creative,
these dogmatic and rigid fundamentalist elements had been held in check by the rational,
universal, and expansive spirit of Islam, which made for the flowering of the Islamic
culture and civilization. Since the destruction of Baghdad, there has been an increasing
dominance by its rigid and intolerant Sariah or Smrti elements, and the consequent
exploitation of Islam, as referred to earlier, by power-hungry worldly-minded individuals
to cover their own greed and bloodthirstiness. If Islam is to become creative once again, and help in the human development and
fulfilment of its followers, it has to capture once again the rational and universal
temper of its early period, by taking inspiration from the spirit of
Islam and not from its letter. This rational approach is found in many
early Muslim thinkers. It is expressed in a famous verse by Jalaluddin Rumi, in his
Masnavi, which is treated as only second to the Quran in importance and reverence
(quoted
by Dr. Bhagawan Das in his An ze Quran maghz ra bardastam. Conclusion Such a creative Islam alone will be able to establish happy and fruitful relations with
its sister world religions, and also to become a progressive force in its own secular
field. Islamic conquerors and missionaries have a bad reputation as idol breakers with
respect to other religions. If this is accepted as an essential element of Islam, it will
have to be engaged in this fruitless task till the end of time; and consequently, it will
never be able to establish happy and peaceful relations with other religions, many of
which will continue to use images and symbols. It is good for Islam to engage in another
type of idol breaking, namely, idols of the mind, consisting of prejudices and
prepossessions. This is one of the important disciplines of the scientific method as
expounded by Francis Bacon, who refers to the need for every scientific seeker to free the
mind from the ‘idols of the cave’, from the ‘idols of the theatre’,
etc. etc. In a famous poem, the great Jalaluddin Rumi protests vigorously against this
idol-breaking programme, which applies to all Semitic religious missionaries generally,
and to all Islamic conquerors and non-Sufi missionaries specially. (Masnavi, quoted in
Claude Field’s Mystics and Sufis of Islam, p. 154): Moses, to his horror, heard one summer day ‘Lord’, he said, ‘I would I know Thee, where Thou art, Comb Thy hair, and dust Thy shoes, and sweep Thy room, Moses cried, ‘Blasphemer!’ Curb thy blatant speech! Allah the almighty? Thinkest thou He doth need Miscreant, have a care, lest thunderbolts should break Without eyes He seeth, without ears He heareth, Space cannot contain Him, time He is above. ‘Put to shame, the shepherd, his poor garment rent, ‘Then spake God to Moses: ‘Why hast thou for Me Not for severance it was, but union ‘Hatefullest of all things is to me divorce (of man from man), I made no creation, self to aggrandize, What though the childish tongue trip? ‘tis the heart I see, Top To top of this page In the year 610 (AD), a forty year old merchant named Muhammad , was sleeping in a cave
somewhere in the vicinity of Mecca. Muhammad was awakened during the night and saw the
angel Gabriel surrounded by bright light. Gabriel said, "Recite!" Muhammad was taken aback and awe struck and asked, "Recite what?" Angel Gabriel said, "Recite in the name of the Lord the Creator". Gabriel then endowed Muhammad with the gift of prophecy enabling him to know the word
of God. Muhammad was an illiterate person, who could neither read nor write. Thus his account
of events is not recorded. The actual text of the Quran was not assembled until more than
thirty years later, after the death of Prophet Muhammad. A committee made up of some
people had interviewed some devotees of Muhammad who had heard Muhammad speak.
The committee also relied on bits of written information that the devotees could produce.
The end product of the texts thus put together is known as the Quran. The following email was received on Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:40:45 -0600 Is this true? I thought Hindus are supposed to be kind but Muslims keep saying they
(the Hindus) are terrorists. The Age of Muslim Wars Contemporary global politics is the age of Muslim wars. Muslims fight each other and
they fight non-Muslims far more often than do peoples of other civilizations. Muslim wars
have replaced the cold war as the principal form of international conflict. These wars
include wars of terrorism, guerrilla wars, civil wars and interstate conflicts. These
instances of Muslim violence could congeal into one major clash of civilizations between
Islam and the West or between Islam and the Rest. That, however, is not inevitable, and it
is more likely that violence involving Muslims will remain dispersed, varied and frequent. The age of Muslim wars began as the cold war was winding down in the 1980s. In 1980
Iraq invaded Iran, and the ensuing war produced at least 500,000 deaths and hundreds of
thousands of wounded. At the same time, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan generated
vigorous Afghan resistance, which by 1989 compelled the Soviets to withdraw. This victory
was made possible by American technology, Saudi and American money, Pakistani support and
training, and the participation of thousands of fighters from other, mostly Arab, Muslim
countries. Then in 1990 Saddam Hussein invaded and attempted to annex Kuwait, and the
United States organized an international coalition, including several Muslim countries, to
defeat him. In the 1990s violence occurred between Muslims and non-Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo,
Macedonia, Chechnya, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kashmir, India, the Philippines, Indonesia,
the Middle East, Sudan and Nigeria. Mujahedin fighters from the Afghanistan war were
central participants in many of these conflicts as well as in Muslim terrorist
organizations in countries throughout the world. In the mid-1990s, roughly half the ethnic
conflicts in the world involved Muslims fighting each other or non-Muslims. In one
inventory by The Economist, Muslims were responsible for 11 and possibly 12 of 16 major
acts of international terrorism between 1983 and 2000. Five of the seven states listed by
the U.S. State Department as supporting terrorism are Muslim, as are a majority of foreign
organizations listed as engaged in terrorism. In counter-actions between 1980 and 1995,
the U.S. armed forces engaged in 17 military operations against Muslims. According to the
International Institute of Strategic Studies, 32 armed conflicts were underway in 2000;
more than two thirds involved Muslims. Yet Muslims are only about one fifth of the
world’s population. The "new war" as U.S. administration officials termed the violence that began
September 11, is thus not so new. It is a continuation and escalation of previous patterns
of violence involving Muslims. Earlier Muslim terrorism had, however, been sporadic and in
comparison relatively limited: 299 people killed in the 1983 attack on the U.S. Marine
barracks in Beirut, 270 on Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988, 224 in the 1998 attacks on U.S.
African embassies. Different Muslim groups and states were involved in these incidents.
Beginning in 1993, however, the principal attacks on Americans and American facilities all
appear to have originated with Osama bin Laden. September 11 revealed the existence of his
sizable global terrorist network with cells in perhaps 40 countries and with the expertise
and resources to attempt well-planned simultaneous attacks. Also for the first time, the
network struck with devastating effect within the United States, its actions highlighting
the likelihood of chemical and biological attacks, with the more distant possibility of
nuclear weapons. The age of Muslim wars had come home to America. Responsibility for particular wars undoubtedly varies, with the Sudanese government
responsible for its ongoing war against Christians and the Israeli government provoking
the second intifada with its settlements and ongoing military presence in
the West Bank and Gaza. Tribal. Religious, ethnic, political and cultural divisions within the Muslim world
stimulate violence between Muslims. They also promote violence between Muslims and
non-Muslims because different Muslim groups and governments, such as those of Saudi Arabia
and Iran, compete with each other in promoting their own brand of Islam and have supported
Muslim groups fighting non-Muslims from Bosnia to the Philippines. If one or two states
dominated the Muslim world, which has not been the case since the end of the Ottoman
Empire, less violence would occur among Muslims and, probably between Muslims and
non-Muslims. Related articles Top To top of this page Part of the email we received reads as follows: By way of answers to this email the following questions and the articles were received
by email during February 2003 How would you describe the contents of the following paragraph; can it be described as
the product of perverted sick mind of satan, devil, demon or the teachings of some one
like Jesus the Christ or the Buddha? Can it be acceptable to any decent human mind that
such passages could be from the Bible, or the Quran or the Talmud? And how is one to
describe the people who carry out such instructions – as the soldiers of God or as
the soldiers of Satan or as the disciples of the devil? "Those who do not agree with our way of believing, kill them, wherever you find
them, cut off their heads, with heavy fetters, throw them into blazing fires; pour boiling
water upon their heads, melting their skins." Translation of "The Glorious Quran" Quran 9:5 Quran 47:4 Quran 73:12 Quran 22:19-22:23 Quran 5:51 Quran 5:64 Quran 33:26 Quran 59:2-5 In addition there are also verses in the Quran that clearly indicate that Jews and
Hindus deserve the same murderous treatment. Perhaps no other evidence is more compelling
or stronger than this to establish the basis for the shared experiences and victimization
of the Hindus of India and the Jews of Israel. Quran 98:1-8 Quran 9:73 Islamic murderers and rulers of
olden days Muhammad of Ghazni also looked upon his numerous invasions of India as the waging of a
holy war. Al' Utbi, the historian of Muhammad, describing his raids writes : " He demolished idol temples and established Islam. He captured ...... cities,
killed the polluted wretches, destroying the idolaters, and gratifying Muslims. ' He then
returned home and promulgated accounts of the victories obtained for Islam. ....... and
vowed that every year he would undertake a holy war against Hind " Mahommed Ghori was
actuated by the same holy zeal in his invasions of India. Hasan Nizami, the historian,
describes his work in the following terms : " He purged by his sword the land of Hind from the filth of infidelity and vice,
and freed the whole of that country from the thorn of God-plurality and the impurity of
idol-worship, and by his royal vigour and intrepidity left not one temple standing Taimur has in his Memoir explained what led him to invade India. He says: " My object in the invasions of Hindustan is to lead a campaign against the
infidels, to convert them to the true faith according to the command of Muhammad (on whom
and his family be the blessing and peace of God), to purify the land from the defilement
of misbelief and polytheism, and overthrow the temples and idols, whereby we shall be Ghazis
and Mujahids, companions and soldiers of the faith before God. " Mahommad bin Qasim's first act of religious zeal was forcibly to circumcise the
Brahmins of the captured city of Debul ; but on discovering that they objected to this
sort of conversion, he proceeded to put all above the age of 17 to death, and to order all
others, with women and children, to be led into slavery. The temple of the Hindus was
looted, and the rich booty was divided equally among the soldiers, after one-fifth, the
legal portion for the government, had been set aside. Muhammad of Ghazni from the outset adopted those plans that would strike terror into
the hearts of the Hindus. After the defeat of Raja JaipalinA.D. 1001, Muhammad ordered
that Jaipal " be paraded about in the streets so that his sons and chieftains might
see him in that condition of shame, bonds and disgrace; and that fear of Islam might fly
abroad through the country of the infidels. " "The slaughtering of ' infidels' seemed to be one thing that gave Muhammad
particular pleasure. In one attack on Chand Rai, in A. D. 1019, many infidels were slain
or taken prisoners, and the Muslims paid no regard to booty until they had satiated
themselves with the slaughter of the infidels and worshippers of the sun and fire. The
historian naively adds that the elephants of the Hindu armies came to Muhammad of their
own accord, leaving idols, preferring the service of the religion of Islam. " Not infrequently, the slaughter of the Hindus gave a great setback to the indigenous
culture of the Hindus, as in the conquest of Bihar by Muhammad Bakhtyar Khilji. When he
took Nuddea (Bihar) the Tabaquat-i-Nasiri informs us that: " Great plunder fell into the hands of the victors. Most of the inhabitants were
Brahmins with shaven heads. They were put to death. Large number of books were
found......... but none could explain their contents as all the men had been killed, the
whole fort and city being a place of study. " Summing up the evidence on the point. Dr. Titus concludes : " Of the destruction of temples and the desecration of idols we have an abundance
of evidence. Mahommad bin Qasim carried out his plan of destruction systematically in
Sind, we have seen, but he made an exception of the famous temple at Multan for purposes
of revenue, as this temple was a place of resort for pilgrims, who made large gifts to the
idol. Nevertheless, while he thus satisfied his avarice by letting the temple stand, he
gave vent to his malignity by having a piece of cow's flesh tied around the neck of the
idol. " Minhaj-as-Siraj further tells how Mahommad became widely known for having
destroyed as many as a thousand temples, and of his great feat in destroying the temple of
Somnath and carrying off its idol, which he asserts was broken into four parts. One part
he deposited in the Jami Masjid of Ghazni, one he placed at the entrance of the royal
palace, the third he sent to Mecca, and the fourth to Medina. It is said by Lane Poole that Muhammad of Ghazni " who had vowed that every year
should see him wage a holy war against the infidels of Hindustan " could not rest
from his idol-breaking campaign so long as the temple of Somnath remained inviolate. It
was for this specific purpose that he, at the very close of his career, undertook his
arduous march across the desert from Multan to Anhalwara on the coast, fighting as he
went, until he saw at last the famous temple: " There a hundred thousand pilgrims were wont to assemble, a thousand Brahmins
served the temple and guarded its treasures, and hundreds of dancers and singers played
before its gates. Within stood the famous linga, a rude pillar stone adorned with gems and
lighted by jewelled candelebra which were reflected in rich hangings, embroidered with
precious stones like stars, that decked the shrine..... Its ramparts were swarmed with
incredulous Brahmins, mocking the vain arrogance of foreign infidels whom the God of
Somnath would assuredly consume. The foreigners, nothing daunted, scaled the walls; the
God remained dumb to the urgent appeals of his servants; fifty thousand Hindus suffered
for their faith and the sacred shrine was sacked to the joy of the true believers. The
great stone was cast down and its fragments were carried off to grace the conqueror's
palace. The temple gates were setup at Ghazni and a million pounds worth of treasure
rewarded the iconoclast " The work done by Muhammad of Ghazni became a pious tradition and was faithfully
followed by those who came after him. In the words of Dr. Titus "Mahommad Ghori, one of the enthusiastic successors of Muhammad of Ghazni, in his
conquest of Ajmir destroyed pillars and foundations of the idol-temples, and built in
their stead mosques and colleges, and the precepts of Islam and the customs of the law
were divulged and established. At Delhi, the city and its vicinity were freed from idols
and idol worship, and in the sanctuaries of the images of the Gods mosques were raised by
the worshippers of the one God. " Qutb-ud-Din Aybak also is said to have destroyed nearly a thousand temples, and
then raised mosques on their foundations. The same author states that he built the Jami
Masjid, Delhi, and adorned it with the stones and gold obtained from the temples which had
been demolished by elephants, and covered it with inscriptions (from the Quran) containing
the divine commands". We have further evidence of this harrowing process having been systematically employed
from the inscription extant over the eastern gateway of this same mosque at Delhi, which
relates that the materials of 27 idol temples were used in its construction. " Ala-ud-Din, in his zeal to build a second Minar to the Jami Masjid, to rival the
one built by Qulb-ud-Din, is said by Amir Khusru not only to have dug stones out of the
hills, but to have demolished temples of the infidels to furnish a supply. In his
conquests of South India the destruction of temples was carried out by Ala-ud-Din as it
had been in the north by his predecessors. " The Sultan Firoz Shah, in his Futuhat, graphically relates how he treated Hindus
who had dared to build new temples. ' When they did this in the city (Delhi) and the
environs, in opposition to the law of the Prophet, which declares that such are not to be
tolerated, under Divine guidance I destroyed these edifices. I killed these leaders of
infidelity and punished others with stripes, until this abuse was entirely abolished and
where infidels and idolaters worshipped idols, Musalmans now by God's mercy perform their
devotions to the true God’." Even in the reign of Shah Jahan, we read of the destruction of the temples that the
Hindus had started to rebuild, and the account of this direct attack on the piety of the
Hindus is thus solemnly recorded in the Badshah-namah: " It had been brought to the notice of His Majesty, says the historian, that
during the late reign (of Akbar) many idol-temples had been begun but remained unfinished
at Benares, the great stronghold of infidelity. The infidels were now desirous of
completing them. His Majesty, the defender of the faith, gave orders that at Benares and
throughout all his dominions in every place all temples that had been begun should be cast
down. It was reported from the Province of Allahabad that 76 temples had been destroyed in
the district of Benares. " It was left to Aurangzeb to make a final attempt to overthrow idolatry. The author of '
Ma ' athir-i-Alamgiri dilates upon his efforts to put down Hindu
teaching, and his destruction of temples in the following terms: " In April, A. D. 1669, Aurangzib learned that in the provinces of Thatta, Multan
and Benares, but especially in the latter, foolish Brahmins were in the habit of
expounding frivolous books in their schools, and that learners, Muslims as well as Hindus,
went there from long distances.... The ' Director of the Faith ' consequently issued
orders to all the governors of provinces to destroy with a willing hand the schools and
temples of the infidels; and they were enjoined to put an entire stop to the teaching and
practising of idolatrous worship.. ...Later it was reported to his religious Majesty that
the Government officers had destroyed the temple of Bishnath at Benares. " As Dr.Titus observes " Such invaders as Muhammad and Timur seem to have been more concerned with
iconoclasm, the collection of booty, the enslaving of captives, and the sending of
infidels to hell with the' proselytizing sword ' than they were with the conversion of
them even by force. But when rulers were permanently established the winning of converts
became a matter of supreme urgency. It was a part of the stale policy to establish Islam
as the religion of the whole land. "Qutb-ud-Din, whose reputation for destroying temples was almost as great as that
of Muhammad, in the latter part of the twelfth century and early years of the thirteenth,
must have frequently resorted to force as an incentive to conversion. One instance may be
noted: when he approached Koil (Aligarh) in A. D. 1194, ' those of the garrison who were
wise and acute were converted to Islam, but the others were slain with the sword '. " Further examples of extreme measures employed to effect a change of faith are
all too numerous. One pathetic case is mentioned in the lime of the reign of Firoz Shah
(A. D. 1351—1388). An old Brahmin of Delhi had been accused of worshipping idols in
his house, and of even leading Muslim women to become infidels. He was sent for and his
case placed before the judges, doctors, elders and lawyers. Their reply was that the
provisions of the law were clear. The Brahmin must either become a Muslim or be burned.
The true faith was declared to him and the right course pointed out, but he refused to
accept it. Consequently he was burned by the order of the Sultan, and the commentator
adds, ' Behold the Sultan's strict adherence to law and rectitude, how he would not
deviate in the least from its decrees '. " Muhammad not only destroyed temples but made it a policy to make slaves of the Hindus
he conquered. In the words of Dr. Titus: " Not only was slaughter of the infidels and the destruction of their temples
resorted to in earlier period of Islam's contact with India, but as we have seen, many of
the vanquished were led into slavery. The dividing up of booty was one of the special
attractions, to the leaders as well as to the common soldiers in these expeditions.
Muhammad seems to have made the slaughter of infidels, the destruction of their temples,
the capturing of slaves, and the plundering of the wealth of the people, particularly of
the temples and the priests, the main object of his raids. On the occasion of his first
raid he is said to have taken much booty ; and half a million Hindus, ' beautiful men and
women ', were reduced to slavery and taken back to Ghazni. " When Muhammad later took Kanauj, in A. D. 1017, he took so much booty and so many
prisoners that * the fingers of those who counted them would have tired '. Describing how
common Indian slaves had become in Ghazni and Central Asia after the campaign of A. D.
1019, the historian of the times says "The number of prisoners may be conceived from the fact that each was sold for
from two to ten dirhams. These were afterwards taken to Ghazni, and merchants came from
far distant cities to purchase them ;. . ....and the fair and the dark, the rich and the
poor were commingled in one common slavery. " In the year A.D. 1202, when Qulb-ud-Din captured Kalinjar, after the temples had
been converted into mosques, and the very name of idolatry was annihilated, fifty thousand
men came under the collar of slavery and the plain became black as pitch with Hindus.
" Slavery was the fate of those Hindus who were captured in the holy war. But, when there
was no war the systematic abasement of the Hindus played no unimportant part in the
methods adopted by the Muslim invaders. In the days of Ala-ud-Din, at the beginning of the
fourteenth century, the Hindus had in certain parts given the Sultan much trouble. So, he
determined to impose such taxes on them that they would be prevented from rising in
rebellion. " The Hindu was to be left unable to keep a horse to ride on, to carry arms, to
wear fine clothes, or to enjoy any of the luxuries of life. " Speaking of the levy of Jizyah Dr. Titus says " The payment of the Jizyah by the Hindus continued throughout the dominions of
the sultans, emperors, and kings in various parts of India with more or less regularity,
though often, the law was in force in theory only ; since it depended entirely on the
ability of the sovereign to enforce his demands. But, finally, it was abolished throughout
the Moghul Empire in the ninth year of the enlightened Akbar's reign (A.D.1665), after it
had been accepted as a fundamental part of Muslim government policy in India for a period
of more than eight centuries. " Lane Poole says that "The Hindu was taxed to the extent of half the produce of his land, and had to pay
duties on all his buffaloes, goats, and other milk-cattle. The taxes were to be levied
equally on rich and poor, at so much per acre, so much per animal. Any collectors or
officers taking bribes were summarily dismissed and heavily punished with sticks, pincers,
the rack, imprisonment and chains. The new rules were strictly carried out, so that one
revenue officer would string together 20 Hindu notables and enforce payment by blows. No
gold or silver, not even the betelnut, so cheering and stimulative to pleasure, was to be
seen in a Hindu house, and the wives of the impoverished native officials were reduced to
taking service in Muslim families. Revenue officers came to be regarded as more deadly
than the plague; and to be a government clerk was disgrace worse than death, in so much
that no Hindu would marry his daughter to such a man. " These edicts, says the historian of the period, " were so strictly carried out that the chaukidars and khuts and muqad-dims
were not able to ride on horseback, to find weapon, to wear fine clothes, or to indulge in
betel. . .... No Hindu could hold up his head. ..... Blows, confinement in the stocks,
imprisonment and chains were all employed to enforce payment. " All this was not the result of mere caprice or moral perversion. On the other hand,
what was done was in accordance with the ruling ideas of the leaders of Islam in the
broadest aspects. These ideas were well expressed by the Kazi in reply to a question put
by Sultan Ala-ud-Din wanting to know the legal position of the Hindus under Muslim law.
The Kazi said :— " They are called payers of tribute, and when the revenue officer demands silver
from them they should without question, and with all humility and respect, tender gold. If
the officer throws dirt in their mouths, they must without reluctance open their mouths
wide to receive it..... The due subordination of the Dhimmi is exhibited in this humble
payment, and by this throwing of dirt into their mouths. The glorification of Islam is a
duty, and contempt for religion is vain. God holds them in contempt, for he says, ' Keep
them in subjection '. To keep the Hindus in abasement is especially a religious duty,
because they are the most inveterate enemies of the Prophet, and because the Prophet has
commanded us to slay them, plunder them, and make them captive, saying, ' Convert them to
Islam or kill them, and make them slaves, and spoil their wealth and property '. No doctor
but the great doctor (Hani-fah), to whose school we belong, has assented to the imposition
of jizya on Hindus ; doctors of other schools allow no other alternative but ' Death or
Islam '. " Such is the story of this period of 762 years which elapsed between the advent of
Muhammad of Ghazni and the return of Ahmadshah Abdalli. How far is it open to the Hindus to say that Northern India is part of Aryavarta ? How
far is it open to the Hindus to say because once it belonged to them, therefore, it must
remain for ever an integral part of India ? Those who oppose separation and hold to the '
historic sentiment ' arising out of an ancient fact that Northern India including
Afghanistan was once part of India and that the people of that area were either Buddhist
or Hindus, must be asked whether the events of these 762 years of incessant Muslim
invasions, the object with which they were launched and the methods adopted by these
invaders to give effect to their object are to be treated as though they were matters of
no account? Apart from other consequences which have flowed from them these invasions have, in my
opinion, so profoundly altered the ' culture and character of the northern areas, which it
is now proposed to be included in a Pakistan, that there is not only no unity between that
area and the rest of India but that there is as a matter of fact a real antipathy between
the two. The first consequence of these invasions was the breaking up of the unity of Northern
India with the rest of India. After his conquest of Northern India, Muhammad of Ghazni
detached it from India and ruled it from Ghazni. When Mahommed Ghori came in the field as
a conqueror, he again attached it to India and ruled it from Lahore and then from Delhi.
Hakim, the brother of Akbar, detached Kabul and Kandahar from Northern India. Akbar again
attached it to Northern India. They were again detached by Nadirshah in 1738 and the whole
of Northern India would have been severed from India had it not been for the check
provided by the rise of the Sikhs. Northern India, therefore, has been like a wagon in a
train, which can be coupled or uncoupled according to the circumstances of the moment. If
analogy is wanted, the case of Alsace-Lorraine could be cited. Alsace-Lorraine was
originally part of Germany, like the rest of Switzerland and the Low Countries. It
continued to be so till 1680, when it was taken by France and incorporated into French
territory. It belonged to France till 1871, when it was detached by Germany and made part
of her territory. In 1918, it was again detached from Germany and made part of France. In
1940, it was detached from France and made part of Germany. What is, however, important to bear in mind is that with all their internecine
conflicts they were all united by one common objective and that was to destroy the Hindu
faith. These Muslim invasions were not undertaken merely out of lust for loot or conquest.
There was another object behind them. The expedition against Sind by Mahommad bin Qasim
was of a punitive character and was undertaken to punish Raja Dahir of Sind who had
refused to make restitution for the seizure of an Arab ship at Debul, one of the sea-port
towns of Sind. But, there is no doubt that striking a blow at the idolatry and polytheism
of Hindus and establishing Islam in India was also one of the aims of this expedition. In
one of his dispatches to Hajjaj, Mahommad bin Qasim is quoted to have said: " The nephew of Raja Dahir, his warriors and principal officers have been
dispatched, and the infidels converted to Islam or destroyed. Instead of idol-temples,
mosques and other places of worship have been created, the Kulbah it read, the call to
prayers is raised, so that devotions are performed at stated hours. The Takbir and praise
to the Almighty God are offered every morning and evening. " After receiving the above dispatch, which had been forwarded with the head of the Raja,
Hajjaj sent the following reply to his general: " Except that you give protection to all, great and small alike, make no
difference between enemy and friend. God, says, ' Give no quarter to infidels but cut
their throats '. Then know that this is the command of the great God. You shall not be too
ready to grant protection, because it will prolong your work. After this give no quarter
to any enemy except those who are of rank." Muhammad of Ghazni also looked upon his numerous invasions of India as the waging of a
holy war. Al' Utbi, the historian of Muhammad, describing his raids writes: " He demolished idol temples and established Islam. He captured ...... cities,
killed the polluted wretches, destroying the idolaters, and gratifying Muslims. ' He then
returned home and promulgated accounts of the victories obtained for Islam. ....... and
vowed that every year he would undertake a holy war against Hind " Mahommed Ghori was
actuated by the same holy zeal in his invasions of India. Hasan Nizami, the historian,
describes his work in the following terms: " He purged by his sword the land of Hind from the filth of infidelity and vice,
and freed the whole of that country from the thorn of God-plurality and the impurity of
idol-worship, and by his royal vigour and intrepidity left not one temple standing Taimur has in his Memoir explained what led him to invade India. He says: " My object in the invasions of Hindustan is to lead a campaign against the
infidels, to convert them to the true faith according to the command of Muhammad (on whom
and his family be the blessing and peace of God), to purify the land from the defilement
of misbelief and polytheism, and overthrow the temples and idols, whereby we shall be Ghazis
and Mujahids, companions and soldiers of the faith before God. " Related articles http://www.islamreview.com/articles/bioofmuhammad.shtml Go to www.google.com/ Top To top of this page
An Essay (abridged) By Aditi Chaturvedi India and Israel destined for
true friendship There is perhaps no other pair of nations on earth, which share such similar dangers,
concerns, hopes and aspirations for the future of their people, as do India and Israel.
There is an incredible amount that these two countries have in common, when one goes
beyond the superficial differences. Just as today, the Hindus of India are fighting for
their survival in the very land of their origin and forefathers, so too are the Jews of
Israel confronting the very same threats to the nation that is theirs by historical and
religious birthright. Hindus and Jews both face exactly the same danger; Islam. And it is
at this very point where so many of the similarities between the Indian nation and the
Israeli nation converge in an incredibly reflective manner. Islam is not a new threat to either the Hindus or the Jews. The most amazing aspect of
all is that it was these very two religions that were sought to be exterminated by the
founder of Islam; Prophet Mohammed, over 1300 years ago. The history of Arabia is littered
with the blood of the Jews and Pagan Pre-Islamic Arabs, who were none other than Hindus.
For every Jewish Medinah, there was a Hindu Mecca, and both of them in their own turns
were decimated and desecrated by Mohammed's followers. These were the two belief systems
that Mohammed stole all his religious concepts from, and then proceeded to distort so
thoroughly, that all elements became entirely unrecognizable. It is his legacy that the
Muslims of the present day plan to live out in its minutest bloody details. The millennia
old legacy of hatred and violence against Jews and Hindus, is very much alive and kicking
in the heart of thousands of committed Mujahideen, willing to martyr themselves any day,
with a suicide bomb or two. The similarities between the present and past situations of these two countries in
reference to Islam, is too striking to overlook or dismiss as mere coincidence. Let us
look at a few examples. It has become increasingly evident over the years, that the Pre-Islamic Pagans who were
massacred by Mohammed were none other than Hindus. Islam began with the genocide of these
Hindus. They were exterminated thoroughly along with every possible trace of Vedic culture
in Arabia. The "Idolaters" , "Unbelievers", or "Kafirs" as
Muslims fondly refer to Hindus, had to bear the brunt of the vociferous amounts of
violence unleashed by the prophet Mohammed in his bid to attain complete power over Arabia
and beyond. If there is one word that spells Anathema to the devout Muslim, it is the word
"Hindu". The incomparable hatred and hostility that Allah's followers bear for
Hindus, find their source in the wellspring of intolerance; the Quran: Quran 9:5 Quran 47:4 Quran 73:12 Quran 22:19-22:23 The Islamic viewpoint of the Jewish faith is just as sharply antagonistic and
decisively hostile. Prophet Mohammed originally was inspired by many of the concepts of
the Jewish faith. However, being an illiterate person, he completely distorted the meaning
of those concepts and presented them in a twisted way that suited his own needs at the
time. When it became clear to him that the Jews of Arabia were wealthy, he tried extortion
and persuasion to win influence over them; but when it became obvious that Jews are
incredibly committed to their faith and willing to protect it with their lives, the
Prophet was enraged. The Jews were apparently a rather large thorn in the flesh, in view
of Mohammed's imperialistic ambitions of bringing Arabia to his feet through religion.
Thus, Quranic injunctions that directly exhorted Muslims to kill Jews and treat them as
born enemies, became the order of the day. Every Jewish settlement in Arabia was raided,
and thousands of Jews massacred in cold blood. Some examples of Quranic verses that speak
of the volumes of hatred, held against Jews by Muslims, are provided below: Quran 5:51 Quran 5:64 Quran 33:26 Quran 59:2-5 In addition there are also verses in the Quran that clearly indicate that Jews and
Hindus deserve the same murderous treatment. Perhaps no other evidence is more compelling
or stronger than this to establish the basis for the shared experiences and victimization
of the Hindus of India and the Jews of Israel. Quran 98:1-8 Quran 9:73 Apart from each having suffered the shared history of Islamic genocide, Hinduism and
Judaism are clearly the two ancient most religions surviving on earth today. Millennia
before Christanity or Islam were born, Israel was the land of Judaism and India the land
of Hinduism. In contemporary times as well, the histories of both Israel and India run
closely paralell. Both were the victims of Islamic occupation for centuries together. And
just as thousands of Hindu wonders such as Taj Mahal were plundered and rechristened by
the Muslims in India, so too were scores of Jewish structures such as the beautiful Temple
on the Mount, plundered and grabbed by the marauding hordes of Islam. What stands out
about the history of these two peoples however, is the fact that all along they have
stubbornly clung to their roots and painstakingly maintained their pride in their ancient
languages, customs, traditions and spiritual practices. In spite of all odds, the greatest
disasters have always somehow strengthened the Jewish people's faith in themselves.
Hinduism, which has suffered the longest record of inhumane crimes and genocide against
it, by the Muslim invaders, still brims over with the unalterable confidence of its
believers. The unshakeable foundations of both of these massive spiritual traditions have
braved many earthquakes and landslides, but never caved in. Trees which are entrenched as
deeply in the soils of India as Hinduism and Judaism in Israel, simply cannot be uprooted. Judea and Samaria are consistently referred to as "West Bank" in a deliberate
attempt to distance the region from its Jewish past. The Indian state of Kashmiri is presented as "the land of the Great Islamic Sufi
Tradition". Not a mention is made of the fact that Kashmir has been home to Hindus
for over 5000 years. The Hindu sect of Kashmir Shaivism was exerting its beneficial
influence all over India, millennia before Islam was even born! Hinduism is constanly
referred to as an alien religion, brought to India by the conquering hordes of "White
Skinned Aryans" wheras the Muslim invaders are referred to as the "harbringers
of culture, arts and peace". The Mughal rule of India was the bloodiest and most
wretched period of India's history. During this period thousands of temples, idols,
universities, libraries, etc were razed to the ground and millions massacred. Thousands of
Hindu palaces and treasures like the Taj Mahal were captured, defaced and renamed with a
Muslim name. And yet the Aryan Invasion Theory which has been thoroughly rescinded and
rejected by the world, still holds hypnotic sway over the minds of India's Journalists. However, this type of unfair portrayl has not gone unnoticed and added to both nations'
experience of decades of unrest, rioting and murder by Muslim mobs . Consequently Jews and
Hindus feel more and more threatened and frustrated in their own lands. As always, this
direct attack on Judaism and Hinduism has only motivated their respective followers to
reassert their individual and collective confidence in their ancient spiritual traditions.
The desire to reassert what is their rightful pride in land, culture and religion has
awakened in the heart of the common Israeli and Indian. The results are obvious, the
unabashedly Jewish Likud Party was voted into power in Israel and the political party that
represents the re-emergence of Hinduism; the BJP, has been voted into power in India.
These developments have of course caused untold heartburn and anger in Pro-Islamic
circles. Therefore the media onslaught has begun in dire earnest. European, American and
Islamic media have started unleashing their tide of anti-Jewish and anti-Hindu
bombardments. What has really set the alarm bells ringing internationally however, is the
emerging closeness between the two nations. As events unfold, this close relationship between India and Israel is bound to deepen.
The Islamic influence which threatens to undermine the tolerance and harmony of the world,
is increasingly focusing on these two nations as targets. Considering the import of shared
experiences, ideas and situations that links Indians and Israelis, it is about time that
solid chains of friendship were forged. Although politics may slow down the process, if
the people of both countries reach out , an invaluable friendship can be created and
nurtured between India and Israel. Note: The Works: "The Glorious Quran" by Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall,
"The Meaning of the Glorious Quran" by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, "Mohammed"
by Maxime Rodinson, and Muhammad" by Martin Lings have been used to compose this
article http://www.islamreview.com/articles/bioofmuhammad.shtml Ishaq:551 “Another victim was Huwayrith. He used to insult Muhammad in Mecca. Tabari VIII:180 “Also among those eliminated were Ikrimah bin Abu Jahl Tabari VIII:181 “The Messenger ordered six men and four women to be Ishaq:597 “When the Apostle returned to Medina after his raid on Ta’if, Ishaq:316 “Following Badr, Muhammad sent a number of raiders with Tabari IX:76 “Malik has reported to me that you were the first from Ishaq:308/Tabari VII:65 “When the Apostle was in Safra, Nadr was Tabari VII:85 “Muhammad killed many Quraysh polytheists at Badr.” Tabari VII:101/Ishaq:483 “Sallam’s wife came out and we told her that .Tabari VII:112/Ishaq:372 “When a blind Jew became aware of the presence Ishaq:564 “The Muslims stole our goods and divided them. Their spears pierced us
not once but twice. Tabari VIII:22 “Hassan was with the women and children. A Jew passed by and began
to walk around his settlement. There was no one to protect them while the Apostle and his Companions were at
the Meccans’
throats. So I said: ‘Hassan, this Jew is walking around. I fear he will point out our
weakness while
the Muslims are too busy to attend to us. So go down to him and kill him.” Ishaq:464 “The Jews were made to come down, and Allah’s Messenger imprisoned
them. Tabari VIII:40 “The Messenger commanded that furrows should be dug in Tabari VIII:38 “The Messenger of Allah commanded that all of the Jewish Bukhari:V4B52N281 “They took Khubaib to Mecca after the battle of Tabari VIII:90 “Abu Basir went out with his companions. When they Quran 2:195 “Spend your wealth for the cause of Allah (fighting non-Muslims). Bukhari: V9B87N127 “The Prophet said, ‘I have been awarded victory by Tabari VII:133/Ishaq:387 “When Muhammad saw Hamzah he said, Hadith Tabari VIII:96 “A raiding party led by Zayd set out against Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet had their men killed, their children All sura are from the English Quran of M.M.Pickthall, Hadith are traditions relating to the words and deeds of Muhammad. http://www.islamreview.com/ Kaaba a Hindu temple? Top To top of this page |