Salam all......can someone give me the verses where Allah refers to people who accept the Quran partially or believe in some verses and ignore others? Cheers Peace, Respect. 3532 Then We inherited the Book to those whom We selected from Our servants. Subsequently, some of them wronged themselves, and others upheld it partly, while others were eager to work righteousness in accordance with the will of God; such is the great benefit. Whenever I read this verse, for some reason, it reminds me of the followers of Rashad. Isn't it true that they uphold The Qur'an partially? Without 9128, 129? Because non-muslims do not uphold it at all and muslims uphold it 100%. God knows best. Zelim vam Bozji Mir.

Salam Omari, If there are any particular articles that you feel need to be put back up, PM me and I will see if it can be done.

The Rabbi is concerned that the same attacks Wafa is doing on Islam can be done to Jews and Judaism. Yup good. I really don't understand why people are attacking Islam and Christianity while excluding Judaism. Judaism is the first Abrahamic religion whom all other Abrahamic religion orginated from. Without Judaism there would be no Christianity letalone Islam. These religions copied their content from Judaism. One could argue that Judaism has indirectly killed more people than Hitler ever did and I'm talking about the attrocities being committed by right-wing Christian morons and 'Muslims' added up all together. Timur was a Mongolian Islamist tool AKA warmongerer that annilihated the South-Asian population. He reduced their population by five percent through mass-killing. If Qur'anists are going to criticise Sunnism then don't forget to mention Judaism, a religion whom Sunnism copied its own content from including its ethics and morals. The Hadiths and the Talmud are very similar. As a Muslim I'm not bound to respect Jewish prophets or Christian prophets. Sure I myself can make fun of religion too. I'm not a slave to Judaism nor Christanity. I believe in freedom of speech and attacking religion is a part of freedom of speech. Attacking Islam, Christianity and Judaism should be legal in the Arab countries once the regimes and Islamists are removed for good. To cooperate with Muslim haters is typical Israeli mentality. Israel for example has no problems in cooperating with fascist European right-wing political parties. As long as they target Muslims, Israel seeks a cooperation. Whenever it starts to attack Jews that is when Israel begins to play the anti-semite card. Israel has many fans that are Nazis and Fascists. It is not a joke. An example is Breivik that is a huge supporter of Hitler as well as Israel. He does this mainly due to his hatred towards Muslims. Many of Israels fanbase consist of people similar to Breivik. These Europeans are nothing but scum and terrorists. Hilariously the main reason to why they support Israel is because they hate Muslims and not because they care about the Jews. They have forgotten what Saladin did to their own cowardly European leader i.e Raynad Chattalon AKA Al-European Al-Hmar Al-Irhabi. The Arab countries use an Eagle as their coat of arms. This is to serve as a middle-finger to these same Europeans. Ironically these European right-wingers pretend to be 'civilized' but they are the opposite of civilization. Countries such as Iraq, Syria and even Palestine has a much older civilization than all these idiotic Europeans combined will ever do. It is not suprising to why they oppose Palestine, the country whom several ancient civilizations took place in.

We may not live to see a thousand years from now with our existing system...but definitely we can project how it will look like if we do. Views regarding saddam today are divided on wether he is a "hero" or a "Villain"...but I can imagine many will give him the status of hero, just like the fella in This Show. It is known fact that he killed. It is known fact that he maimed. It is known he used his position to further his personal desires. It is known fact he died saying the Shahada, and therefore to many Sunni Iraqis ''a courageous muslim''. It is known fact he fired scud missile into Israel. It is known fact that he claims to be a uniter of all arabs and muslims. He is practically given the status of the "Shahaba" as the video depicts. No wonders if in 1400 years time he will be called one of the "Ashraf El Mursaleen"...Saddamism is rising by the day, and people may soon shout....Saddamism is the fastest rising religion in the world....and they will fight whenever he is insulted...they will burn flags whenever he is depicted and they will say I sacrifice my Mom and dad for you...Oh Saddam and of course the generation born in that era (1400 years from now), will support him because it is being passed down to them with intimidation...and they blindly refuse to resort to historical accounts.

Peace all, I See three ways in this discussion 1- First the discussion of our natural history and how our ancestors behaved and other like species. ( having sex for example, other animals have, our ancestors also and so do we) 2- Secondly, what would be JUST and ALLOWED for us to do , in the sense of giving recognition to justice. (for example you can kill somebody which have killed your child). 3- Third, what if we decide to ascend tha natural behavior (for example trying to survive is natural but what if I become ready to die in the fight for rescuing the life of other people or you decide to forgive someone who has killed your child). These I consider divine. They transcend the natural and the just. I see the discussion of eating and what we eat in all three parallels. I am not quite sure if I have chosen the best examples to convey the idea. peace

brother decepticus i read my comment and there is a few typos and missing Nots etc etc, i hope you can make sense of it, i will try to fix it tomorrow as I have to go to bed it is almost 2 am good night Salaam and thank you very much for your interesting argumentation. Don't worry crystal clear P ! I am going to print it right now (it is 11 pm here in Tunisia roll ) and to re-read it along with the text of Dr Mansur. Nevertheless, there's something telling me that truth is somewhere between you both P I just found that his book is published on free-minds! Just a question before going to sleep is it wise to apply grammatical, syntax, "balagha" etc. rules on a text that existed long before these rules were invented? I still did not get a convincing answer from whoever I asked! For DCS123 J'allais entreprendre une petite traduction mais gr?ce ? Dieu, AhmedBahgat s'en est charg? ? merveille et s'est m?me pay? le luxe de d?cortiquer, critiquer, confondre Dr Mansur! Y est-il arriv?? Je ne crois pas mais son argumentation est tr?s valable. Je ne pense pas qu'il y ait une traduction du livre de Dr Mansur (

Thank you

Peaceful Muslim Shukran jiddan ya akhi!! I never even thought of those other ayaat in reference to women being witnessses!! What you said makes sense. I always guard against sterotypes, so I just did not want to conclude that this ayaat is speaking to some type of deficiency of women. After all, it says the other can remind her if the one errs. So if women were naturally or consistently deficient, one could not remind the other. But, at the same time, women and men are not the same. To counter attack the Islaam detractors on this women issue, I can't pretend that men and women are the same. Now, some may still take issue and say, why can't two women be witness and no man be present? I also noticed or think I noticed that, the verbs used in that portion of the ayaat do not seem to be feminine verbs. On second look, maybe there is no feminine dual pronoun suffix in arabic. But it does say iHda which is the feminine for waHad? And tudhkkira is the feminine for yudhikkir I believe? At anyrate, this is to be understood as dealing with financial transactions. And I just noticed, all of this comes after the issue of the one owing the debit being unsound. If the one owing the debt is sound, are the other witnessess still needed? Because the scribes is putting it all in writing. Are the two men witnesses or one male and two females really acting as guardians for the unsound party to the transaction?

. Shaheed means to raise one's self above the worldly ways to lead a life inscribed by Allah and stand tall as model amongst your umma and a witness over their deeds both in this world and in the hereafter. Peace .

Much appreciated Born Again....i'll read it and get respond back to it

I might be wrong but I dont think he is kissing them into mouth but in the chins......its just that this picture making it seems like he is kissing them in the lips or mouth...and its duration was maybe less than a second but when frosen by a photos in the manner like this it may seem like an act...he is an older man maybe he wasnt able to target the chin precisely or missed the traget in the hurry whatever, i am of opinion one should not consider this as a sexual offence....SEE that chapter 24 its very very dangerous to accuse without witnesses( and this photo surely isnt a witness) best wishes

Peace, Whay has ''Wafaat'' been translated in various ways? Does it mean Death literally? If not then how do you explian it's uses in other verses? 'Wafa' simply means 'to take' and is almost always linked to the subject of death. It relates to the soul being taken as a result of death. With regards to Jesus, we can see he is clearly dead from his own use of the word in 5117.

Why did he marry more than one wife? He was poor. It wasn't as if he was a king who by marrying multiple wives was supporting these women. His life was just as much in jeaoperdy as the lives of several men who were dying by fighting the pagans, so if he died, more than one woman all of a sudden would become a widow. Why? What's the reason?

Peace, I believe this verse is referring to when we are in war with the disbelievers (yea yea, obvious I know). I don't believe it is referring to any war that we'd be in today as bombs or guns would be used, and it seems "smiting necks" would be hand to hand combat with swords or something along those lines. Also remember that War is only incumbent on believers in self-defense, there is no other justification for war (muslims cannot go around kidnapping people and then decapitating them, this makes no sense according to the verse, plus its not self-defense). I therefore look at the situation in the following hypothetical manner, The believers are being attacked simply because they declare that their God is one God, assuming that they've bore the attacks with the utmost patience; they've exasperated all other diplomatic options, and now the Disbelievers have openly declared war upon them. They therefore, are permitted to defend themselves in combat ( I assume it would be hand to hand combat in the past). Thus, even if the verse did read necks (which it probably doesn't, I don't know arabic), the believers would be told to strike at the necks of those who are attacking them, which to me seems to be an efficient way of killing people in hand to hand combat. However, I don't believe this is what the verse is really saying as it doesnt make much sense with regards to the "release them" part, as they'd be dead. Oh Gosh, I'm rambling again. All in all, I look at the FM translation as being the most appealing to my logic. However, I dont see why beheading in actual combat wouldn't be justified, how is it any worse than dropping an incendiary bomb on a group of people? At least with beheading you're only killing the person attacking you, there are no Civilian casualties. Furthermore, even with the traditional translation, I dont see where it would justify capturing people, and then decapitating them. PEEAAAAAACE

Peace, Not all Christians are idol worshipers, although a majority are, as are most Muslims. God bless you

Do Angels literally have wings? ( 351 )

Iraqi Shias Slaughtered on their holy day http//news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39908000/jpg/_39908165_blast300bbc.jpg http//news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39907000/jpg/_39907719_streetscene300bbc.jpg http//news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39907000/jpg/_39907803_ambulance_300ap.jpg http//news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39907000/jpg/_39907787_cart_300ap.jpg http//news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39907000/jpg/_39907711_wounded300bbc.jpg http//news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39907000/jpg/_39907975_headinhands_300ap.jpg http//newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39908000/jpg/_39908657_wounded_203bodyap.jpg http//news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39907000/jpg/_39907717_smoke300bbc.jpg Where are the Arab and Muslim masses protesting in the streets of the Middle-East, America, Canada, Europe and the world?????? Only complicit silence that has become the heroine of this God-foresaken part of the world....This is disgusting, disgusting and disgusting! We don't want people just saying how bad and horrid the attacks were but Muslims and Arabs who will for once in their dreary existence have the courage and conscience to condemn such inhuman aberrations not only in words but action as well. On this day of Ashura may God remember the innocent men, women and children slaughtered by rabid monsters masquerading as "Muslims". Omari

Selam I know this is an old thread but was searching around for ritual prayer in Quran and the title fit the bill. Was reading this and wanted peoples reaction/comments on it. Thanks Quote from Aidid Safar (mental bondage) A religion is a concept requiring rituals or rites focused on physical icons enabling people to see what they worshipped. This singular attribute, according to the Reading, marks it as a religion. After all, who would choose to show the Glory of God in something tangible and manmade? A Deen on the other hand, is a way of life sanctioned either by men or by God Himself. When God says, ?you shall not serve except Me?, it means that we are to observe only what is sanctioned by Him. These sanctions were revealed to the various prophets. In the Reading it is known as Deen-nil-lah or God?s prescribed way of life. Hence, we find many passages in the Reading instructing people to obey God and obey the messengers so that they not be diverted from God?s prescribed sanctions under the pretext of a particular religion. God?s deen requires His servants to manifest their faith in practical acts of charity and deeds. His way is a series of decrees that must be translated into actions as the way of life. For example, God?s covenant revealed through all the prophets requires His servants to observe the decrees listed below. Anyone can undertake to fulfil their covenant with God by upholding these prescribed decrees without consulting the priests of any religion ?Your Lord has decreed that you shall not serve other than Him. ?You shall honour your parents for as long as they live, one of them or both of them. ?You shall not speak harshly to them nor mistreat them. ?You shall speak amicably to people and do not utter any lies. ?You shall regard the relatives, the orphans, and the poor. ?You shall not kill your children from fear of poverty. ?You shall not commit adultery, for it is a vice. ?You shall not kill anyone, for taking of life is made forbidden. ?You shall not touch the orphans? money except for their own good. ?You shall give full measure when you trade and weigh with an equitable balance. ?You shall not accept anything that you yourself cannot ascertain. ?You shall be perfectly honest when you serve as a witness, even if it is against yourself, your parents, or your relatives whether the defendant is rich or poor. ?You shall give to charity from God?s provisions, which He has entrusted to you. ?You shall strive in the path of God (fi-sabi-lil-lah) against those who strive against you, but not aggress. ?You shall fulfil your commitments and humble yourself with those who are humble. ?You are not to be arrogant, nor to walk in pride. God does not love the boastful, the arrogant. Be humble as you walk and lower your voice. ?Eat from everything that is lawful and good, and do not follow the step of the Devil, he is your ardent enemy. He directs you towards vice and evil and to invent lies and attribute them to God. This is part of the prescribed way and the wisdom sanctioned by God in the Reading. People, from the times of Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad have been committed to these values. They observe these values in an orderly manner (as a deen). Common sense tells us that in order to achieve results these values must be translated into deeds. Worship or ritual prayers are irrelevant. Therefore, religion and deen are distinctly different. People are expected to serve the Creator by observing the prescribed orders. He has decreed for you the same deen enjoined upon Noah and what is revealed herein, and what was decreed for Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. You shall uphold the one deen and not be segregated. It is simply too difficult for the idol-worshippers to accept what you advocate. (4213) Be penitent to God, observe Him, uphold your commitments and do not fall into idol-worship. And do not be with those who change the deen into religion (shi-ya-?an) each sectarian is happy with what they have. (3031-32) Traditionally, the word shi?ah is translated as sect. Sects have long been associated with principal differences in a religious context. God however, has no interest in sectarianism. All the religions in this world are the same. The faithful congregate. They form groups to a common cause in public. They worship and pray ritually to different shapes of idols be it a wall, cross, star, crescent or a square house or other images made from the materials which themselves owe their existence to the true God. That is the extent of difference between religion and the deen as far as the Reading is concerned. Peace

France votes to ban signs of faith 10-02-2004 By Tom Heneghan http//www.middleeastuk.com/culture/art/sanders/people26.jpg PARIS (Reuters) - France's National Assembly has voted overwhelmingly to banish religious emblems from state schools, a measure meant to keep tensions between Muslim and Jewish minorities out of public classrooms. Deputies on Tuesday voted 494 to 36 to ban Muslim headscarves, Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses and to expel pupils who insisted on wearing them. It will not apply to private schools. The government says the ban does not single out any religion, but cabinet ministers acknowledge its main targets are the Islamic headscarves and anti-Semitic remarks from Muslim pupils that teachers say have become more frequent. "After this debate and the magnitude of this vote, both the republic and its secularism have been reinforced," Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin told deputies. "What is at issue here is the clear affirmation that public school is a place for learning and not for militant activity or proselytism," Assembly Speaker Jean-Louis Debre said. It was the first reading of the bill, which must go to the Senate and then back to the National Assembly for final approval in mid-March, which now should be just a formality. The key passage of the law, which schools would apply from September, reads "In primary and secondary state schools, wearing signs and clothes that conspicuously display the pupil's religious affiliation is forbidden." "This will not solve the problem," said Lhaj Thami Breze, president of the large Union of French Islamic Organisations (UOIF). "Who will decide what's conspicuous and what's not?" He said the UOIF would urge schoolgirls to opt for discrete head coverings such as bandannas or caps and hoped these would be accepted at school. "It's unfortunate that the whole nation is so preoccupied with a simple piece of cloth," he remarked. Nicholas Perruchot, a centrist UDF deputy who voted against the bill, said "The law will not be applicable and the disputes will not diminish." RISING RACISM, ANTI-SEMITISM The ban has wide public support in France, which has the largest Muslim and Jewish minorities in western Europe. Leaders of France's five million Muslims denounce it as discriminatory and likely to stigmatise veiled schoolgirls. It has provoked criticism from Muslim and Christian leaders abroad, including Pope John Paul. Jewish leaders have been split over the ban, with those in favour seeing it as a bulwark against the militant Islam they see spreading in poor neighbourhoods with mixed populations. Lord Greville Janner, vice-president of the World Jewish Congress, said in London it was a sad decision which "disgracefully punished the entire Muslim population and other religious communities". Before the vote, Education Minister Luc Ferry said France had witnessed a "spectacular rise in racism and anti-Semitism in the last three years" and the ban would help to keep classes from dividing into "militant religious communities". He said the law would also make clear pupils could not object to or skip classes for religious reasons. Teachers have complained in recent years of problems with Muslim pupils who interrupt history classes to deny the Nazis slaughtered Jews, boycott classes on human reproduction because they are "immodest", or refuse to attend physical education. It was not clear if France would also ban Sikh turbans, which the country's 5,000 Sikhs say are not religious symbols. In Kuala Lumpur, about 40 supporters of the fundamentalist Islamic PAS, the biggest opposition party in mainly Muslim Malaysia, protested against the law outside the French embassy chanting "Long live Islam" and "Crush the infidels." http//www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=455846?ion=news

I can't access the arabic articles....apart from the one entitled ''Hadith'' all the rest come out in what looks like Russian script. Any advice. Omari