2 readers online now  |  69 million page views

General Ayyub: In Islam slavery is no big deal for Muslims as they accept they are themselves slaves of Allah

Reader comment on item: Still Asleep After Mumbai
in response to reader comment: for Mr. Plato

Submitted by Plato (India), Feb 25, 2009 at 11:13

General Ayyub Khan, you wrote:

General, despite your scholarship of the Arabic language and Islam I notice that you have shied away from quoting any Islamic source or correcting the translations or giving the contexts of what you claim I have misquoted or taken "way out of context". I will quote extensively from Muslim sources in this post and I hope you will come back and correct me where I am wrong, especially where I am way out of context

>>Good good.....and i pray that india remains united lest we deal with an onslaught of Sikh and other refugees.<<

I am sure you would love to see Sikh and Muslim refugees streaming into Pakistan. But that is only a fond hope. During all the years of the Sikh militancy how many Sikhs did you welcome? With Muslims being targeted in some riots how many Muslims did you welcome into Pakistan. We welcomed more than 10 million of your fellow countrymen, both Muslims and Hindus, when your army rampaged through your own country, East Pakistan.

>>I was never really bothered by whether indian were bitter or not about Pakistan creation. In the end we have our country and that is most important.<<

Those Indians who were bitter are I am now sure a relieved lot. If Muslims in Pakistan cannot live with themselves how could they ever be part of India?

>>I can't think of any religions that are not peaceful and tolerant. That is more than what i can say about some followers who distort things to serve their own nefarious designs.<<

Oh really? What about the Israeli Jews of old, who thought they were the chosen people of Allah and could do as they wished, occupying territory that they thought was promised to them after decimating the locals? What about Christianity which has the inquisition, and the genocide of the Red Indians on its conscience? And most of all what about a religion that tells its followers to:

Koran 009.029 YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Now use your context shotgun and shoot this verse down.

Koran 009.033 YUSUFALI: It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it).

Or use your mistranslation blunderbuss and demolish the above verse

>>Which is why they were trying to kidnap foreigners and were vandalizing shops (i.e. destroying livelihoods)<<

As I said the Koran had descended into the souls of the Lal Masjid brothers. For the Koran tells true believers in Islam that non-believers are cursed creatures of Allah and fit only for hell. For the "scholars" of Lal Masjid knew that the foreigners they were kidnapping were unbelieving infidels i.e. people of dar al harb about whose property Allah says:

008.069 YUSUFALI: But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good: but fear Allah: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Kidnapping for ransom has a venerable history in Islam. In the first raid successful ordered by Muhammad during a holy month netted him some plunder from vandalizing a Meccan caravan along with two kidnapped men whom he held back as ransom and for the safety of two of his followers (Ibn Ishaq, Life of Muhammad, Page 287-88. The publication is available from Oxford University Press, Pakistan).

After the famous (infamous, really, as it was the result of another attempt by Muhammad to capture booty from a Meccan caravan peacefully passing several marches away) battle of Badr the captives were ransomed.

>>I'm not sure who told you they were true Muslims. Even the religious parties were condemning their actions.<<

So who is a true Muslim? The one who follows the verse:

002.256 YUSUFALI: Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things

Or the one who follows these verses:

009.033 YUSUFALI: It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it).

009.029 YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

>>Dont forget that they were smuggling dangerous weapons into a holy place. That automatically renders their credibility subpar.<<

General you seem to forget that the calls to war itself are given from the pulpit of mosques which are considered holy places. When the prayer leader recites a verse like 9:111 or 009.041 why should stocking weapons in mosques be an unholy act? (YUSUFALI: Go ye forth, (whether equipped) lightly or heavily, and strive and struggle, with your goods and your persons, in the cause of Allah. That is best for you, if ye (but) knew.)

>>Apart from watching bollywood garbage, yes i engage in said activties. If in their book that makes me a kaffir, then i guess i am one in their book. <<

Good secular attitude. But the problem of their book remains; because you too claim to follow the same book or books. For instance this common book of yours tells you this world is not meant for amusement as there are better amusements awaiting you elsewhere.

006.032 YUSUFALI: What is the life of this world but play and amusement? But best is the home in the hereafter, for those who are righteous. Will ye not then understand?

021.016: Not for (idle) sport did We create the heavens and the earth and all that is between!

>>They arent speaking on my behalf or representing my country or its policies. Therefore i'm just simply not worried or concerned.<<

Your country is succumbing to THEIR policies. Soon they will speak on your behalf too unless your wake up to what is ahead and stop teaching hate to your children for the sake of religion and country.

>>Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.

Even though that is highly mis-translated, I must say that I agree with the verse 100% <<

That verse is a translation by Yusuf Ali. Perhaps you could give me your rendition of it and enlighten me on its true in context meaning

>>Especially to those who wage war on Muslims or on our countries. But this is no dar al-harb. >>

The SWAT Muslims are waging a war on your government Muslims, and the government Muslims have caved in. It seems to me the whole of Pakistan is dar al harb

>>If those whack-jobs think its crusades time, then they are in for a un-pleasant surprise.<<

Those whack-jobs have provided the Pakistan government with an unpleasant surprise in SWAT and nearby areas. The whack-jobs crusade is succeeding.

>>The Lal Masjid brothers probably had this verse engraved in their hearts.

Funny how you call them 'brothers'<<

Funny you did not know there were two brothers in charge of the place. One of them dead in the military action and the other tried to sneak out dressed in drag and was caught.

>>Are you their spokesperson? Something we should know here? LoL.<<

The something you should know is that sitting Turkey you have lost touch with what is happening in your homeland.

>>For the record, I supported the operation against the misguided nut-jobs who armed themselves and took people hostage –inside a holy place. They got what they deserved.<<

The rest of the world also supported the operation. But calling them misguided nut-jobs is being deluded. They were misguided by the Koran, your holy manual for all times and all places.

>>And who gave them the authority or writ to declare who is and who is not a kaffir? Most of those men and women were illiterate and never went to school. Who are they declare who is kaffir and who is not? They are nobodys. Rather, they WERE nobodys.<<

Don't despise people who cannot afford to go to school and be educated. Your prophet was uneducated and illiterate. Yet Allah chose him to be a guide and messenger for all mankind.

And this illiterate man did declare who is kafir and who is not. Was he a nobody?

These people are merely following in the footsteps of the prophet and his sunnah.

>>Fighting for the cause of Allah (fi Sabeel Allah) does not mean 'right to bear arms' and bloodshed. It can be done just by helping a man in a wheel-chair cross the street safely. Or by keeping the plight of the poor close to our hearts (and doing best to alleviate their pain). Many ways, actually.<<

Again good secular thinking. But this verse (9:41) is talking about going forth lightly or heavily equipped. To help a man in a wheel chair you don't need to be lightly armed with an AK -47. If your traffic is chaotic you will probably need a heavily armed tank to clear the way for the wheel chair. So is this verse talking about such situations, my dear general?

>>As far as i know, no schools have been bombed in Kashmir. I'd be more worried about indian held kashmir where the indian army repeatedly imposes curfews, harassment of locals, and occasional incidents of rape.<<

I was talking about Indian held Kashmir. The insurgency has been going on for nearly 20 years now. All those things you mention can be multiplied many fold in regions facing insurgency in Pakistan. How many schools has the Indian army bombed? How many Kashmiris have the security forces beheaded. Leaders from Indian Kashmir are free to come and badmouth India in Pakistan or get married to your women. Our media freely report what is happening in Kashmir and the guilty get punished. The record on this is patchy but we are getting our act together on the human rights score. You may have read about the police filing a case against the army about a recent incident. You army would have fried the police for such an act.

>>That is a lot more sick than blowing up a school<<

You don't seem to consider it sick that a nuclear-armed government with the seventh largest army in the world caves in to the dictates of the rag-tag Taliban who blow up schools to prevent girls from getting an education, kill the teachers who defy their orders, behead kidnapped people who had gone to help the destitute people.

MINGORA, Pakistan (AFP) – Schools reopened in Pakistan's Swat valley on Monday but attendance was extremely low despite a fledgling truce between the government and insurgents, officials said.

"Our schools reopened today. The attendance was very poor. Only up to 10 percent attended," Swat education ministry official Sher Afzal told AFP.

Thousands of Islamist hardliners have spent nearly two years waging a terrifying campaign to enforce sharia law in Swat, beheading opponents, bombing girls' schools, outlawing entertainment and fighting government forces.

Last Monday, the government signed an agreement with a pro-Taliban cleric agreeing to enforce sharia in the valley in the hope of ending the insurgency.

Schools reopened a week earlier than scheduled after the winter holidays, but Afzal said many parents were unaware of the new term start date.

[http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090223/wl_sthasia_afp/pakistanunrestnorthwestdealeducation_20090223093905 ]

>>Kashmir is a disputed territory. The people want liberation from indian army grasp. How can you compare that to Swat which is facing an insurgency by local and many foreign fighters? Swat isnt an international disputed territory<<

We consider the problem there a separatist movement. You have your own separatist movement in Balochistan apart from SWAT having dropped out of your government's control.


Eastern Balochistan

Western Balochistan

Northern Balochistan

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balochistan_(region) ]

>>Your logic makes no sense.<<

It will make sense if you look inwards and take a dispassionate view of what is happening in your country.

>>The Hindu mobs thrashed those poor girls and now the Ram Sene is being thrashed all over the media and goons have been charged and will be tried soon.

Hmmm. Good to know.<<

It is sickening that one of the largest armies in the world turned tail from the murderous Taliban and left the hapless citizens in the hands of the criminal Islamists.

>>Maybe in conservative areas they would be chastized or beaten. But if you go to Lahore, Karachi, Sialkot, Islamabad, Rawalpindi or even parts of Peshawar or Quetta ---that is far from the truth.<<

The question is how long will it remain far from the truth. The truth of SWAT is only about 300 kilometres from Islamabad.

>>You have a very distorted image of Pakistan. There are many conservative people in the country but in most cases, such behaviour would just attract stares or maybe frowns.<<

Unfortunately sitting in India that is the only image I am getting of Pakistan. Reading some of your newspapers online only reinforces that image.

>>I dont know what u meant by Islamistan –but if you are referring to countries with Muslim populations then i suggest you travel a bit more. Just based on my experiences in Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Bahrain, Kuwait, Dubai, --and yes even Iran --- i can say with confidence that your post is a pack of lies.<<

Can you say with confidence that this UN report is a pack of lies (it mentions all the Muslim countries you have mentioned):

According to the UN in 2002:

"The report of the Special Rapporteur ... concerning cultural practices in the family that are violent towards women (E/CN.4/2002/83), indicated that honour killings had been reported in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, Punjab, the Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey, Yemen, and other Mediterranean and Persian Gulf countries, and that they had also taken place in western countries such as France, Germany and the United Kingdom, within migrant communities."[11][12]

>>its an old news and the culpulrits are jailed.

People in Pakistan are also demanding that senator Zehari be kicked out of senate and Pakistan Peoples Party. Nevertheless, we all believe its a shame and should never happen again.

We also in Pakistan have sisters/wives/daughters and it bothers me too.<<

Spoken like a good secular person.

>>And it bothers me even more when i see Palestinians kids being slaughtered by Israel using American weapons. We Pakistanis are ashamed on the act of those Baluchi Pakistanis<<

Does what Muslims are doing to Muslims in Dafur bother you as much as it bothers you about Palestinian casualties? Check the numbers killed by Israel since its sixty years of existence and what Sudan has managed to do in just six years.

Did it bother you when Saddam massacred the Kurds or Hafez Assad the Muslim Brotherhood?

>>Are American ashamed? Are indian ashamed by honour killings in their own country?<<

For an answer read our newspapers online when such incidents occur.

>>İ wonder how many cases go un-reported? You are acting like your police force doesnt have its fair share of corruption.<<

Plenty could be going unreported. And our police have more than its fair share of corruption. But there is no institutionalised corruption like that of your military in Pakistan. Our democracy though flawed is a working one and the police is dealt with severely when exposed.

>>While i agree that our education sector needs more attention, i highly find the report to be ridiculous. I have seen many indians use the same report to try showing how 'hateful' us Pakistanis are to our neighbours.<<

General you have obviously not gone through the report but are free with the accusation that it is ridiculous. The report is very meticulous with extensive references to the chapter and page numbers of where the hate material appear in your school texts.

>>Let it be known that the guy who wrote that report had major beef with the education minister at the time.<<

What is germane is not whether the writer had a beef with the minister but whether, like people who quote the Koran are accused of, he also distorted the material he found in the school textbooks. As a Pakistani it will be easy for you to check. Please come back and tell us what you found.

>> Another article written by an opportunist. Pakistan was created for Muslims of hindustan to be able to practice freely and live freely. <<

Muslims in India practice Islam more freely than in Pakistan. I have seen TV shots of mosques surrounded by armed police for people to pray during Eids. Your shias are massacred regularly. Your Ahamadiays are not even considered Muslims and I am told they cannot travel for Haj. "…This was given institutional form in Ordinance No. 20 of 1984, which came into effect on April 26, 1984, and forbade Ahmadis from describing themselves as Muslims, from using any Islamic terminology to describe any of their buildings or from using the azan or public call to prayer. Ahmadis who were convicted of violating these prohibitions could be punished by fines or prison sentences of up to three years. Ahmadis were disenfranchized unless they agreed to register with the electoral authorities as non-Muslims. These restrictions resulted in the spiritual leader of the Ahmadi, Mirza Tahir, leaving Pakistan for London…. [http://www.faqs.org/minorities/South-Asia/Ahmadis-of-Pakistan.html ]

In India our Ahamadiyas practice their version of Islam freely and are proud citizens of the country.

>>We also have minorities who arent Muslim and Jinnah asked for them to be respected and be as free. I live by what Jinnah taught anyways....not the misguided madrassah people.<<

What Jinnah asked for died with him. What is left of Jinnah's secular dream for Pakistan? Minorities are second class citizens now and they will become dhimmis liable to pay the jiziya when full sharia is imposed on the country. That may happen sooner rather than later. Swat is just the trailer.

>>No it doesnt. And Nabay SAWS did not have any relations with her at that rage. You are just using the typical (passe) smear tactic.<<

It is not I who is using smear tactic. It is the revered Bukhari and other greats of Islam. I quote just two hadith:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234
Narrated Aisha: The Prophet engaged (married) me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. ………. Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Sunan Abu Dawood Vol3 Bk36 N0 4917
Then they brought me to the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) and he had sexual intercourse with me . I was nine years old.

It is also known that Aisha was eighteen when the prophet died and she had lived with him for about nine years. So even if you work backwards you arrive at the same figure for Aisha's age at marriage.

>>So i guess india isnt a civilized country. Why do parents marry their 7 year old girls to dogs?<<

Some girls are even married to trees, frogs etc. The reason it is more civilized than what happens in Islamic countries is because they cannot have sex with the little girls unlike the old men who marry nine-year-old kids. Also in most cases the girls go on to have normal marriages later.

>>You must be joking me. You took that verse way out of context. If you understand Arabic, i can even post the exact verse (just ask)<<

I am not joking. What is way out of context? I do not understand Arabic but give me the context and enlighten me on how enlightened Islam is about slave girls. And while you are about it you could also give me the context to show us that keeping female sex slaves is anathema in Islam.

023.005 YUSUFALI: Who abstain from sex,
023.006 Except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame,

033.050 : O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee; ….

033.052 YUSUFALI: It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for (other) wives, even though their beauty attract thee, except any thy right hand should possess (as handmaidens): and Allah doth watch over all things.

Also you may check out the game the Rasul played with Maria the slave and his wife Hafsa the result of which was a few verses in the Koran.

>>And as you are aware, slavery in Islam is completely forbidden. That is why Islam was so popular in Africa ---as well as among many dalit hindus who later converted to Islam.<<

I am aware of no such thing. But I am aware of this verse in the Koran:

004.092 YUSUFALI: Never should a believer kill a believer; but (If it so happens) by mistake, (Compensation is due): If one (so) kills a believer, it is ordained that he should free a believing slave, and pay compensation to the deceased's family, unless they remit it freely. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you, and he was a believer, the freeing of a believing slave (Is enough). If he belonged to a people with whom ye have treaty of Mutual alliance, compensation should be paid to his family, and a believing slave be freed. For those who find this beyond their means, (is prescribed) a fast for two months running: by way of repentance to Allah: for Allah hath all knowledge and all wisdom.

Unless slavery was practiced and it was commonplace why would Allah give such an instruction as in 004:092?? Also notice that only believing slaves can be freed to atone for such crimes as compensation. Unbelieving slaves are worth far less in Allah's eyes so freeing them is not sufficient compensation.

>>So the most powerful person in your country isnt even an indian citizen? How odd. This woman who doesnt even speak fluent hindi, hated indian food, wore miniskirts everyday, and remained silent over indian army support for tamil tiger terrorists ----most powerful person in the country? Strange realities.<<

She is an Italian Catholic woman who is now an Indian citizen under the Indian constitution. She can now become the prime minister, president or whatever her citizenship rights entitle her. She can also wear miniskirts if she so wishes. Most leaders from the south cannot speak even the broken hindi of Sonia. But Sonia speaks fluent English like the South Indians.

The Tamils of the country do not just remain silent on the Tamil Tigers but demand the Indian army support them (for your information the Indian army once went in support of the Sri Lankan army against the Tamil Tigers and got its fingers burnt). These are the strange realities of India. As they say 'it happens only in India'. And we are proud of our multi-racial, multi-cultural, multi-hued, multi-religious, multi-almost-everything country and its harmless idiosyncrasies.

>>Now can a Christian or Hindu in your country take this oath? Will they be allowed to swear by the 'corrupt' Bible or the Ramayana with its human and monkey gods.

If there is a candidate with credentials and strong backing –i dont see why not.<<

Can you back this claim of yours by quoting the constitutional provision allowing non-Muslims to occupy such posts?

>>We've had a woman prime minister twice (she did do an awful job though)<<

One good landmark in an otherwise dreary political landscape.

>>A black man with a Muslim father is the US President. The world is full of surprises.<<

Will Pakistan surprise us with a Hindu or Christian as prime minister?

>>And please dont refer to the bible as corrupt (even if you are trying to be a wise-alec). I take offence to it.<<

Not so fast. Your taking offense I mean. Check out these verses in the Koran:

005.017 YUSUFALI: In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every - one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things."

005.072 YUSUFALI: They do blaspheme who say: "Allah is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.

005.073 YUSUFALI: They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

006.148 YUSUFALI: Those who give partners (to Allah) will say: "If Allah had wished, we should not have given partners to Him nor would our fathers; nor should we have had any taboos." So did their ancestors argue falsely, until they tasted of Our wrath. Say: "Have ye any (certain) knowledge? If so, produce it before us. Ye follow nothing but conjecture: ye do nothing but lie."

Now it is a fact that the Bible says Allah (god) is Christ the son of Mary. So tell me General, if you respect the Bible so much are you willing to contradict this central truth of the Bible which is the exact opposite of the Koran which says Allah has no partners? Which is corrupt, the Bible of the Koran? If the Bible is not then most certainly the Koran is corrupt.

>>Or maybe you are dis-illusioned? Learn more about Islam.<<

Or is it that you have no answer??

>>I already explained why. But as usual you are fast asleep and not maintaining a strong focus. It's most unfortunate, and a very bad habit you have.<<

The focus, General, is on why Pakistan's Hindu population fell drastically whereas Indias Muslim population outpaced the Hindus'. This is what you wrote (italics): Some moved to india and some willingly converted.

Very true General. Spot on!

>>You also have to understand that in 1947 Pakistan's general population was MUCH smaller than it is today. So obviously over time the numbers will change one way or the other –especially if the Muslims are having more children than the hindus are..These numbers I dont know.<<

Here is a UN report: The ten countries which will contribute most to world population growth over the next 30 years are India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Indonesia, United States of America, Bangladesh, Zaire, and Iran - in that order!

According to the most recent (medium variant) UN population projection India's population will increase by an additional 401 million between 1995 and 2025 - China will grow by "only" 260 million (see Table C1_3). The next largest contributor to world population growth - surprisingly - is not Indonesia which has the third largest population among developing countries, but Pakistan.[http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/Papers/gkh1/chap1.htm ]

The numbers are just a simple internet search away. And you say I am out of focus. Focus on the numbers of the UN report and you will see that India's population growth is nothing to laugh at compared to Pakistan's. What the numbers prove is that your Hindu population went down because as you rightly said at the beginning they either converted (because they were shown in no uncertain terms like the prophet showed, sword in hand when he conquered Mecca, how superior Islam was compared to idol worship) or those who loved their idols more than the all-merciful Allah decided to hike all the way to India.

On the other hand in India the Muslims continued to be Muslims as the Hindus were not interested in proving their superiority even when they had the upper hand and they continued to prosper and grow along with the Hindus. The Indian Muslims became ministers, presidents, chief justices, leading scientists, great sportsmen and women, great entertainers, billionaires. And now they have bettered their Hindu brethren by winning three Oscars. And the Hindus are ecstatic. There has been nothing over the airwaves or the newspapers over the last few days except adulation for Allah Rakah Rahman and Resul Pookutty, both Muslims.

>>You think Hindus have a great sense of family planning? Why do you think there nearly a billion of us?

Well – your country is huge. It is inevitable<<

You lost focus now, General. The focus is on why there are so few Hindus remaining in Pakistan as against the growing number of Muslims in India.

>>The Field Marshal was prophetic. You are beginning to 'eat' each other now aren't you?

İn a sense, yes.<<

I hope Swat will drive some sense into your ruling establishment.

>>Wonderful!! Quote a Saudi mullah (of all people). I only needed to read a few lines of that garbage to close the window and shudder.<<

The Saudi Mullah makes you shudder? Now we are getting somewhere. Does the Koran not do that to you when you read it. You should, the Koran wants you to shudder when you read it, for it says:

039.023 YUSUFALI: Allah has revealed (from time to time) the most beautiful Message in the form of a Book, consistent with itself, (yet) repeating (its teaching in various aspects): the skins of those who fear their Lord tremble thereat; then their skins and their hearts do soften to the celebration of Allah's praises. Such is the guidance of Allah: He guides therewith whom He pleases, but such as Allah leaves to stray, can have none to guide.

And my skin did tremble when I read these verses:

004.056 YUSUFALI: Those who reject our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire: as often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the penalty: for Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.

You would think that such sadistic and excruciatingly cruel punishment is something that can wait for a far off judgment day. But Bukhari tells us different. The prophet was quite capable of imitating Allah's punishment:

"O Allah's Apostle! Give us shelter and food. So when they became healthy they said, "The weather of Medina is not suitable for us." So he sent them to Al-Harra with some she-camels of his and said, "Drink of their milk." But when they became healthy, they killed the shepherd of the Prophet and drove away his camels. The Prophet sent some people in their pursuit. Then he got their hands and feet cut and their eyes were branded with heated pieces of iron. I saw one of them licking the earth with his tongue till he died." Bukhari 7. 71.58

As a general you must have seen some pretty bad stuff. But if you could read the kind of punishment the Koran and sahih hadith has in store for unbelievers and those who wage war against the prophet, and did not shudder, then you are made of really stern stuff.

But don't think badly of your prophet. He was only carrying out Allah's orders in this verse:

005.033 YUSUFALI: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

>>I dont subscribe to the wahhaby cult or their mentality. Even 99% Wahhaby and deobandis will condemn slavery.<<

The Wahaby opinion makers, the sheikhs of Saudi Arabia, find nothing wrong with slavery as the Koran finds nothing wrong with it either. Where did you get your figure of 99% going against what the Koran allows i.e is not haram like pork, alcohol and interest are haram?

>>A key trait of Islam is that before God we are all equal. That is why in Mosques – a janitor, a taxi driver and a businessman will pray side by side in submission.<<

Wrong again, General. Keep your focus on what the Koran really says! Even the prophets are not equal before Allah. Read:

002.253 YUSUFALI: Those messengers We endowed with gifts, some above others: To one of them Allah spoke; others He raised to degrees (of honour); to Jesus the son of Mary We gave clear (Signs), and strengthened him with the holy spirit. If Allah had so willed, succeeding generations would not have fought among each other, after clear (Signs) had come to them, but they (chose) to wrangle, some believing and others rejecting. If Allah had so willed, they would not have fought each other; but Allah Fulfilleth His plan.

About discrimination among ordinary people Allah has this to say:

006.165 YUSUFALI: It is He Who hath made you (His) agents, inheritors of the earth: He hath raised you in ranks, some above others: that He may try you in the gifts He hath given you: for thy Lord is quick in punishment: yet He is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

In the next verse Allah divides Muslims into two categories. Those who strive with their wealth and their life are ranked higher than mere sit-at-home believers.

009.020 YUSUFALI: Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with might and main, in Allah's cause, with their goods and their persons, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah: they are the people who will achieve (salvation).

The verse below Allah divides people into clean (Muslims) and unclean (unbelievers) ones.

009.028 YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. …

The Koran also brings discrimination against half of humanity with verses 2:228 and 4:34. One giving men a stature higher than women and the other allowing men to violate the dignity of women by allowing wives to be thrashed if they fear disloyalty.

002.228 YUSUFALI: ….. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.

004.034 YUSUFALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, …... As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

Islam institutionalized for ever discrimination based on social position i.e.slaves and the free, possessions, willingness to go on jihad, cleanliness (spiritual/physical) and gender.

>>Islam condemns racism and slavery in all their forms.<<

Instead of race Islam uses gender and religion to discriminate. The gender part have I already demonstrated above. The basis for discrimination based on religion is clearly enunciated in:

004.092 YUSUFALI: Never should a believer kill a believer; but (If it so happens) by mistake, (Compensation is due): If one (so) kills a believer, it is ordained that he should free a believing slave, and pay compensation to the deceased's family, unless they remit it freely. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you, and he was a believer, the freeing of a believing slave (Is enough). If he belonged to a people with whom ye have treaty of Mutual alliance, compensation should be paid to his family, and a believing slave be freed……

Freeing an unbelieving slave is of no use because he is less valued than a believing slave. This is clear from the first ordainment about believing slaves having to be freed in expiation for killing a free believer by mistake.

>>Islam is a universal religion meant for all nations without distinction. It has no colour or racial prejudice. Greater Arabia was a bastion for slavery and war and then Islam brought peace and prosperity.<<

If Greater Arabia was a bastion of slavery what do the following verses prove?

004.024 YUSUFALI: Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property….. [Women in your possession can be lawfully used for sex]

033.026 YUSUFALI: And those of the People of the Book who aided them - Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror into their hearts. (So that) some ye slew, and some ye made prisoners. [Banu quraiza women and children were sold off as slaves]

004.036 YUSUFALI: Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good- to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are near, neighbours who are strangers, the companion by your side, the wayfarer (ye meet), and what your right hands possess: …… [This verse assumes that slave-holding is commonplace]

009.060 YUSUFALI: Alms are for the poor and the needy, and those employed to administer the (funds); for those whose hearts have been (recently) reconciled (to Truth); for those in bondage and in debt; …. [Again the verse assumes that people in bondage is commonplace]

It is obvious from these verses that the Allah has no problem with slavery as He had with pork, alcohol and interest. And slavery is intimately intertwined with Islamic law (of marriage, sale and inheritance).

>>Too late – you already made it long. And you are incorrect from inside and out.

If you want to talk about Islam, then ask the question and I will answer them. But what I wont do is argue against garbage posted on "Islam watch" and other propoganda websites that take verses from our Holy Book way the hell out of context. I read and understand classical (foos'ha) and colloqial (Egyptian and Syrian) dialect of Arabic. Throw some verses at me and I'll be happy to prove my point.<

If you consider what I have posted to be plagiarized 'garbage' from a Christian-zionist site you need not reply. But if you think you can refute what I have written using your knowledge of classical and colloquial Arabic I will be happy to stand corrected. I have thrown enough verses at you for a day's work. Now prove your point or points.

>>Learn how to argue in a proper manner.<<

I am always eager to learn, especially about propah manners from a General. I am waiting.

>>Kafirs just means a non-believer. But Islam doesnt discriminate its own people and dividing people into castes/categories.<<

Women are a degree below men as Allah tells us in 2:228. Allah tell us in verse 6:165 quoted above that some Muslims have ranks above others. In verse 4:92 Allah tells Muslims that believing slaves have a value higher than unbelieving ones. So is this discrimination or not?

>>Non-Muslims to us are just non-Muslims.<<

You have missed out many verses from the Koran, General. Stay focused on what the Koran is really telling you: 9:28 told you that non-Muslims like me are unclean. We not just non-Muslims, we are unclean people. Check out the verses that tell you non-Muslims are not just unbelievers but worse than beasts and also deaf, dumb and without intelligence, and like panting dogs (8:55, 7:176)

>>No big deal. Unless you ask some fundamentalist nut job. Judaism and Christianity have their own fair-share of nutjobs who view the 'different' in a negative way.<<

Now you are back to the old trick of trying to show Islam shining by bringing in the nut-jobs from other religions. They do not explain the nut-jobs in your religion who are legion. The Muslim fundamentalist nut-jobs have all those verses I quoted to throw at you if you tell them they are nuts.

>>Or the Koran telling Muslims that women are a degree below maen:

False. Find a new source.<<

Now you have me rolling on the floor. What new source should I find apart from the Koran. Are you claiming that 2:228 is an interpolation in the Koran?? Tauba, tauba.

>>Paradise lies at the feet of the mother. How could we consider females lower than men?<<

At the feet of mothers, not of wives. You may not consider them lower than men, but the Koran sure does in 2:228 and 4:34.

Ouch. That could be painful. You can quote these ancient laws as much as you like and no Hindu will tell you that it is taken out context or misunderstood or mistranslated (except the RSS, VHP, Ram Sene types).

>>I agree.......same is the case with other religions. We all have our fair share of whack-jobs.<<

Focus. Focus. You missed the core. Muslims always say, just as you have been telling me that I have taken verse 'way out of context'. Read what I said again, no Hindu except the 'whack-jobs' will hide under the context hijab like Muslims always do with verses they do not like or can't explain.

>>And are we trishul-weilding saffron-robed whackos that you see on your TVs?

İn university i had enough exposure to indian hindus.....the answer is no.<<

Unfortunately I can't say that about some of my Muslim friends.

>>And what about Hindus and Buddhists?

İ have never heard of buddhists in Pakistan. Hindus are still there, but the numbers are very low. Most of them are just farmers and live in their own small communities.<<

What happened to the Buddhists? Read:

Buddhism in antiquity

The region that is today known as Pakistan once had a large Buddhist population, with the majority of people in Gandhara (present day North Western Pakistan and Eastern Afghanistan) being Buddhist. ……There are many archaeological sites from the Buddhist era in Swat.…………….

Buddhism was also practiced in the Punjab and Sindh regions.

Gandhara remained a largely Buddhist land until around 800 AD, when the Pashtun people invaded the region from Southern Afghanistan and introduced the Islamic religion.

Most Buddhists in Punjab reverted to Hinduism from 600 AD onwards. Buddhism was the faith practiced by the majority of the population of Sindh up to the Arab conquest by the Umayad Caliphate in 710 AD.

Buddhists live in Indian Kashmir to the east of the Line of Control. ….. There are no significant Buddhist populations in Pakistan proper.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_in_Pakistan ]

I don't know whether to feel sorry for you or for the Buddhists who once inhabited what is now Pakistan. They have been so thoroughly cleansed by Islam that you are not even aware that your forefathers probably belonged to that gentle religion.

>>İndia is a huge country and our region saw many conquests and different cultures and religions. In the end ---if what you say is true –then its a good thing. In both our countries there are extremists who embarass our name...but the masses are just regular people who dont view everything in religious perspective. Just hard-working people (and some dishonest people) who just do what they gotta do to live and raise family –like all humans.<<

Now you sound like a honest-to-goodness secular liberal.

>>We both seem to be secular minded people. So lets just leave it at that. I am a proud practicing Muslim till the day I die –but i view all humans as equals.<<

You may view all humans as equals. But the Koran does not as the many verses I have quoted prove. Prove me wrong.



Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to General Ayyub: In Islam slavery is no big deal for Muslims as they accept they are themselves slaves of Allah by Plato

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2021 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)