69 million page views

In search of al-Buraq aka the winged horse part two

Reader comment on item: Uncovering Early Islam
in response to reader comment: I am very insulted

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Oct 27, 2014 at 15:07

Our dear Adil wrote this little gem

I am very insulted that you can lie about my Muhammad so casually,

Who cares

you really need to find proof that he was so cruel and evil.

Sirat rasul Allah, al-Maghazi and al-Tarikh by al-Tabari it is your sources that tell us that he was an Arabian warlord and caravan raider and that he married a 6 year old girl when he was 53 years old and he owned slaves and told his followers to behead and kill in the name of his god and he and his Allah are supposed to collect 1/5 of the loot collected from your poor Hindu ancestors and his Allah ordered him and his followers to terrorize yes terrorize non Muslims now would you like me to go on and on?

Your ancestors the Hindus what did they do to your Arab masters to deserve what happened to them at the hands of the muslim invaders of India?

Also, you are trying to discredit Islam by destroying the legacy of Muhammad. You are trying a character assassination.

Then prove me wrong or get rid of the literary sources of your Arab masters that tell us kuffar about all these disasters deal?

Yes, he battled for land, but he did not murder people left and right. He did not rape women, he caared for his servants and slaves

Then he owned slaves right? so is it right to own slaves? and could you tell the annoying Reza Aslan that he was wrong when he said that prophet Quthm never owned slaves deal?

and helped them finish hard tasks, he was good to his 9 (or 11) wives and his guests,

Ali Dashti tells us that Abul Qasim aka Quthm had 23 wives and concubines so how come Allah allows your likes to only have 4 wives and not prophet Abul Qasim? I thought that he was an ordinary dude?

What a disaster

he treated people with mercy

So iqtoloo al-mushrikeen is treating people with mercy?

(except on the battlefield.

Why battlefields/ i forgot he ain't the Buddha for sure but this makes him an Arabian warlord

Also, just because someone has a weapon does not mean that the person is warlord,

Thank you for proving my point that he was a warlord and for sure not the Buddha or the Christ

it means that the person feels that he or she needs to protect his/herself.

Why fight in the first place and why would his so called Allah allows wars and fights and killing and beheading when he Allah can change the hearts and minds of human beings unless there is no Allah or Allah is not really omnipotent so which one is it?

Leave islam and be free from all of this nonsense

PS: were you able to locate a Buraq? Hint: Check the Persian section at the British Museum!


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".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 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.)