Qrratugai/leavanay zalmay vs Dinosaur khan.

[Dinosaur Khan]

I challenge all the views of Qrratugai and Leavanay Zalmay on islam. It will not be primarily a game of presenting, sources, refrences and evidences, just a debate of views yielded from our own brain. though it is choice to present sources for making point convincing and heavy.
I hope you two will accept the challenge of such unknown member on intellectual debate.

[شمله ور خراساني]

I challenge all the views of Qrratugai and Leavanay Zalmay on islam. It will not be primarily a game of presenting, sources, refrences and evidences, just a debate of views yielded from our own brain. though it is choice to present sources for making point convincing and heavy.
I hope you two will accept the challenge of such unknown member on intellectual debate.

I am with you. However, I do not have high expectations from Qrratugai. Especially since I saw her replies to the ahlul sunnah wa al jam'ah thread I made. I think she usally just keeps arguing for the sake of argument rather than re-examining them in the light of the critique posed to them.

[Dinosaur Khan]

Following are the challenges

1) God exists

2) Islam is the best religion for disciplining and socializing ones life.

3) it is best religion for women

4) Islamic punishments are valid, appropiate and effective

[Khushal Khan Khattak]

Dino, you have my support as well, though, here you said:

Following are the challenges

1) God exists

Dude, if we could prove that, then there would be no atheists or non Muslims.

How do you propose on proving the existence of God?

[tor_khan]

I challenge all the views of Qrratugai and Leavanay Zalmay on islam. It will not be primarily a game of presenting, sources, refrences and evidences, just a debate of views yielded from our own brain. though it is choice to present sources for making point convincing and heavy.
I hope you two will accept the challenge of such unknown member on intellectual debate.

Having a reasoned thoughtful debate is one thing, but do you think that starting a thread as an open personal challenges is helpful? It's a declaration of an openly hostile combat and is really about personal issues rather than anything that goes towards Pashtoon betterment.

Not necessary when bombs are going off in Peshawar, the Taliban is raising its ugly head in Swat again and NATO forces are leaving behind a mess in Afghanistan.

Your priorities and your reasons for debate are all mixed up.

[Roshina]

Having a reasoned thoughtful debate is one thing, but do you think that starting a thread as an open personal challenges is helpful? It's a declaration of an openly hostile combat and is really about personal issues rather than anything that goes towards Pashtoon betterment.

Your priorities and your reasons for debate are all mixed up.

Yes. It's obvious that neither he nor Sangar is willing to actually hear a different perspective, but both think that they're here only to challenge.

Well, I'm cool with that. They just have to prove their points, that's all. I'm used to this - been doing it the last 8 years, lol. I was once in his shoes, too, mind ya Thought I could prove people wrong and all with having looked at only ONE interpretation of a certain guideline and having analyzed only ONE view.

I am with you. However, I do not have high expectations from Qrratugai. Especially since I saw her replies to the ahlul sunnah wa al jam'ah thread I made. I think she usally just keeps arguing for the sake of argument rather than re-examining them in the light of the critique posed to them.

OMG! :D The feeling coudln't be ANY more mutual, bro! Wah! I think you don't have any good points or support for your claims, and you think I don't; I think it's useless to get into a discussion with you because you're not willing to hear what I've to say, and you think it's vice versa.

Yep, the feeling's mutual: I expect nothing positive, tolerant, worth-reading to come out of your posts at all, and you expect the same of me.

[Roshina]

Following are the challenges

1) God exists

2) Islam is the best religion for disciplining and socializing ones life.

3) it is best religion for women

4) Islamic punishments are valid, appropiate and effective

Yes, we know you believe this. Now, try expounding on each one. Prove them. And as far as women are concerned, what exactly do you define as "best religion"? I don't doubt that NO religion that came before the 19th century sees women as equal partners of their men counterparts, but when you say "the best for women," it implies that IF Islam is bad, then all the others are even worse. See, THAT, I don't like.

And we've already talked on the punishments in Islam... one of my focuses tends to be on those who leave Islam. Why should they be killed? And, please, don't say, "Well, in other religions, it's no better! they're to be BURNT when they leave other religions!"

No, two wrongs don't make a right. If it's wrong in one, it's wrong in the others, too. But why kill apostates? (Note: This punishment for apostasy is NOT in the Quran.)

So, where do you wanna go with this? You wanna prove God exists? Go ahead. I think you'll be doing the world a huuuuuuuuuge favor, trust me. People have been debating this since human evolved into what she/he is today!

[شمله ور خراساني]

OMG! :D The feeling coudln't be ANY more mutual, bro! Wah! I think you don't have any good points or support for your claims, and you think I don't; I think it's useless to get into a discussion with you because you're not willing to hear what I've to say, and you think it's vice versa.

Yep, the feeling's mutual: I expect nothing positive, tolerant, worth-reading to come out of your posts at all, and you expect the same of me.

Well, you spread lies against companions of the prophet saying they denied rights of inheritence from his children which is clearly a Shi'ite fabrication. It is common knowledge the the prophets heritage is Islamic knowledge no piece of land or any such thing.

You just use void arguments and blatant lies which have been refuted centuries ago. How can one discuss anything with someone who does things you do on regular bases?

[Dinosaur Khan]

I am neither islamic scholar nor i have any qualification on islamic studies. But i have God-gifted active brain, so naturally the creation (my Brain) incite me to defend the God's (creator of my brain) religion.
I dont need to Quote some one else thinkings on the points i mentioned above.
I am purely relying on my intellect. My biological processor will counter the arguements.

[Roshina]

Well, you spread lies against companions of the prophet saying they denied rights of inheritence from his children which is clearly a Shi'ite fabrication.

Um... if i'ts a Shiite fabrication, then why does it appear in Sunni hadiths? Check out, for instance, Sahih Bukhari:

Allah's Apostle said, "Our property is not inherited. Whatever we leave, is Sadaqa, but the family of (the Prophet) Muhammad can eat of this property.' By Allah, I will not make any change in the state of the Sadaqa of Allah's Apostle and will leave it as it was during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle, and will dispose of it as Allah's Apostle used to do.

- Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 546.

and SahihMuslim:

“...So Abu Bakr refused to hand over anything from it to Fatima who got angry with Abu Bakr for this reason. She forsook him and did not talk to him until the end of her life.”
- Sahih Muslim, Book 19, Number 4352

Last I checked, both Bukhari and Muslim were Sunni sources.

It is common knowledge the the prophets heritage is Islamic knowledge no piece of land or any such thing.

This is exactly my view. And when I read the hadith in which Abu Bakr denied Fatima her property and I had to explain this hadith -- give my views for or against it -- I said something like, "WHY does 'inheritance' HAVE to mean physical property and not knowledge?" And my teacher said he agreed. But, heck, what can we do when Abu Bakr clearly didn't agree :S

You just use void arguments and blatant lies which have been refuted centuries ago. How can one discuss anything with someone who does things you do on regular bases?

The issue of fadak has not been refuted, bro, and I just showed you above that it's in Sunni hadiths; I haven't read any Shiite hadith books yet, so I'll have to look into those to see what style it's written in there. Look into it. It's still debated, and the best hadith Sunnis can give in response is, "Well, the Prophet ALSO said that anyone who bothers or angers Abu Bakr, he angers ME." Their argument is that Fatima angered Abu Bakr by not talking to him just because he denied her the right to HER property that her FATHER left her. Yet, there's another hadith that says that anyone who angers Fatima, angers the Prophet. SO, yeah.

[Roshina]

I am neither islamic scholar nor i have any qualification on islamic studies. But i have God-gifted active brain, so naturally the creation (my Brain) incite me to defend the God's (creator of my brain) religion.
I dont need to Quote some one else thinkings on the points i mentioned above.
I am purely relying on my intellect. My biological processor will counter the arguements.

Firstly, you're ASSUMING I don't believe in God. And I do... though, as I've said elsewhere, our UNDERSTANDING of God is most likely very different, and i conclude this from the sort of things you say and the sort of things I say.

Secondly, I thought you were going to prove me and Laevany Zalmay wrong in this thread ... Zalmay doesn't believe in God. How are you gonna prove him wrong?

Thirdly, I, too, am using MY intellect, MY understanding, MY faculty to believe what I believe and say what I say. Zalmay, too, is using the same. Yet, all of us have different beliefs. How's this? So, if you're trying to say that because you THINK about your beliefs and that's why we should agree with you (I said IFFF you think this), then that makes no sense to me, 'cause I, too, think about mine. It's not like I woke up one morning and said, "ALL RIGHT! God exists!" or "Okay! I don't believe this anymore!"

We're humans. We think, we learn, we share, we teach, we change, we grow, and we change even more.

[شمله ور خراساني]

Um... if i'ts a Shiite fabrication, then why does it appear in Sunni hadiths? Check out, for instance, Sahih Bukhari:

Allah's Apostle said, "Our property is not inherited. Whatever we leave, is Sadaqa, but the family of (the Prophet) Muhammad can eat of this property.' By Allah, I will not make any change in the state of the Sadaqa of Allah's Apostle and will leave it as it was during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle, and will dispose of it as Allah's Apostle used to do.

- Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 546.

and SahihMuslim:

“...So Abu Bakr refused to hand over anything from it to Fatima who got angry with Abu Bakr for this reason. She forsook him and did not talk to him until the end of her life.”
- Sahih Muslim, Book 19, Number 4352

Last I checked, both Bukhari and Muslim were Sunni sources.



This is exactly my view. And when I read the hadith in which Abu Bakr denied Fatima her property and I had to explain this hadith -- give my views for or against it -- I said something like, "WHY does 'inheritance' HAVE to mean physical property and not knowledge?" And my teacher said he agreed. But, heck, what can we do when Abu Bakr clearly didn't agree :S



The issue of fadak has not been refuted, bro, and I just showed you above that it's in Sunni hadiths; I haven't read any Shiite hadith books yet, so I'll have to look into those to see what style it's written in there. Look into it. It's still debated, and the best hadith Sunnis can give in response is, "Well, the Prophet ALSO said that anyone who bothers or angers Abu Bakr, he angers ME." Their argument is that Fatima angered Abu Bakr by not talking to him just because he denied her the right to HER property that her FATHER left her. Yet, there's another hadith that says that anyone who angers Fatima, angers the Prophet. SO, yeah.

Those are both authentic hadiths to my knowledge. Yet the story did not end there. The issue is well documented and the Shi'ite claim is refuted.

Just because you get to learn only parts of events and your professors deliberately emphasize on these matters to cast doubt and suspicion does not mean that your version of the story is the only one available.

Many books are written where this incident is discussed extensively. Would you refer to Islamic sources discussing the matters instead of some proffessor in a non-Muslim university, you would have known this. But since you prefer to learn about Islam from non-Muslims it is not surprising that you take such ridiculous stance against such matters.

[Roshina]

Those are both authentic hadiths to my knowledge. Yet the story did not end there. The issue is well documented and the Shi'ite claim is refuted.

Just because you get to learn only parts of events and your professors deliberately emphasize on these matters to cast doubt and suspicion does not mean that your version of the story is the only one available.

Many books are written where this incident is discussed extensively. Would you refer to Islamic sources discussing the matters instead of some proffessor in a non-Muslim university, you would have known this. But since you prefer to learn about Islam from non-Muslims it is not surprising that you take such ridiculous stance against such matters.

There you go again - accusing my professors of having filtered my mind and calling MY preference of learning Islam in a non-Muslim world "ridiculous." lol. Yet, you go around creating threads in which you whine about not getting respect from members or being called a Salafi, which you obviously are and I don't see why it should be pejorative to you when you support Salafism yourself. If you're offended, that means you don't believe in Salafism and Wahabism and other ahle-hadith branches of Islam.

One more thing - just because my professors are TEACHING at an institution in a non-Muslim country does NOT mean they're kafir or non-Muslim. Oh, but then again, you have the right to issue fatwa against people whose views don't appease you, correct? Everyone's a kafir in your mind, it seems, if they don't agree with you. Gosh.

Anyway, actually, I HAVE read refutations of it, but like I said, the issue has NOT been resolved; it remains dispositive. Neither have *I* been convinced, and I'd like to be because this is absolutely WRONG in my belief.

Nonetheless, why don't you explain those refutation to us here along with the books where they're noted so that other members and I can get a fuller grasp of it? NOTHING can explain why Abu Bakr refused to give Fatima her property, and NOTHING can explain why - if he was RIGHT in making that decision - she remained angry and upset with him till her death. But I'd be delighted to hear your position on this regard and learn what you think angered her and what you think Abu Bakr's reasoning was.

And I don't understand why Bukhari and Muslim would add "Shiite claims" in their Sahihs if this "Shiite claim" is wrong. Please, explain that as well. Manana.

[Dinosaur Khan]

Firstly, you're ASSUMING I don't believe in God. And I do... though, as I've said elsewhere, our UNDERSTANDING of God is most likely very different, and i conclude this from the sort of things you say and the sort of things I say.

Secondly, I thought you were going to prove me and Laevany Zalmay wrong in this thread ... Zalmay doesn't believe in God. How are you gonna prove him wrong?

Thirdly, I, too, am using MY intellect, MY understanding, MY faculty to believe what I believe and say what I say. Zalmay, too, is using the same. Yet, all of us have different beliefs. How's this? So, if you're trying to say that because you THINK about your beliefs and that's why we should agree with you (I said IFFF you think this), then that makes no sense to me, 'cause I, too, think about mine. It's not like I woke up one morning and said, "ALL RIGHT! God exists!" or "Okay! I don't believe this anymore!"

We're humans. We think, we learn, we share, we teach, we change, we grow, and we change even more.

levanay doesnt believe in God, my first point is specifically directed to him.
This world and vast universe is creation...
At the night when i look into sky, i find innumerable stars. Sun is also star and it has solar system in which 8 planets revolves around the sun. Planets have moons revolving around them. Billions of stars make a galaxy and there are billions of galaxies. All these stars and galaxies are moving e.g sun is moving from the centre of its galaxy at the rate of 20 km/sec. The points is that frequecy and speed of each revolution of a moon, planet and star around its axis is always constant with no difference of second. Amazing, is'nt? no star clashes with another star....why? Are these stars move and revolve on its own and randomely? Why these stars are in such discipline? Why stars are not colliding with each other...who is providing centripetal force for stars and planets to move around their axis?
Consider a stone attached at the end of string , dinosaur khan is revolving this string attached to stone above his head. I am the central axis, and stone is revolving around me like a moon revolving around earth....when qrattu will ask heathen that who is causing this stone revolving, heathen will say that it is dinosaur khan... So guys think about solar system, stars, galaxies...some one is regulating and controlling all this system...such complex yet regulated universe can not be created on its own...if universe is creation then it must have a creator, call it God , allah or ishwar.
Let suppose dinosaur khan is an alien, he visits earth and the first thing that he see is a tea cup. He wonder what is it?
Then he wonders how it came into existence. He thinks of two probabilities
a) it automatically came into existence
b) some one has made it
like athiests he assumes that it must have created on its own.
But then he thinks that why it is created?
He has no answer for it but he assumes it must have some purpose as it has regular shape.
Then another question arise in his mind, if it is created on its own then why it has specific shape, what the purpose and function of tea cup? He discards the previous assumption and make a hypothesis that there is some one who has made this tea cup. In the mean while a human appears, takes the tea cup and fills it with tea and the drink it. It automatically clicks to alien that tea cup has a use and purpose, for serving a purpose, it is created by human to use it as source to contain tea. Human is the creator of tea cup.
Now like alien thinks who is the creator of humans, earth and whole universe?

[شمله ور خراساني]

There you go again - accusing my professors of having filtered my mind and calling MY preference of learning Islam in a non-Muslim world "ridiculous." lol. Yet, you go around creating threads in which you whine about not getting respect from members or being called a Salafi, which you obviously are and I don't see why it should be pejorative to you when you support Salafism yourself. If you're offended, that means you don't believe in Salafism and Wahabism and other ahle-hadith branches of Islam.

One more thing - just because my professors are TEACHING at an institution in a non-Muslim country does NOT mean they're kafir or non-Muslim. Oh, but then again, you have the right to issue fatwa against people whose views don't appease you, correct? Everyone's a kafir in your mind, it seems, if they don't agree with you. Gosh.

Anyway, actually, I HAVE read refutations of it, but like I said, the issue has NOT been resolved; it remains dispositive. Neither have *I* been convinced, and I'd like to be because this is absolutely WRONG in my belief.

Nonetheless, why don't you explain those refutation to us here along with the books where they're noted so that other members and I can get a fuller grasp of it? NOTHING can explain why Abu Bakr refused to give Fatima her property, and NOTHING can explain why - if he was RIGHT in making that decision - she remained angry and upset with him till her death. But I'd be delighted to hear your position on this regard and learn what you think angered her and what you think Abu Bakr's reasoning was.

And I don't understand why Bukhari and Muslim would add "Shiite claims" in their Sahihs if this "Shiite claim" is wrong. Please, explain that as well. Manana.

Your professors did teach you falsehood.

Bukhari, Muslim and other hadith collections contain many ahadith used by Shi'ites to make claims and accuse people of all sorts of stuff. Yet, these Shi'ites go about claiming Bukhari and Muslim are fabricated lies of Sunni Muslims who apparently according to Shi'ites "hate" ahlul bayt. haha.

And you are here shamefully presenting their views as evidence to discredit righteous people.

How can you still claim you were not taught falsehood by your professors?