Scientists On QURAN

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I'm actually tempted to test Badlun's knowledge of arabic

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

He reads the translation of Quran. Thats his knowledge of Arabic.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

After decades of the martyrdom of Dr Najeeb Barakzai is still obsessed with poor Najib. He is the only one who has been presented so far as an example for Barakzai's militant secularism.

Instead of marginalizing, criminalizing Najeeb is staging a come back.....read it
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/fea...838393817.html


Executed Afghan president stages 'comeback'
Sixteen years after he was killed, Mohammad Najibullah is riding a wave of popularity among violence-weary Afghans.





Can you please share few other names in present day world? On the other hand militancy in religious Islamist camp is obvious where thousands of names are on UN terrorist list.

Wrong again Badlun wrorre. This article was debunked and its authors investigated long ago, you are late to the scene:

http://www.pashtunforums.com/showthr...ela+najibullah

There are so many secular terrorists and extremists as well as murderers Badlun sahib, the list is long and so much marginalization needs to be done of these folks so that they can be treated like criminals:

Robert Fisk mocks secular fascist Al Sisi here:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...y-8750836.html

Like so many militant terrorist secularists, he has subverted the will of his people and welcomed outside aggression (but lets face it this is the common trait of these cowardly people since they are a lunatic fringe group).

Or the Marxist inspired hypersecularist nutty MEK:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americ...851555396.html

Or this hyper secular extremist who even Karzai thinks is nuts:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Hanif_Atmar

Or this evil individual:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amrullah_Saleh

Or this loony individual and mass murderer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad

Or these foolish extremists and Trojan horses in Turkey
Kemal KalichDaroglu and Delvet Bacheli

In Pashtun lands, I mentioned Atmar above, but then in addition the whole leadership of ANP also deserves jail time.

The key is to neuter this vocal minority lunatic fringe group's propaganda as much as possible and to free Americans and natives from their deceptive and malignant intentions which is makes them like the Pigs in Orwell's Animal Farm - greedy people who say platitudes but are out of touch with reality and bring fear and war to their lands.

Once again Badlun Saheb,
1) Identify - thankfully because of their loud pride they have put themselves in the lime-light and now as their power is ebbing they feel exposed
2) Marginalize and ostracize
3) Criminalize

This is the approach to dealing with this threat to world peace. These people are like the Dhiem or the Batista, or the Syngman Rhee of the Muslim world - a plague that needs antibiotics.

[zamurd]

Because Muslims do not believe in science. We believe in Quran & Sunnah.

Nobody is expected to enter Islam just because some scientists claims there are scientifically accurate things mentioned in Quran.

Some people think that we should conform to everything scientists claim. 100 years ago, evolution theory made people think Africans are stupid and inferior to whites. Back then that was what scientists believe is accurate. Today, they no longer believe this to be true.

Scientists claimed that homosexuality is a disease. Today they no longer say so. But rather they claim it is something that is in the genes.

Scientists claimed so many things at one point and their claims were perceived as scientific facts. But after a while they discovered something else and suddenly they changed their views.

Should we Muslims adjust our beliefs every time scientists come up with a new story?

rightly said, science changes, scientists are humans and their knowledge cant be 100% accurate, they keep changes statements after research but Allah is creator and His knowledge encompasses everything.

I will like to say having said this, If you Recall Prophet IBRAHIM pbuh story you will know how a human brain analyses things he observes and ponders over, like he did over stars , idols and then asking Allah to show him how He will raise the dead. I see Ibrahim pbuh story as i at this time will analyse scientific facts and truth from Allah , that how a human being uses his brain and seeks Allah's help for true path.

ch 6. 76. When the night covered him over with darkness he saw a star. He said: "This is my lord." But when it set, he said: "I like not those that set."

77. When he saw the moon rising up, he said: "This is my lord." But when it set, he said: "Unless my Lord guides me, I shall surely be among the erring people."

78. When he saw the sun rising up, he said: "This is my lord. This is greater." But when it set, he said: "O my people! I am indeed free from all that you join as partners in worship with Allâh.

79. Verily, I have turned my face towards Him Who has created the heavens and the earth Hanifa (Islâmic Monotheism, i.e. worshipping none but Allâh Alone) and I am not of Al-Mushrikûn (see V.2:105)".

ch.2 260. And (remember) when Ibrâhim (Abraham) said, "My Lord! Show me how You give life to the dead." He (Allâh) said: "Do you not believe?" He [Ibrâhim (Abraham)] said: "Yes (I believe), but to be stronger in Faith." He said: "Take four birds, then cause them to incline towards you (then slaughter them, cut them into pieces), and then put a portion of them on every hill, and call them, they will come to you in haste. And know that Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise."

[zamurd]

Dear Manzareh

First of all I do appreciate the way you interact and try to convey your message. At least you write something to refute me along with bashing me and calling me a devil, an evil, an infidel and Kafir not like others who issue fatwa but with out even a try to justify the Fatwa!

If you think Sunna is not obligatory , just optional then our this dispute is resolved. Then Sunna being non obligatory cannot be a source of Islam and if any one is convinced may opt for it if not may leave it as it is not obligatory. Thus I can listen to music, can shave , can dance and women are not obliged to cover their whole bodies.

I am not at all against the religion of Islam. I believe in the five pillars of Islam. I am against mixing Islam with science, society, culture, economy, politics and education. This is not part of my belief system to believe in the stages of embryology mentioned in Quran.

I am Mulsim by saying shahadah , prayers, fasting, zakat and hajj. I must follow Islamic moral system as not telling lie, not murdering, no adulteration, no stealing etc. This is enough for me being a Muslim. I will not follow Arab culture or believe that sun rises in the east and sets in the west as mentioned in Qur'an to be a Muslim.

The sites I quoted above have some well organized stuff which have a lot of valid points. Instead of just calling it Islamophobic we may come up with some valid counter arguments.

My solution to all such discussion is that we may restrict Islam to be a religion and Qur'an to be a book of religion not a book of science or culture. Quran being a book of religion do mention some scientific information but those are based on 1400 years back milieu. Qur'an says sun rises and sets and we know that it is scientifically wrong but Qur'an mentions it in a common man parlance and prove the existence of God not giving some scientific data.

There are many other verses of Qur'an which are scientifically wrong but correct religiously, spiritually and representative of a common man thinking and approach.

Yes there is some contribution of Muslim scientists but they were Muslims by name and birth not that the credit goes to Islam but to Muslims. They were also not Salafi kind of Muslims and many of them were declared kafir by their Asharite kind of Muslims.

If religion or religious names have to do something with science then the millions of christian and Jews scientists that we have today will make Christianity or Judaism or even atheism superior to Islam.

Those Muslims were only in limited time(mainly 10th century) and subsequent generations ignored science and today we do not have any Muslim scientist of international refutation.

Mr. Badlun what are your educational credentials? Can you tell us?

[zamurd]

Science is Mans attempt to understand the working of god: Chemistry, Physics, Geology, and Astronomy, are the after effects of the big bang.

Evolution is blasphemous. Your going way above your limits to ignore what Allah said about the creation of animals.

We're animals created by God, so that is why have some similarities with other animals

Well said "Science is Mans attempt to understand the working of god: Chemistry, Physics, Geology, and Astronomy, are the after effects of the big bang."

This seeking of knowledge is like worshiping Allah, It is quest of Man to know HIM who creater him; seeing how magnificent is His creation, to know Him better from our human mind and be in awe of HIM.

[Midnight_Sun]

It is surprising to me that some places speakers are still banned? Strange. I was talking about over 50 years ago.

Who considered loud speakers haram when and where?

A religious scholar had once spoke about it on a radio show here in the USA. He mentioned that the head of Islamic scholars in Egypt over 50 years had banned microphones and speakers. He also mentioned it caused a lot of controversy in Mecca when Adhan was called with loud speakers. But anyways here is some info I found via searching:

------

The use of microphone in Azan and Salah has been a difficult issue for many scholars over the last century. One point to make perfectly clear is that the reason why some scholars forbid its use is not on the basis that they are backward-minded and are against new technology. Rather the issue is whether the sound emitted from the speaker is the Imam’s (or Muezzin’s) own voice, or is it the equipment involved.

Our scholars are clear that a person cannot read Salah on the instructions of someone who is not in Salah. At first, when scientific experiments were conducted with amplifying equipment, it was suggested that the audible voice was in fact the echo of the speaker. A second experiment was conducted later, when it was discovered the audible voice was the speaker’s actual voice (and not the sound of his echo). This is the central issue in the dispute as to whether microphones are permissible in Salah or not.

The Muftis who have allowed the practice of using a microphone for Azan and Salah do so on the opinion that the audible voice emitted from the equipment is the speaker’s voice per se. Hence, acting upon the Imam’s word is permissible [in Salah]. The Muftis who outlaw the practice do so on the opinion that the emitted voice from the equipment is not the speaker’s voice. Therefore, it is not permitted to perform Ruku’ and prostration upon this emitted voice, because it is now synonymous with following the instructions of someone who is not in Salah, something which invalidates the Prayer.

Various decrees are available from the Barelwi scholars in their books on the issue of using a microphone for Azan and prayer. Most have forbidden the practice though some have allowed it. In some books of decrees, both its permissibility and prohibition have been mentioned.

From the Barelwa school of thought, two decrees have been written by Mufti Amjad ‘Al ‘Azami in Rabi’ al-Awwal 1355/June 1936. The first declares it permissible to use such equipment, whereas the second prohibits it. In these two decrees, Mufti Sahib has merely explained the principle of using a microphone, and has not offered evidence.

In one decree, he writes,
‘There are no visible reasons for its prohibition. Some have declared its usage as synonymous to Ta’lim min al-Khaarij [i.e. a person not in prayer who becomes involved in it externally]. However, according to my humble opinion, the microphone can only be declared as Ta’lim min al-Khaarij if it has its own autonomy and the sound emitting from it is its own. But this is not the case; the sound emitted from the microphone is in essence the speaker’s voice…the microphone is a means to relay the voice of the Imam, and the sound [emitting from the microphone] is the Imam’s voice per se.’

In the commentary of Fatawa Amjadiyya, Mufti Muhammad Sharif al-Haq declares the fatwa outlining its prohibition as the correct opinion. He adds,

‘The first decree itself suggests that it was written at a time when detailed knowledge on the working of microphones was not available. When more knowledge did become available and its functioning became clear, the latter decree was given. It renders the prayer null and void because its usage is synonymous to Ta’lim min al-Khaarij.’

The famous scholar from the Barelwis, Mufti Sahib Daad (President, Jam’iyya Ahl Sunna, Karachi) wrote a detailed and referenced decree –consisting of seventy pages and named Decrees on Microphone- and printed it through Anjuman Ihya al-Sunna in 1369/1950. This contained the assisting notes and verifications from the major scholars of the three sects of thought (Ahl Hadith, Deoband and Barelwi). All gave a unanimous decree that using a microphone in prayer is not permissible, and results in the prayer being null and void.

Regarding the permissibility of using a microphone for Azan and prayer, Mufti Muhammad Nur Allah Na’imi issued twenty decrees. This detailed analysis consists of 127 pages. Mufti Sahib explained his position in an analytical manner. From the Barelwi scholars, he is the sole scholar who has unequivocally declared the permissibility of using microphones in his decrees. To support his stance, Mufti Sahib referred to dozens of references from classic books of jurisprudence and decrees. He also offered evidenced refutations of all objections raised on using such equipment in the mosque for Aan and prayer. Mufti Sahib issued these decrees between Jamada al-Awwal 1376/January 1957 and Rajab 1388/October 1968.

http://www.islamiccentre.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=813&Itemid=25

--

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

It is surprising to me that some places speakers are still banned? Strange. I was talking about over 50 years ago.




A religious scholar had once spoke about it on a radio show here in the USA. He mentioned that the head of Islamic scholars in Egypt over 50 years had banned microphones and speakers. He also mentioned it caused a lot of controversy in Mecca when Adhan was called with loud speakers. But anyways here is some info I found via searching:

------

The use of microphone in Azan and Salah has been a difficult issue for many scholars over the last century. One point to make perfectly clear is that the reason why some scholars forbid its use is not on the basis that they are backward-minded and are against new technology. Rather the issue is whether the sound emitted from the speaker is the Imam’s (or Muezzin’s) own voice, or is it the equipment involved.

Our scholars are clear that a person cannot read Salah on the instructions of someone who is not in Salah. At first, when scientific experiments were conducted with amplifying equipment, it was suggested that the audible voice was in fact the echo of the speaker. A second experiment was conducted later, when it was discovered the audible voice was the speaker’s actual voice (and not the sound of his echo). This is the central issue in the dispute as to whether microphones are permissible in Salah or not.

The Muftis who have allowed the practice of using a microphone for Azan and Salah do so on the opinion that the audible voice emitted from the equipment is the speaker’s voice per se. Hence, acting upon the Imam’s word is permissible [in Salah]. The Muftis who outlaw the practice do so on the opinion that the emitted voice from the equipment is not the speaker’s voice. Therefore, it is not permitted to perform Ruku’ and prostration upon this emitted voice, because it is now synonymous with following the instructions of someone who is not in Salah, something which invalidates the Prayer.

Various decrees are available from the Barelwi scholars in their books on the issue of using a microphone for Azan and prayer. Most have forbidden the practice though some have allowed it. In some books of decrees, both its permissibility and prohibition have been mentioned.

From the Barelwa school of thought, two decrees have been written by Mufti Amjad ‘Al ‘Azami in Rabi’ al-Awwal 1355/June 1936. The first declares it permissible to use such equipment, whereas the second prohibits it. In these two decrees, Mufti Sahib has merely explained the principle of using a microphone, and has not offered evidence.

In one decree, he writes,
‘There are no visible reasons for its prohibition. Some have declared its usage as synonymous to Ta’lim min al-Khaarij [i.e. a person not in prayer who becomes involved in it externally]. However, according to my humble opinion, the microphone can only be declared as Ta’lim min al-Khaarij if it has its own autonomy and the sound emitting from it is its own. But this is not the case; the sound emitted from the microphone is in essence the speaker’s voice…the microphone is a means to relay the voice of the Imam, and the sound [emitting from the microphone] is the Imam’s voice per se.’

In the commentary of Fatawa Amjadiyya, Mufti Muhammad Sharif al-Haq declares the fatwa outlining its prohibition as the correct opinion. He adds,

‘The first decree itself suggests that it was written at a time when detailed knowledge on the working of microphones was not available. When more knowledge did become available and its functioning became clear, the latter decree was given. It renders the prayer null and void because its usage is synonymous to Ta’lim min al-Khaarij.’

The famous scholar from the Barelwis, Mufti Sahib Daad (President, Jam’iyya Ahl Sunna, Karachi) wrote a detailed and referenced decree –consisting of seventy pages and named Decrees on Microphone- and printed it through Anjuman Ihya al-Sunna in 1369/1950. This contained the assisting notes and verifications from the major scholars of the three sects of thought (Ahl Hadith, Deoband and Barelwi). All gave a unanimous decree that using a microphone in prayer is not permissible, and results in the prayer being null and void.

Regarding the permissibility of using a microphone for Azan and prayer, Mufti Muhammad Nur Allah Na’imi issued twenty decrees. This detailed analysis consists of 127 pages. Mufti Sahib explained his position in an analytical manner. From the Barelwi scholars, he is the sole scholar who has unequivocally declared the permissibility of using microphones in his decrees. To support his stance, Mufti Sahib referred to dozens of references from classic books of jurisprudence and decrees. He also offered evidenced refutations of all objections raised on using such equipment in the mosque for Aan and prayer. Mufti Sahib issued these decrees between Jamada al-Awwal 1376/January 1957 and Rajab 1388/October 1968.

http://www.islamiccentre.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=813&Itemid=25

--

Basically it is a Barelwi thing to prohibit microphones and loudspeakers.

Asking dead people for help = OK!

Dancing at grave sites? = Fo shizzle ma nizzle: Sufi Mujra dancers at grave. - YouTube

Celebrating Christmas immitation for Prophet Muhammad? = Hell yeah!

Believing in pantheism ( borrowing from hindu creed)? = Why not?

Use of modern technology? = BID'AH!

Btw: barelwis are the so called apolitical peaceful desirable sect people like Cheryl Benard, Badlun and others endorse for spreading neo-colonialism and democracy in the Muslim world.

[Haris]

1) People that have questioned science have been murdered in 10's of millions.

Could you provide an example and/or source?

[Midnight_Sun]

Basically it is a Barelwi thing to prohibit microphones and loudspeakers.

Asking dead people for help = OK!

Dancing at grave sites? = Fo shizzle ma nizzle: Sufi Mujra dancers at grave. - YouTube

Celebrating Christmas immitation for Prophet Muhammad? = Hell yeah!

Believing in pantheism ( borrowing from hindu creed)? = Why not?

Use of modern technology? = BID'AH!

Btw: barelwis are the so called apolitical peaceful desirable sect people like Cheryl Benard, Badlun and others endorse for spreading neo-colonialism and democracy in the Muslim world.

Again, according to that website, some still find it controversial. What I was referring to happenned over 50 yrs ago in Egypt and in Mecca.

[Manzareh]

Could you provide an example and/or source?

One name: Mao Zedong - He though it was very important to remove religion from China and specially Tibet because he saw it as ''poison'' or ''opiate of the people'' as a result he killed many many Buddhist monks. Mao Zedong was an atheist, he killed nearly 70 million people. That's only one person in recent history there's many more.