Category Archives: Quran

Christian Calendar and Intercalation


Many Muslims today use the Christian calendar system in their daily affairs, not realizing that some of the practices inherent to this calendar are forbidden in Islam (notably intercalation or nasee).

Moreover, many of those who use the Christian calendar, Christians and otherwise, think that it is an accurate system or that it has had a fixed and true reference point. Thus, when the calendar tells us today is the first Tuesday of the month of May of the year 1999 for example, then this is what today actually is. But the truth is, no one knows for sure what the day, the month or the year actually is. Not only that, but the need for correction is continuous and is inescapable. Intercalation, for example, is done at least every four years through the process called the leap year.

The Christian calendar has years that are 365 or 366 days long. It is divided into 12 months that have no relationship to the motion of the moon, and it employs a system of weeks that group the days in sets of 7. It had three main versions: The Roman, the Julian and the Gregorian calendars, the difference between which lies in the way they approximate the length of the tropical year and in their rules for  approximating the occurrence of Easter.


Originally, the year started on March 1, and consisted of only 304 days or 10 months (Martius, Aprilis, Maius, Junius, Quintilis, Sextilis, September, October, November, and December). These 304 days were followed by an unnamed and unnumbered winter period. The Roman king Numa Pompilius (c. 715-673 BC, although his historicity is disputed) allegedly introduced February and January (in that order) between December and March, increasing the length of the year to 354 or 355 days. In 450 BC, February was moved to its current position between January and March.

In order to make up for the lack of days in a year, an extra month, Intercalaris or Mercedonius, (allegedly with 22 or 23 days) was introduced in some years. It was the duty of the priesthood to keep track of the calendars, but they failed miserably, partly due to ignorance, partly because they were bribed to make certain years long and others short. Furthermore, leap years were considered unlucky and were therefore avoided in times of crisis, such as the Second Punic War. In order to clean up this mess, Julius Caesar made his famous calendar reform in 45 BC. “Julius Caesar made all odd numbered months 31 days long, and all even numbered months 30 days long (with February having 29 days in non-leap years). In 44 BC, Quintilis was renamed ‘Julius’ (July) in honor of Julius Caesar, and in 8 BC Sextilis became ‘Augustus’ in honor of emperor Augustus. When Augustus had a month named after him, he presumably wanted his month to be a full 31 days long, so he removed a day from February and shifted the length of the other months so that August would have 31 days. This fact, however, is not confirmed, and could be  a fabrication dating back to the 14th century.


It was introduced by Julius Caesar in 45 BC. It was in common use until the 1500s. However, some countries (Greece and Russia, for example) used it well into this century. In the Julian calendar, the tropical year is approximated as 365.25 days. This gives an error of 1 day in approximately 128 years. The approximation 365 1/4 is achieved by having 1leap year every 4 years. Furthermore, the way it calculated the Easter occurrence was inaccurate, it had to be refined depending on the fact that most felt that 21 March was the proper day for vernal equinox (because 21 March was the date for vernal equinox during the Council of Nicaea in AD 325). The Gregorian calendar was therefore calibrated to make that day vernal equinox. By 1582 vernal equinox had moved (1582-325)/128 days = approximately 10 days backwards. So 10 days had to be dropped. This change in sequence of the calendar is known in Islam as intercalation, which is prohibited to do for any reason.


The Gregorian calendar is commonly used today by the non-Muslims. Pope Gregory XIII adopted it in accordance with instructions from the Council of Trent (1545-1563). In the Gregorian calendar, the tropical year is approximated as 365 97/400 days = 365.2425 days. Thus it takes approximately 3300 years for the tropical year to shift one day with respect to the Gregorian calendar. The approximation 365 97/400 is achieved by having 97 leap years every 400 years.


In the Gregorian calendar, every year divisible by 4 is a leap year. Also, every year divisible by 100 is not a leap year, but every year divisible by 400 is a leap year. And so, 1800, 1900 and 2100 are not leap years, while 1600 and 2000 are.


As we mentioned above not all countries adopted this calendar, and some of those who did, had their own changes added to it. Italy, Poland, Portugal, and Spain adopted it and other Catholic countries followed shortly after, but Protestant countries were reluctant to change. Later, the Orthodox Church in Greece decided to switch to the Gregorian calendar in the 1920s, but they tried to improve on the Gregorian leap year rules, replacing the “divisible by 400” rule.

Thus the beginning of their calendar is still different from the rest of the Christian world. In an attempt to unify their Christmas and Easter celebrations, both churches tried to change both Calendars. The meeting happened in Aleppo, Syria (5-10 March 1997), organized by the World Council of Churches and the Middle East Council of Churches, Representatives of several churches and Christian world communions suggested that the discrepancies between Easter calculations could be resolved by adopting calculations of the vernal equinox and the full moon. This new method for calculating Easter should take effect from the year 2001.


Was Prophet Eesa (Jesus), alayhis salam, born in the year 0? No. The reasons for this is that there is no year 0 in the Gregorian calendar and that Eesa, alayhis salam, was born before 4 BC. The concept of a year “zero,” which was introduced by the Muslims was not known to Romans when they devised their calendar. Therefore, CE 1 follows immediately after 1 BC with no intervening year zero. The exact year Eesa, alayhis salam, was born is not known. Also, he, alayhis salam, was not born in December.

And when did the 1st century start? In the year CE 1. Therefore, the 2nd century should have started in CE 101. Thus, the 21st century must have started in the year CE 2001 (and not 2000). And although the 20th century started in 1901, the 1900s started in 1900. The Gregorian system therefore is not standard by any means. It is neither accurate nor widely used.

[By Syed Khalid Shaukat]

Every calendar except one, at any time in the entire history of the world, has had to make corrections by either adding or subtracting time. The Jewish, Chinese, or Hindu calendars add a thirteenth month periodically, to bring the lunar calendar in line with the solar calendar. This is called “intercalation” or “Nasee” (in Arabic). Two kinds of Nasee’ were in practice at the time of Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alayhi wasallam. One was inserting a thirteenth month, and the other was transposing a sacred month with another for certain social or political needs and advantages. During the Prophet’s farewell message, two revelations regarding the Islamic calendar were given to humankind, Allah says, “The number of months in the sight of Allah is twelve (in a year). So ordained by Him, the day He created the heavens and the earth. Verily the transposition (of a prohibited month or intercalation) is an addition to disbelief.” [9:36-37]

This indicates that the use of a calendar with intercalation is against nature and prohibited by Allah, subhanahu wa ta’ala. Intercalation of a month is used by Jewish, Chinese, and Hindu calendars, while Gregorian calendar uses intercalation of days in several months to increase the number of days to 30 or 31. The one calendar that does not add or subtract time is the Islamic calendar. Despite the figures presented by some calendars, the reality is that among all the prevailing calendars in the world, the Islamic calendar is the oldest in practice in its original form without any correction or modification. The Islamic calendar, because of its inherent cycles of the visible crescent, does not require any corrections, and has remained intact in its principle since it was given to humankind by Allah through Messenger Muhammad, sallallahu alayhi wasallam.

کرسمس اور اسلام

ﺑﺴﻢ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﯿﻢ

ﻏﯿﺮ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺗﮩﻮﺍﺭﻭﮞ ﻣﺜﻼ ﮐﺮﺳﻤﺲ ﻭﻏﯿﺮﮦ ﮐﯽ ﺧﻮﺷﯽ ﻣﻨﺎﻧﺎ

ﺗﺤﺮﯾﺮ : ﺳﺎﺟﺪ ﺧﺎﻥ ﻧﻘﺸﺒﻨﺪﯼ

ﻧﻮﭦ : ﯾﮧ ﻣﻀﻤﻮﻥ ﻓﯿﺼﻞ ﺍٓﺑﺎﺩ ﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺟﻌﻠﯽ ﭘﯿﺮ ﮐﮯ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻟﮑﮭﺎ ﮔﯿﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ﺍﺏ ﻣﻮﻗﻊ ﮐﯽ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺖ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻥ ﮐﺎ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﮑﺎﻝ ﮐﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺗﺮﺍﻣﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﮐﮯ ﺷﺎﯾﻊ ﮐﯿﺎ ﺟﺎﺭﮨﺎ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﻗﺎﺭﺋﯿﻦ ﺍﮨﻠﺴﻨﺖ ! ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯽ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﮐﯽ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻧﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﺱ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺗﮏ ﻣﻤﮑﻦ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺟﺐ ﺗﮏ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺑﺎﻃﻞ ﻣﺬﮨﺐ ﮐﻮ ﭼﮭﻮﮌ ﮐﺮ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﻧﮧ ﮐﺮﻟﯿﮟ ﭼﻨﺎﻧﭽﮧ ﺭﺏ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﯽ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺭﺷﺎﺩ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ:

ﻟَﻘَﺪْ ﮐَﻔَﺮَ ﺍﻟَّﺬِﯾْﻦَ ﻗَﺎﻟُﻮْ ٓﺍ ﺍِﻥَّ ﺍﻟﻠّٰﮧَ ﮬُﻮَ ﺍﻟْﻤَﺴِﯿْﺢُ ﺍﺑْﻦُ ﻣَﺮْﯾَﻢَ ﻭَ ﻗَﺎﻝَ ﺍﻟْﻤَﺴِﯿْﺢُ ﯾٰٓﺒَﻨِﯽْ ﺍِﺳْﺮَﺍٓﺋِﯿْﻞَ ﺍﻋْﺒُﺪُﻭْﺍٓ ﺍﻟﻠّٰﮧَ ﺭَﺑِِّﯽْ ﻭَ ﺭَﺑَّﮑُﻢْ ﺍِﻧَّﮧ ‘ ﻣَﻦْ ﯾُّﺸْﺮِﮎْ ﺑِﺎﻟﻠّٰﮧِ ﻓَﻘَﺪْ ﺣَﺮَّﻡَ ﺍﻟﻠّٰﮧُ ﻋَﻠَﯿْﮧِ ﺍﻟْﺠَﻨَّۃَ ﻭَﻣَﺎْﻭٰﮦُ ﺍﻟﻨَّﺎﺭَ ﻭَﻣَﺎ ﻟِﻠﻈَّﺎِﻟﻤِﯿْﻦَ ﻣِﻦْ ﺍَﻧْﺼَﺎﺭٍﻟَﻘَﺪْ ﮐَﻔَﺮَ ﺍﻟَّﺬِﯾْﻦَ ﻗَﺎﻟُﻮﺍٓ ﺍِﻥَّ ﺍﻟﻠَّﮧَ ﺛَﺎﻟِﺚ ‘’ ﺛَﻼَﺛَۃ ﻭَﻣَﺎ ﻣِﻦْ ﺍِﻟٰﮧٍ ﻭَّﺍﺣِﺪ ‘’ ﻭَّ ﺍِﻥْ ﻟَّﻢْ ﯾَﻨْﺘَﮭُﻮْﺍ ﻋَﻤَّﺎ ﯾَﻘُﻮْﻟُﻮْﻥَ ﻟَﯿَﻤَﺴَّﻦَّ ﺍﻟَّﺬِﯾْﻦَ ﮐَﻔَﺮُﻭْﺍ ﻣِﻨْﮭُﻢْ ﻋَﺬَﺍﺏ ‘’ ﺍَﻟِﯿْﻢ ‘’ ۔
‏( ﺳﻮﺭۃ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺋﺪﮦ : ﺍٓﯾﺖ ۷۲۔۷۳ ‏)

ﺗﺮﺟﻤﮧ : ﺑﮯ ﺷﮏ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ ﻭﮦ ﻟﻮﮒ ﺟﻮ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻭﮨﯽ ﻣﺴﯿﺢ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺮﯾﻢ ﮐﺎ ﺑﯿﭩﺎ ﮨﮯ ﺣﺎﻻﻧﮑﮧ ﻣﺴﯿﺢ ﻧﮯ ﺗﻮ ﯾﮧ ﮐﮩﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﮮ ﺑﻨﯽ ﺍﺳﺮﺍﺋﯿﻞ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺕ ﮐﺮﻭ ﺟﻮ ﻣﯿﺮﺍ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺭﺏ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺗﻤﮩﺎﺭﺍ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺑﻼﺷﺒﮧ ﺟﺲ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﺎ ﺷﺮﯾﮏ ﭨﮭﺮﺍﯾﺎ ﺗﻮ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻧﮯ ﺍﺱ ﭘﺮ ﺟﻨﺖ ﺣﺮﺍﻡ ﮐﺮﺩﯼ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﮭﻨﻢ ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﭨﮭﮑﺎﻧﮧ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻇﺎﻟﻤﻮﮞ ﮐﺎ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﻣﺪﺩﮔﺎﺭ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺑﮯ ﺷﮏ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ ﻭﮦ ﺟﻮ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺑﮯ ﺷﮏ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺗﯿﻦ ﺧﺪﺍﻭٔﮞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﺍﯾﮏ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺗﻮ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﮨﮯ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﯾﮧ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺑﺎﺕ ﺳﮯ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻧﮧ ﺍٓﺋﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺟﻮ ﺍﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ‏( ﻣﺮﯾﮟ ﮔﮯ ‏) ﺿﺮﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﻮ ﺩﺭﺩﻧﺎﮎ ﻋﺬﺍﺏ ﭘﮩﻨﭽﮯ ﮔﺎ۔

ﺍﻥ ﺍٓﯾﺎﺕ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﮐﮧ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﻃﻮﺭ ﭘﺮ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﭘﺎﮎ ﻧﮯ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮐﮩﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺩﯾﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﮔﺮ ﯾﮧ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﻣﺸﺮﮐﺎﻧﮧ ﻋﻘﺎﺋﺪ ﺳﮯ ﺗﻮﺑﮧ ﻧﮧ ﮐﺮﯾﮟ ﺗﻮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﺎ ﭨﮭﮑﺎﻧﮧ ﺟﮩﻨﻢ ﮨﮯ ۔ﺍﻭﺭ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮩﻮﺩﯾﻮﮞ ﺳﮯ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﯽ ﮐﮯ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺍﺭﺷﺎﺩ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ :

ﯾٰﺎَﯾُّﮭَﺎ ﺍﻟَّﺬِﯾْﻦَ ﺍَﻣَﻨُﻮْﺍ ﻟَﺎ ﺗَﺘَّﺨِﺬُﻭْﺍ ﺍﻟْﯿَﮭُﻮْﺩَ ﻭَ ﺍﻟﻨَّﺼَﺎﺭٰﯼ ﺍٓﻭْﻟِﯿَﺎٓﺉً ﺑَﻌْﻀُﮭُﻢْ ﺍَﻭْﻟِﯿَﺎٓﺉَ ﺑَﻌْﺾٍ ﻭَّ ﻣَﻦْ ﯾَّﺘَﻮَﻟَّﮭُﻢْ ﻣِﻨْﮑُﻢْ ﻓَﺎِﻧَّﮧ ‘ ﻣِﻨْﮭُﻢْ ﺍِﻥَّ ﺍﻟﻠَّﮧَ ﻻَ ﯾَﮭْﺪِﯼ ﺍﻟْﻘَﻮْﻡَ ﺍﻟﻈَّﺎﻟِﻤِﯿْﻦَ۔ ‏( ﺳﻮﺭۃ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺋﺪﮦ : ﺍٓﯾﺖ ۵۱ ‏)

ﺗﺮﺟﻤﮧ : ﺍﮮ ﺍﯾﻤﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻮ ! ﯾﮩﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﮐﻮ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﻧﮧ ﺑﻨﺎﻧﺎ ،ﺍﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺑﻌﺾ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﻮ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﺗﻢ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻃﺮﻑ ﭘﮭﺮﺍ ﺗﻮ ﻭﮦ ﺍﻧﮩﯽ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻇﺎﻟﻤﻮﮞ ﮐﻮ ﮨﺪﺍﯾﺖ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺩﯾﺘﺎ۔
ﺍﺱ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﻃﻮﺭ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺭﺷﺎﺩ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺩﯾﺎ ﮐﮧ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮩﻮﺩﯾﻮﮞ ﺳﮯ ﮨﺮ ﮔﺰ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﺤﺒﺖ ﮐﮯ ﭘﯿﻨﮕﮯ ﻧﮧ ﺑﮍﮬﺎﻧﺎ ﯾﮧ ﺗﻤﮩﺎﺭﮮ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺍٓﭘﺲ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺩﻭﺳﺮﮮ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﺱ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﻣﻤﺎﻧﻌﺖ ﮐﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺗﻢ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻧﮧ ﺍٓﺋﮯ ﺗﻮ ﭘﮭﺮ ﯾﮩﯽ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﻮ ﮐﮧ ﺗﻢ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﻧﮩﯽ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﮨﻮ۔ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻗﺎﺿﯽ ﻋﯿﺎﺽ ﻣﺎﻟﮑﯽ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ :

’’ ﻭﻣﻦ ﻟﻢ ﯾﮑﻔﺮ ﺍﺣﺪﺍ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﻭﺍﻟﯿﮭﻮﺩ ﻭﮐﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻓﺎﺭﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤﯿﻦ ﺍﻭ ﻭﻗﻒ ﻓﯽ ﺗﮑﻔﯿﺮﮬﻢ ﺍﻭ ﺷﮏ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﯽ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺑﮑﺮ ﻻﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻗﯿﻒ ﻭﺍﻻﺟﻤﺎ ﻉ ﺍﺗﻔﻘﺎ ﻋﻠﯽ ﮐﻔﺮﮬﻢ ﻓﻤﻦ ﻭﻗﻒ ﻓﯽ ﺫﺍﻟﮏ ﻓﻘﺪ ﮐﺬﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺺ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻗﯿﻒ ﻭﺍﻟﺸﮏ ﻓﯿﮧ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﮑﺬﯾﺐ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﺸﮏ ﻓﯿﮧ ﻭﻻ ﯾﻘﻊ ﺍﻻ ﻣﻦ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ۔ ‏( ﺍﻟﺸﻔﺎﺀ : ﺝ۲ : ﺹ ۱۷۰۔ﺣﻘﺎﻧﯿﮧ ‏)

ﺗﺮﺟﻤﮧ : ﺍﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﮨﮯ ﺍﺱ ﮐﮯ ﮐﻔﺮ ﭘﺮ ﺟﻮ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯽ ﯾﮩﻮﺩﯼ ﯾﺎ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﯾﺴﮯ ﺷﺨﺺ ﮐﻮ ﺟﻮ ﺩﯾﻦ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺳﮯ ﺟﺪﺍ ﮨﻮﮔﯿﺎ ﮨﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﻧﮧ ﮐﮩﮯ ﯾﺎ ﺍﺱ ﮐﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮐﮩﻨﮯ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﻮﻗﻒ ﮐﺮﮮ ﯾﺎ ﺷﮏ ﮐﺮﮮ ﺍﻣﺎﻡ ﻗﺎﺿﯽ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺑﮑﺮ ﻧﮯ ﺍ ﺳﮑﯽ ﻭﺟﮧ ﯾﮧ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺋﯽ ﮐﮧ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺷﺮﻋﯿﮧ ﻭ ﺍﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻣﺖ ﺍﻥ ﻟﻮﮔﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﮐﻔﺮ ﭘﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﻖ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺗﻮ ﺟﻮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﮐﻔﺮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﻮﻗﻒ ﮐﺮﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ﻭﮦ ﻧﺺ ﻭ ﺷﺮﯾﻌﺖ ﮐﯽ ﺗﮑﺬﯾﺐ ﮐﺮﺗﺎﮨﮯ ﯾﺎ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺷﮏ ﺭﮐﮭﺘﺎ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮧ ﺑﺎﺕ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯽ ﺳﮯ ﮨﻮﺳﮑﺘﯽ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﺍﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺳﮯ ﯾﮧ ﺑﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﮨﻮﺋﯽ ﮐﮧ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯽ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﻧﮧ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﻨﮯ ﻭﺍﻻ ﺑﮭﯽ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻥ ﺳﮯ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﯽ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﻻﺕ ﺣﺮﺍﻡ ﮨﮯ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺍﻓﺴﻮﺱ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﮐﮩﻨﺎ ﭘﮍﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺑﻌﺾ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﮩﺎﺩ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ،ﻣﺤﺒﺖ ،ﺍﺧﻮﺕ ،ﺑﮭﺎﺋﯽ ﭼﺎﺭﮦ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻣﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺧﻮﺑﺼﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﺎﻣﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﺍٓﮌﻣﯿﮟ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﭘﯿﺎﺭ ﻭﻣﺤﺒﺖ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﯽ ﯾﺎﺭﯼ ﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﺴﮯ ﺗﻌﻠﻘﺎﺕ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﺭﮐﮭﻨﺎ ﭼﺎﮨﺘﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﺬﺍﮨﺐ ﺍﯾﮏ ﮔﻠﺪﺳﺘﮧ ﮐﯽ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺍﺧﺘﯿﺎﺭ ﮐﺮﻟﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻣﻦ ﮐﮯ ﻧﺎﻡ ﭘﺮ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﻣﺬﮨﺒﯽ ﺗﮩﻮﺍﺭ ’’ ﮐﺮﺳﻤﺲ ‘‘ ﮐﻮ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻋﯿﺴﯽٰ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﻡ ﮐﺎ ﺟﻨﻢ ﺩﻥ ﻣﺎﻥ ﮐﺮ ﺑﮍﮮ ﺩﮬﻮﻡ ﺩﮬﺎﻡ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﻮ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﻣﻞ ﮐﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﯾﺎ ﺟﺎﺭﮨﺎ ﮨﮯ ۔ﺣﺎﻻﻧﮑﮧ ﻋﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻧﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮﻭﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺗﮩﻮﺍﺭﻭﮞ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺷﺮﮐﺖ ﮐﻮ ﮐﻔﺮ ﻟﮑﮭﺎ ﮨﮯ۔

ﮐﺮﺳﻤﺲ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﺧﺪﺍ ﮐﺎ ﻏﻀﺐ ﻧﺎﺯﻝ ﮨﻮﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ

ﺍﺧﺒﺮﻧﺎ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺑﮑﺮ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺭﺳﯽ ﺍﻧﺎ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﺳﺤﺎﻕ ﺍﻻﺻﺒﮭﺎﻧﯽ ﻧﺎ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻓﺎﺭﺱ ﻧﺎ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﯿﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﺨﺎﺭﯼ : ﻗﺎﻝ : ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﯽ ﻣﺮﯾﻢ ﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻓﻊ ﺑﻦ ﯾﺰﯾﺪ ﺳﻤﻊ ﺳﻠﯿﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﯽ ﺯﯾﻨﺐ ﻭ ﻋﻤﺮﻭ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺭﺙ ﺳﻤﻊ ﺳﻌﯿﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﯽ ﺳﻠﻤۃ ﺳﻤﻊ ﺍﺑﺎﮦ ﺳﻤﻊ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﺎﺏ ﺭﺿﯽ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﯽ ﻋﻨﮧ ﺍﻧﮧ ﻗﺎﻟـ : ﺍﺟﺘﻨﺒﻮﺍ ﺍﻋﺪﺍٓﺀ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺍﻟﯿﮭﻮﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﻓﯽ ﻋﯿﺪﮬﻢ ﯾﻮﻡ ﺟﻤﻌﮭﻢ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺨﻂ ﯾﻨﺰﻝ ﻋﻠﯿﮩﻢ ﻓﺎﺧﺸﯽ ﺍﻥ ﯾﺼﯿﺒﮑﻢ ﻭﻻ ﺗﻌﻠﻤﻮﺍ ﺑﻄﺎﻧﺘﮭﻢ ﺗﺨﻠﻘﻮﺍ ﺑﺨﻠﻘﮭﻢ۔
‏( ﺷﻌﺐ ﺍﻻﯾﻤﺎﻥ : ﺝ۷ : ﺹ ۴۳۔ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻟﮑﺘﺐ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﯿﮧ ﺑﯿﺮﻭﺕ ‏)

ﺗﺮﺟﻤﮧ : ﮨﻤﯿﮟ ﺧﺒﺮ ﺩﯼ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺑﮑﺮ ﻓﺎﺭﺳﯽ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻥ ﮐﻮ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﺳﺤﻖ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻥ ﮐﻮ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﺣﻤﺪﻧﮯ ﺍﻥ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺳﻤﻌﯿﻞ ﺑﺨﺎﺭﯼ ﻧﮯ ﻭﮦ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺮﯾﻢ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻧﮑﻮ ﺧﺒﺮ ﺩﯼ ﻧﺎﻓﻊ ﺑﻦ ﯾﺰﯾﺪ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﺳﻨﺎﺳﻠﯿﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺯﯾﻨﺐ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻭﮦ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺑﻦ ﺣﺎﺭﺙ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﺳﻌﯿﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺳﻠﻤﮧ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﻭﺍﻟﺪ ﺳﮯ ﺳﻨﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻧﮩﻮﮞ ﻧﮯ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻋﻤﺮ ؓ ﺳﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﭖ ؓ ﻧﮯ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﯾﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﮯ ﺩﺷﻤﻨﻮﮞ ﯾﮭﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﺳﮯ ﺑﭽﻮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻋﯿﺪ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﺍﮐﮭﭩﮯ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻧﻮﮞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺑﮯ ﺷﮏ ﺍﻥ ﭘﺮ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﯽ ﻧﺎﺭﺍﺿﯽ ﺍﺗﺮﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮈﺭﺗﺎ ﮨﻮﮞ ﮐﮧ ﮐﮩﯿﮟ ﻭﮦ ﺗﻤﮩﯿﮟ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻧﮧ ﭘﮩﻨﭻ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﺍﻧﺪﺭﻭﻧﯽ ﺑﺎﺗﯿﮟ ﻣﺖ ﺟﺎﻧﺎ ﮐﺮﻭ ﮐﯿﻮﻧﮑﮧ ﺗﻢ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺎﺩﺗﯿﮟ ﺳﯿﮑﮫ ﺟﺎﻭ ﮔﮯ ‏( ﯾﻌﻨﯽ ﺍﻥ ﺳﮯ ﻣﺘﺎﺛﺮ ﮨﻮﺟﺎﻭﮔﮯ ‏) ﺍﺳﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺭﻭﺍﯾﺖ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ :

ﺍﺧﺒﺮﻧﺎ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺳﻢ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﻓﯽ ﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﯽ ﺑﻦ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺰﺑﯿﺮ ﺍﻟﮑﻮﻓﯽ ﻧﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﻠﯽ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻔﺎﻥ ﻧﺎ ﺯﯾﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺒﺎﺏ ﻧﺎ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻘﺒﮧ ﺣﺪﺛﻨﯽ ﻋﻄﺎﺀ ﺑﻦ ﺩﯾﻨﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﮭﺬﻟﯽ ﺍﻥ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﺎﺏ ﻗﺎﻝ : ﺍﯾﺎﮐﻢ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﻃﻨۃ ﺍﻻﻋﺎﺟﻢ ﻭ ﺍﻥ ﺗﺪﺧﻠﻮﺍ ﻋﻠﯿﮩﻢ ﻓﯽ ﺑﯿﻌﮭﻢ ﯾﻮﻡ ﻋﯿﺪﮬﻢ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺨﻂ ﯾﻨﺰﻝ ﻋﻠﯿﮩﻢ۔
‏( ﺷﻌﺐ ﺍﻻﯾﻤﺎﻥ : ﺝ۷ : ﺹ۴۳ ‏)

ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻋﻤﺮ ؓ ﻧﮯ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﯾﺎ ﺗﻢ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺍٓﭖ ﮐﻮ ﺑﭽﺎﻭٔ ﺍﮨﻞ ﻋﺠﻢ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺵ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﺑﺎﺕ ﺳﮯ ﻣﻨﻊ ﮐﯿﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺕ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﮞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﻋﯿﺪ ﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﺎﻡ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﮨﻮﺍ ﮐﺮﯾﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﺎ ﻏﻀﺐ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﻧﺎﺯﻝ ﮨﻮﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﻗﺎﺭﺋﯿﻦ ﺍﮨﻠﺴﻨﺖ ! ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻋﻤﺮ ؓ ﺗﻮ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﻮ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﺎ ﺩﺷﻤﻦ ﮐﮩﮧ ﺭﮨﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﮐﺮﺳﻤﺲ ﮐﮯ ﻣﻮﻗﻊ ﭘﺮ ﺟﻤﻊ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﺳﮯ ﻣﻨﻊ ﮐﺮﺭﮨﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﺎ ﻏﻀﺐ ﻭ ﻧﺎﺭﺍﺿﮕﯽ ﻧﺎﺯﻝ ﮨﻮﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ﻣﮕﺮ ﯾﮧ ﺟﻌﻠﯽ ﺻﻮﻓﯽ ﮐﮩﺘﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﯾﮧ ﺧﯿﺮ ﻭ ﺑﺮﮐﺖ ﻭﺍﻻ ﺩﻥ ﮨﮯ ۔ﺍﺏ ﮨﻢ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﻣﺎﻧﯿﮟ ﯾﺎ ﺣﻀﺮ ﺕ ﻋﻤﺮ ؓ ﮐﯽ ؟

ﮐﺎﻓﺮﻭﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﺎﻡ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮨﮯ

ﻣﻼ ﻋﻠﯽ ﻗﺎﺭﯼ ﺣﻨﻔﯽ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ : ؎

ﻓﯽ ﻓﺘﺎﻭﯼ ﺍﻟﺼﻐﺮﯼ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﯼ ﯾﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﺷﯿﺌﺎ ﻭ ﻟﻢ ﯾﮑﻦ ﯾﺸﺘﺮﯾﮧ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺫﺍﻟﮏ ﺍﺭﺍﺩ ﺑﮧ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﺭﻭﺯ ،ﮐﻔﺮ ﺍﯼ ﻻﻧﮧ ﻋﻈﻢ ﻋﯿﺪ ﺍﻟﮑﻔﺮۃ۔ )) ﺷﺮﺡ ﻓﻘﮧ ﺍﻻﮐﺒﺮ : ﺹ ۴۹۹ ۔ﺑﯿﺮﻭﺕ ‏)

ﺍﮔﺮ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻧﮯ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ‏( ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻋﯿﺪ ‏) ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﺍﯾﺴﯽ ﭼﯿﺰ ﺧﺮﯾﺪﯼ ﺟﻮ ﺍﺱ ﺳﮯ ﭘﮩﻠﮯ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺧﺮﯾﺪﺗﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ،ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﮦ ﺍﺱ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﺀ ﺳﮯ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ﺗﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﻮﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﮔﺎ،ﺍﺱ ﻟﺌﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍ ﺱ ﻧﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮﻭﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻋﯿﺪ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﯽ۔

ﻣﺰﯾﺪ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ :

ﻟﻮﺍﻥ ﺭﺟﻼ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺧﻤﺴﯿﻦ ﻋﺎﻣﺎ ﺛﻢ ﺟﺎﺀ ﯾﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﻓﺎﮬﺪﯼ ﺍﻟﯽ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺮﮐﯿﻦ ﯾﺮﯾﺪ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﺫﺍﻟﮏ ﺍﻟﯿﻮﻡ ﻓﻘﺪ ﮐﻔﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺍﻟﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﻭ ﺣﺒﻂ ﻋﻤﻠﮧ ﺧﻤﺴﯿﻦ ﻋﺎﻣﺎ۔
‏( ﺷﺮﺡ ﻓﻘﮧ ﺍﻻﮐﺒﺮ : ﺹ ۵۰۰ ‏)

ﺍﮔﺮ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺷﺨﺺ ﻧﮯ ﭘﭽﺎﺱ ﺳﺎﻝ ﺗﮏ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺕ ﮐﯽ ﭘﮭﺮ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﮐﺎ ﺩﻥ ﺍٓﮔﯿﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻣﺸﺮﮎ ﮐﻮ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﮨﺪﯾﮧ ﮐﺮﺩﯾﺎ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﻧﯿﺖ ﺍﺱ ﮨﺪﯾﮧ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﺗﮭﯽ ﺗﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮐﯿﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﭘﭽﺎﺱ ﺳﺎﻝ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺕ ﺑﺮﺑﺎﺩ ﮨﻮﮔﺌﯽ۔

ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍٓﮔﮯ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ :

’’ ﻭ ﻋﻠﯽ ﻗﯿﺎﺱ ﻣﺴﺎﻟۃ ﺍﻟﺨﺮﻭﺝ ﺍﻟﯽ ﺍﻟﻨﯿﺮﻭﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻮﺳﯽ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺍﻓﻘۃ ﻣﻌﮭﻢ ﻓﯿﻤﺎ ﯾﻔﻠﻌﻮﻥ ﻓﯽ ﺫﺍﻟﮏ ﺍﻟﯿﻮﻡ ﯾﻮﺟﺐ ﺍﻟﮑﻔﺮ ‘’

ﯾﻌﻨﯽ ﺍﺳﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﮐﮯ ﺟﺸﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﻧﮑﻠﻨﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﻮ ﮐﭽﮫ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯽ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻣﻮﺍﻗﻔﺖ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﯾﮧ ﺑﮭﯽ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮐﻮ ﻻﺯﻡ ﮐﺮﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﺍﺏ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﮩﺎﺩ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﭼﯿﻠﮯ ﺟﻮ ﮐﺮﺳﻤﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﮐﯿﮏ ﮐﺎﭨﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﮔﯿﺖ ﮔﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺟﺸﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﯿﺎ ﯾﮧ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺭﮨﮯ؟
ﻋﻼﻣﮧ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺷﮭﺎﺏ ﯾﻮﺳﻒ ﺍﻟﮑﺮﺩﺭﯼ ﺍﻟﺤﻨﻔﯽ ؒ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ :

’’ ﻭﮐﺬﺍ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﻠﻤﯿﻦ ﯾﻮﻡ ﻓﺼﺢ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﻟﻮ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻘۃ ﻟﮭﻢ۔ ‏( ﻓﺘﺎﻭﯼ ﺑﺰﺍﺯﯾﮧ : ﺝ۳ : ﺹ ۱۸۶ ‏)

ﺍﺳﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻧﻮﮞ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻋﯿﺪ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻘﺖ ﮐﺮﻧﮯ ﮐﯿﻠﺌﮯ ﮨﮯ ﺗﻮ ﯾﮧ ﺳﺐ ﺑﮭﯽ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﻮﮔﺌﮯ۔

ﻋﻼﻣﮧ ﺑﺰﺍﺯﯼ ﻧﮯ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺑﮍﯼ ﻋﺠﯿﺐ ﺑﺎﺕ ﮐﯽ ﺟﻮ ﺻﻮﻓﯽ ﻣﺴﻌﻮﺩ ﮐﮯ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﮐﮯ ﺑﺎﻟﮑﻞ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻖ ﮨﮯ ﻭﮦ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﻧﮑﻠﻨﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻭﮦ ﺍﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﺳﺮﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﯾﻨﺎ ﺟﻮ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯽ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﯽ ﻭﺟﮧ ﺳﮯ ﺗﻮ ﯾﮧ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮨﮯ ،ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮧ ﮐﺎﻡ ﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﻭﮦ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺟﻮ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﺖ ﭼﮭﻮﮌ ﮐﺮ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻻﺋﮯ ﭘﺲ ﻭﮦ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻃﺮﻑ ﻧﮑﻠﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻘﺖ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﻭﺟﮧ ﺳﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﻮﺟﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻓﺴﻮﺱ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﮨﻮﺗﺎ ‘‘ ۔ ‏( ﻓﺘﺎﻭﯼ ﺑﺰﺍﺯﯾﮧ : ﺝ۳ : ﺹ ۱۸۶ ‏)

ﻗﺎﺭﺋﯿﻦ ﮐﺮﺍﻡ ﺍﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺣﻮﺍﻟﮧ ﺟﺎﺕ ﺳﮯ ﯾﮧ ﺑﺎﺕ ﺭﻭﺯ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﮐﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﮨﻮﮔﺌﯽ ﮐﮧ ﮐﻔﺎﺭ ﮐﮯ ﻣﺬﮨﺒﯽ ﺗﮩﻮﺍﺭﻭﮞ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ،ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺟﻤﻊ ﮨﻮﻧﺎ،ﻭﮦ ﺟﻮ ﺍﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻥ ﮐﻮ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﯾﮧ ﺳﺐ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﺳﺐ ﮐﺎ ﮐﺮﻧﮯ ﻭﺍﻻ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﮐﯽ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﮯ ۔

The REAL Christmas Story: How a Prophet was turned into a god

By Abu Zakariya

On December 25th, most Christians around the world will be celebrating Christmas, a day that commemorates the birth of who they believe is their Lord and saviour, Jesus Christ. A lot of Muslim commentaries at this time of the year tend to focus on highlighting links between Christmas and the pagan celebrations of old such as Saturnalia. We typically argue on the basis that the date of December 25th, and symbolic practices such as adorning trees with gold and silver, have direct parallels with paganism, and therefore such celebrations should be avoided.

Such arguments are unconvincing for many Christians. Putting to one side the possibility that many of the parallels may be purely coincidental (think about it, most calendar dates will coincide with a pagan festival as there are so many different pagan religions with so many different celebrations dotted throughout the year). Christians even manage to put a positive spin on things, they acknowledge such parallels but retort that the early Church Fathers assimilated many of the pagan practices that were popular with the masses and purified them in the process, taking people away from the worship of the pre-Christian, Graeco-Roman gods to the worship of the God of Abraham. In their minds, this is a good thing.

Even in the Islamic tradition, there are some rituals which have parallels with other religions. The example of Ashura springs to mind:

It was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) that when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) came to Madinah, he found them fasting on one day, i.e., ‘Ashura’. They said: This is a great day; it is the day on which Allah saved Musa and drowned the people of Pharaoh, so Musa fasted in gratitude to Allah. He (the Prophet) said: “I am closer to Musa than they are.” So he fasted on that day and issued instructions to fast on that day. [1]

In another narration, we find the companions questioning the Prophet (peace be upon him) about the parallels of Ashura with the religions of the People of the Book:

Ibn ‘Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah fasted on the day of ‘Ashura’ and ordered the people to fast on it. The people said, “O Messenger of Allah, it is a day that the Jews and Christians honour.” The Prophet said, “When the following year comes, Allah willing, we shall fast on the ninth and the tenth.” [2]

We can see that the Prophet (peace be upon him) didn’t just assimilate this Jewish practice but differentiated it by changing some underlying elements, in this case by adjusting the date.

The point is that simple, ritualistic parallels in and of themselves should not be our focus. Coming back to Christmas, elements such as the date of Christmas are superficial when compared to the actual paganism that lies at the heart of Christian belief. There is a far more powerful strategy that we can adopt in our dawah, and that is showing the links between pagan belief and the fundamental doctrines of Christianity such as the Trinity. So rather than focussing on the when of Christmas, instead try to focus on the what. What is the essence of Christmas? It’s a celebration of the incarnation of the second person of the Trinity, God the Son, in the bodily form of Jesus. This shall be the focus for the rest of the article.


In order to understand the influence of paganism on the doctrine of the Trinity, we need to first understand the world into which Christianity was born and developed. The early followers of Jesus were followers of Judaism. In fact, Christianity started out as a movement within Judaism. Like Jews since the time of Moses, these early believers kept the Sabbath, were circumcised and worshiped in the Temple. The only thing that distinguished the early followers of Jesus from any other Jews was their belief in Jesus as the Messiah, that is, the one chosen by God who would redeem the Jewish people. Today, many Christian scholars agree that authors of the New Testament such as Matthew were Jewish believers in Jesus. The influence of Judaism on the New Testament is important because it helps us to correctly understand its message. The New Testament is full of terminology like “son of God.” Such language is interpreted literally by Christians today to mean that Jesus is God the Son, but is this correct? What was the intention behind the Jewish writers of the New Testament when they used such language? What did these terms mean at the time of Jesus?


When we turn to the Old Testament we find that such language permeates its pages. For example, Moses calls God “Father”: Is this the way you repay the Lord, you foolish and unwise people? Is he not your Father, your Creator, who made you and formed you? [Deuteronomy 32:6] Angels are referred to as “sons of God”: Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them. [Job 1:6] The Old Testament even goes so far as to call Moses a god: “And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.” [Exodus 7:1] The Israelites are also referred to as “gods”: “I said, ‘You are “gods”; you are all sons of the Most High.’”  [Psalm 82:6] What we can conclude is that such highly exalted language was commonplace and is intended figuratively; it is not a literal indication of divinity.

Even as late as the end of the first century, when the New Testament writers started penning their accounts of the life of Jesus, Jewish people were still using such language figuratively. In a conversation between Jesus and some Jewish teachers of the law, they say to Jesus: “…The only Father we have is God himself.” [John 8:41] The Gospel of Luke calls Adam a son of God when it recounts the lineage of Jesus: “the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.” [Luke 3:38] Jesus even says that anyone who makes peace is a child of God: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.” [Matthew 5:9] If the New Testament writers understood such language to be a claim to divinity, then they would have used it exclusively in relation to Jesus. Clearly, it denotes a person that is righteous before God and nothing more.

So we can see that such language, in and of itself, does not denote the divinity of Jesus. So where did such ideas come from?


The turning point in history came when Christianity ceased being a small movement within Judaism and Gentiles (non-Jews) started to embrace the faith in large numbers. We need to look to the pagan world of the Gentiles in order to understand the mindset of the people that received the New Testament message. Since the time of Alexander the Great, Gentiles had been living in a Hellenistic (Greek) world. Their lands were dominated by Roman armies, with the Roman Empire being the superpower of the world at the time. The Roman Empire itself was heavily influenced by Hellenistic religion, philosophy and culture. Greek gods and goddesses like Zeus, Hermes and Aphrodite, as well as Roman gods and goddesses like Jupiter, Venus and Diana, dominated the landscape. There were temples, priesthoods, and feasts dedicated to the patron god or goddess of a city or region; statues to the deities dotted the forums of the cities. Even rulers themselves were frequently worshipped as gods.

Gentiles from such a polytheistic background would have naturally understood Christian preaching about the “son of God” in light of a Greek or Roman god having been begotten by another. We can see this mindset manifested in the New Testament. In the Book of Acts there is an incident where the Gentile crowds think that Paul is Zeus come among them when he heals a crippled man:

When the crowd saw what Paul had done, they shouted in the Lycaonian language, “The gods have come down to us in human form!” 

Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes because he was the chief speaker.

The priest of Zeus, whose temple was just outside the city, brought bulls and wreaths to the city gates because he and the crowd wanted to offer sacrifices to them.

But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting: 

“Men, why are you doing this? We too are only men, human like you. We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to the living God, who made heaven and earth and sea and everything in them. [Acts 14:11-15]

Here we see that the Graeco-Roman peoples that Paul and Barnabas were preaching to were in the habit of taking humans for gods. Despite Paul protesting that he was not a god, the people persisted in their belief: “Even with these words, they had difficulty keeping the crowd from sacrificing to them.” [Acts 14:18] From this example we can see that according to Christian history, it was a common practice for people to attribute divinity to other humans. In spite of Paul openly denying being a god, the people continued to worship and sacrifice to him. We can conclude that even if Jesus himself rejected being God at that time, the mindset of the people was such that they would still have found a way to deify him.

With this background in mind, it’s easy to see how Judaic phrases like “son of God” took on a different meaning when transported out of their Jewish monotheistic context into pagan Greco-Roman thought. The Trinity doctrine arose neither in a vacuum, nor strictly from the text of Scripture. It was the result of the influence of certain beliefs and attitudes that prevailed in and around the Church after the first century. The Church emerged in a Jewish and Greek world and so the primitive Church had to reconcile the notions they had inherited from Judaism with those they had derived from pagan mythology. In the words of the historian and Anglican bishop John Wand, “Jew and Greek had to meet in Christ” [3]


It’s interesting to note that the Greco-Roman religions were filled with tales of gods procreating with human beings and begetting god-men. The belief that God could be incarnate, or that there were sons of God, were common and popular beliefs. For example, the chief god in the Greek pantheon, Zeus, visited the human woman Danae in the form of golden rain and fathered Perseus, a “god-man.” In another tale Zeus is said to have come to the human woman Alcmena, disguised as her husband. Alcmena bore Hercules, another “god-man.” Such tales bear a striking similarity to Trinitarian beliefs of God being begotten as a man. In fact, the early Christian apologist Justin Martyr, considered a saint in the Catholic Church, said the following in response to pagan criticisms that Christianity borrowed from their beliefs about the sons of God:

When we say that the Word, who is our teacher, Jesus Christ the first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he was crucified and died and rose again, and ascended to heaven, we propound nothing new or different from what you [pagans] believe regarding those whom you consider sons of Jupiter. [4]

According to ancient Roman myth, Jupiter was the king of all the gods. Here Justin Martyr is telling Roman pagans that what the Christians believe about Jesus being the son of God is nothing different than what they believe about the sons of the god Jupiter. That the Church Fathers’ conception of the Trinity was a combination of Jewish monotheism and pagan polytheism can be seen in the testimony of Gregory of Nyssa, a fourth century bishop who is venerated as a saint in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches. He also happens to be one of the great figures in the history of the philosophical formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity. He wrote:

For the truth passes in the mean between these two conceptions, destroying each heresy, and yet, accepting what is useful to it from each. The Jewish dogma is destroyed by the acceptance of the Word and by belief in the Spirit, while the polytheistic error of the Greek school is made to vanish by the unity of the nature abrogating this imagination of plurality. [5]

The Christian conception of God, argues Gregory of Nyssa, is neither purely the polytheism of the Greeks nor purely the monotheism of the Jews, but rather a combination of both.

Even the concept of God-men who were saviours of mankind was by no means exclusive to Jesus. Long before Jesus was born, it was not uncommon for military men and political rulers to be talked about as divine beings. More than that, they were even treated as divine beings: given temples, with priests, who would perform sacrifices in their honour, in the presence of statues of them. In Athens for example, Demetrios Poliorcetes (Demetrios the Conqueror of Cities, 337–283 BCE) was acclaimed as a divine being by hymn-writers because he liberated them from their Macedonian enemies:

How the greatest and dearest of the gods are present in our city! For the circumstances have brought together Demeter and Demetrios; she comes to celebrate the solemn mysteries of the Kore, while he is here full of joy, as befits the god, fair and laughing. His appearance is solemn, his friends all around him and he in their midst, as though they were stars and he the sun. Hail boy of the most powerful god Poseidon and Aphrodite! For other gods are either far away, or they do not have ears, or they do not exist, or do not take any notice of us, but you we can see present here, not made of wood or stone, but real. So we pray to you: first make peace, dearest; for you have the power… [6]

The Athenians gave Demetrios an arrival that was fit for a god, burning incense on altars and making offerings to their new deified king. It must be pointed out that as time passed by, he did some other things that the Athenians did not approve of, and as a consequence they revoked their adoration of him. It seems that in the days before Jesus, divinity could be stripped away from human beings just as easily as it was granted. Perhaps the best known examples of God-men are the divine honours bestowed upon the rulers of the Roman Empire, starting with Julius Caesar. We have an inscription dedicated to him in 49 BCE discovered in the city of Ephesus, which says this about him [7]:

Descendant of Ares and Aphrodite

The God who has become manifest

And universal savior of human life

So Julius Caesar was believed to be God manifest as man, the saviour of mankind. Sound familiar? Now prior to Julius Caesar, rulers in the city of Rome itself were not granted divine honours. But Caesar himself was – before he died, the senate approved the building of a temple for him, a cult statue, and a priest. Soon after his death, his adopted son and heir, Octavian, promoted the idea that at his death, Caesar had been taken up to heaven and been made a god to live with the gods. There was a good reason that Octavian wanted his adopted father to be declared a God. If his father was God, then what does that make him? This deification of Caesar set the precedent for what was to happen with the emperors, beginning with the first of them, Octavian himself, who became “Caesar Augustus” in 29 BCE. There is an inscription that survives from his lifetime found in the city of Halicarnassus (modern Turkey), which calls Augustus [8]:

…The native Zeus

and Savior of the human race

This is yet another example of a divine saviour of mankind. Now Octavian happened to also be the “son of God” by virtue of his divine father Julius Caesar. In fact Octavian became known as ‘Divi filius’ (“Son of the Divine One”). These, of course, are all titles widely used by Christians today to describe Jesus. We must realise that the early Church did not come up with these titles out of the blue, they are all things said of other men before they were said of Jesus. For early Christians, the idea was not that Jesus was the only person who was ever called such things, this is a misconception. The concept of a divine human being who was the saviour of mankind was a sort of template that was applied to people of great power and authority. We’ve seen that the history of paganism is littered with such examples, and Jesus was just another divine saviour in a long list of divine saviours that had preceded him.


Pre-Islamic Arabia was a dreadful place to live in. Slavery was an economic institution with male and female slaves being bought and sold like animals. Illiteracy was common among the Arabs, as were alcoholism and adultery. Those with power and money took advantage of the poor by charging extremely high interest on loans. Arabia was a male-dominated society; men could marry any number of women. When a man died, his son “inherited” all his wives except his own mother. Women had virtually no legal status, for example they had no right to possess property and had little to no inheritance rights. Female infanticide was widely practiced with daughters often being buried alive.

It was not only the rights of human beings that were violated, but also the rights of God. The Arabs were a highly idolatrous people. The idolatry of pre-Islamic Arabia seeped into every facet of day-to-day life. Idols adorned their places of worship. Today the Ka’ba, situated in Saudi Arabia and the holiest place of worship for Muslims, contains neither idols nor images. But before Islam, the pagan Arabs housed 360 different idols in the Ka’ba. Idols were their travel partners whenever they set out on a journey, for the Arabs were very superstitious and believed that they would provide protection in a land plagued by highway robbery and kidnapping. They were also the source of their livelihoods, so central was the Ka’ba to idolatry that pagans from all over Arabia would make pilgrimage there.

In just 23 years, Islam managed to completely reform not only the social ills of Arabian society, but also its idolatry, taking people away from the worship of carved images and stones back to the worship of the One true God of Abraham. This is the testimony of Ja’far bin Abi Talib, who was a contemporary of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Here he informed the king of Abyssinia about the condition of his people and the positive change that Islam brought for them:

O King, we were an uncivilised people, worshipping idols, eating carrion, committing abominations, breaking natural ties, treating guests badly, and our strong devoured our weak. Thus we were until God sent us an apostle whose lineage, truth, trustworthiness, and clemency we know. He summoned us to acknowledge God’s unity and to worship Him and to renounce the stones and images which we and our fathers formerly worshipped. He commanded us to speak the truth, be faithful to our engagements, mindful of the ties of kinship and kind hospitality, and to refrain from crimes and bloodshed. He forbade us to commit abominations and to speak lies, and to devour the property of orphans, to vilify chaste women. He commanded us to worship God alone and not associate anything with Him, and he gave us orders about prayer, almsgiving, and fasting. We confessed his truth and believed in him, and we followed him in what he had brought from God, and we worshipped God without associating aught with Him. [9]

Just how did the Qur’an go about winning the hearts and minds of people, completely transforming every level of Arabian society in such a short space of time? The Qur’an takes into account the psychology of its audience, which is demonstrated in its use of language. In defining the relationship between God and mankind, the Qur’an avoids terms like “Father” when referring to God and “sons of God” when referring to human beings. Such language can be easily misunderstood, especially in the minds of those who come from a background of idolatry and are used to interpreting such language literally. There are even those who might take advantage of such ambiguous language in Scripture, by interpreting it in such a way as to try and justify idolatry. The Qur’an warns mankind against using ambiguity as the foundation for our beliefs:

It is He who has sent this Scripture down to you [Prophet]. Some of its verses are definite in meaning – these are the cornerstone of the Scripture – and others are ambiguous. The perverse at heart eagerly pursue the ambiguities in their attempt to make trouble and to pin down a specific meaning of their own [3:7]

The Qur’an confirms that those who believe that Jesus is the literal Son of God are imitating an ancient pagan concept: “The Christians said, ‘The Messiah is the son of God’: they said this with their own mouths, repeating what earlier disbelievers had said.” [9:30] When the Qur’an defines the relationship between God and mankind, it instead uses terms like Creator when referring to God, and we as the creation. Such terms leave no room for confusion and clearly distinguish between what is God and what is not – everything else. Such careful use of language shows the wisdom of the Qur’an’s source and the insight He has into the human condition. Our Creator knows the inner thoughts of man: “We created man – We know what his soul whispers to him: We are closer to him than his jugular vein.” [50:16]


Take this Kitaab with Quwwah

By Muhammad Huzaifah ibn Adam aal-Ebrahim

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيْمِ

There are five Aayats in the Qur’aan Kareem wherein Allah Ta`ala commands people to seize a particular thing with Quwwah. These Aayaat are:

“And (remember, O Bani Israa’eel) when We took your promise (that you would fulfil the injunctions of the Towrah) and We raised above you Mount Toor (saying): “Take what We have given you (the Towraah) with Quwwah (power), and heed what is in it (i.e. act upon it) so that you may attain Taqwa.” [Surah al-Baqarah, 2:63]

In this particular Aayah, Allah Ta`ala is addressing Bani Israa’eel, reminding them of how He had taken their oaths and covenants that they would have Imaan in Him Alone, not committing Shirk with Him, and that they would follow His Rusul. Allaah Ta`ala mentions that at the time of this Covenant being taken, He raised Mount Toor out of the earth from its root and suspended it over the heads of Bani Israa’eel, that they may realise the gravity of this Covenant and follow this Command that Allaah Ta`aalaa is giving them, of taking the Towrah with Quwwah (power), resolutely, with courage to carry out His Commands.

When Imaam Qataadah رحمة الله عليه gave the Tafseer of this Aayah, and he explained the meaning of “bi-Quwwah (with power),” he said: “(Allaah Ta`aalaa was saying to them) Take this Towrah with seriousness or I will hurl down this mountain upon you.”

Thus, out of fear of the `Adhaab of Allaah Ta`aalaa the Bani Israa’eel unanimously submitted, falling into Sajdah, and they pledged that they would take this Towrah with Quwwah.

Imaam Abu-l `Aaliyah and Imaam Rabi` ibn Anas explained that one meaning of this Quwwah mentioned in the Aayah is Taa`ah (obedience). Imaam Mujaahid gave another meaning to it, which is “bi-`Amalim bimaa Feehi” (by acting upon it).

The second time in the Qur’aan Kareem that Allaah Ta`ala mentions this Command of taking something “With Quwwah” is also in Surah al-Baqarah:

“And (remember) When We took a promise from you (that you will obey the commands in the Towraah) and (after you refused to carry out the promise, We) raised Mount Toor above you (saying): “Take what We have given you with Quwwah (power) and listen (to the commands, otherwise the mountain will be flung on you). They said, “We hear and we disobey (Your command).” Because of their Kufr, the (love of the) calf was soaked into their hearts. Tell them, “Evil indeed is that (worship of the calf and rejection of Muhammad ﷺ) which your belief (in the Towraah) orders you to do, if you really are people who believe (as you claim).” [Surah al-Baqarah, 2:93] 

In Tafseer Jalaalayn, “with Quwwah” is explained as “with Jidd (might/determination) and Ijtihaad (hard work).”

The third time that Allah Ta`ala mentions “with Quwwah” is in Soorah al-A`raaf. This time, the Command is addressed to Nabi Moosa عليه السلام:

“And We wrote for him (Moosa عليه السلام) on the tablets (of the Towraah) every type of advice and details of everything (that man needs to know). (We told him): “Take (this Towraah) with Quwwah (power), and command your people to hold fast to the excellent commandments it contains. I am going to show you the abode of the Faasiqeen.”   [Soorah al-A`raaf, 7:145]

Imaam ibn Katheer رحمة الله عليه in his Tafseer explains “with Quwwah” as being: “bi-`Azmin `alat-Taa`ah” (with determination to obey).

Hadhrat `Abdullaah ibn ‘Abbas رضي الله انهما, added:

Imaam Sufyaan ibn `Uyaynah narrates: Abu Sa`d narrated to us from `Ikrimah, from Hadhrat `Abdullah ibn `Abbas رضي الله انهما who said: “Nabi Moosa عليه السلام was commanded to take (upon himself) the severest (of the laws) which his people were commanded with.”

In other words, he was commanded to take the strictest view for himself, with regards to the commandments of his Shari`ah.

With regards to the Aayah: “I am going to show you the abode of the Faasiqeen.”, some of the Mufassiroon have said that it refers to the lands of the Kuffaar in this Dunyaa, i.e. that Allah Ta`ala is going to take it away from them and give it to the Muslims. The second view is that Allah Ta`ala was telling Nabi Moosa عليه السلام: “I am going to show you the abode in Jahannam of those who oppose Me and who are not obedient unto Me.”

The fourth time in the Qur’aan when Allah Ta`ala commands people to take something “with Quwwah”, it is also in Surah al-A`raaf:

“And (remember the time) when We uprooted the mountain (Mount Toor and suspended it) above them (the Bani Israa’eel) as if it were a canopy and they thought that it would fall on them. (We said to them) “Take what We have given you with Quwwah and remember what is in it so that you may attain Taqwaa.” [Surah al-A`raaf, 7:171]

Imaam ibn Katheer narrates in his Tafseer that when Allah Ta`ala had given the Towraah to Nabi Moosaa عليه السلام, he commanded them to obey it and carry out its injunctions, saying to them, “Accept everything that is in this Kitaab, for in it is an explanation of what Allaah has made Halaal for you and what He has made Haraam upon you, and what He has commanded you and what He has forbidden you from.” They said, “Open it up and show us what is inside it. If its injunctions are easy and its Hudood (prescribed punishments) are light, we will accept it.”

Nabi Moosa عليه السلام said to them: “Accept it regardless of what is in it.”

They said, “No. We will not accept it until we know what is inside it. What are its injunctions and prescribed punishments like?” They continued to refuse to accept it until Allah Ta`ala uprooted the mountain and raised it in the sky above their heads. Nabi Moosa عليه السلام then said to them, “Do you not see what my Rabb `Azza wa Jall is saying? He is saying, “If you do not accept the Tawrah with whatever is inside it, I will throw on you this mountain.”

Commenting on this event, Imaam Hasan Basri رحمة الله عليه said, “When Bani Israa’eel looked up at the mountain raised above their heads, about to be hurled at them, all of them unanimously fell into Sajdah, prostrating upon the left part of their foreheads and looking up at the mountain with their right eyes, out of fear that it would fall on them. Thus, there is no Jew in the world who does not prostrate upon the left part of his forehead. The Jews say: “This is the Sajdah which caused the `Adhaab (of Allaah) to be lifted.”

When the Tablets were spread open in which was the Kitaab of Allaah (the Towrah) which He had written, there was not a mountain, tree or stone upon the surface of the earth except that it shook. Thus, till today there is no Jew on the face of the earth, young or old, upon whom the Towraah is read except that he shakes and moves his head.”

This is another meaning of “take it with Quwwah”: the Jews were being commanded: “Accept everything within this Towrah without exception; that which you find easy and that which you find difficult, that which you like and that which you dislike, or I will hurl down this mountain upon you.”

Thus, to take it with Quwwah is to carry out every single injunction within it without exception, and to abstain from every single prohibition within it without exception, and to propagate everything in it without hiding anything. If they refused to accept, Allah Ta`ala would have crushed them with Mount Toor. 

The fifth and final time in the Qur’aan Kareem when Allaah Ta`aalaa commands taking something “with Quwwah” is in Surah Maryam, and this time it is addressed to Nabi Yahya عليه السلام. Allah Ta`ala says to him:

“O Yahya, take this Kitaab with Quwwah! And We granted him Al-Hukm (Nubuwwah) when he was still a child.” [Surah Maryam, 19:12] 

Allaah Ta`ala mentions in this Aayah that He granted Nubuwwah to Nabi Yahya عليه السلام when he was still a child. Mufassiroon say that Nabi Yahya عليه السلام was three years old at the time of being granted Nubuwwah. The norm was that Allaah Ta`ala would grant Nubuwwah to each Nabi at the age of 40, but the two exceptions we know of were Nabi Yahya Yahya عليه السلام and Nabi `Eesa عليه السلام – both of them were granted Nubuwwah when they were still children.

When Imaam ibn Katheer explains the meaning of “Take this Kitaab with Quwwah” in the Aayah, he says: “Learn this Kitaab (the Tawraah) with Quwwah, i.e. with Jidd (seriousness, resolve and determination), Hirs (zeal) and Ijtihaad (hard work).”

Imaam al-Baydhaawi رحمةالله عليه explains “bi-Quwwah” in his Tafseer, saying: “Take the Kitaab with Quwwah, i.e. with Jidd (seriousness, resolution, determination) and by strongly memorising it with the Tawfeeq (which We shall grant you).”

Thus, Nabi Yahya عليه السلام was also commanded to commit the Tawrah to memory, and this too he did “bi-Quwwah” (powerfully).

Hadhrat `Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak رحمةالله عليه narrates from Ma`mar, who said: The children used to say to Nabi Yahya ibn Zakariyyaa عليه السلام: “Come and play with us.” He would say: “I was not created to play.” For this reason Allah Ta`ala revealed:

“And We granted him Al-Hukm (Nubuwwah) when he was a child.”
Allah Ta`ala further praises Nabi Yahyaa عليه السلام, saying:

“And (We granted him the quality of) compassion (towards others) from Ourselves (and We granted him) purity (therefore he never committed any sins). And he was always a Taqi (person of great Taqwa).” [Surah Maryam, 19:13] 

From the Tafseer of all of these Aayaat, we come to know that the meanings of “Take this Kitaab with Quwwah” are:

1) To learn it thoroughly. The Salaf used to say that when it comes to `Ilm, if you do not give it your all, it will give you nothing. Thus, for a person to “take the Qur’aan with Quwwah” means he must first of all devote his time and exhaust his efforts in properly acquiring `Ilm (Knowledge) of this Qur’aan. The kind of three-day “Tafseer workshops” prevalent nowadays do not count as learning the Qur’aan. People attend such “seminars” and “workshops” and come out knowing nothing. `Ilm of Deen is not acquired in two or three days. The person has to devote his life to `Ilm. `Ilm is إلى اللحد من ال عهد “from the cradle to the grave”. These “workshops” are a travesty and a satanic mockery of the Qur’aan and the Deen.

Most of the graduates of the Darul Ulooms these days are lacking in this very first quality. During their student days they do not pay attention to their lessons, they do not do mutaala`ah, they take the study of Deen “lightly” and thus they emerge from the Darul Ulooms as “graduate” devoid of `Ilm and Tafaqquh of Deen. For this reason they are incapable of adequately refuting any of the numerous Baatil groups in the world today. If they even get into a debate with a Shia Kaafir, they are dumbstruck, whereas, if you have studied the Deen properly, there is no Kaafir on the surface of the earth who can silence you, because the Haqq will always defeat Baatil.

2) By memorising it. The Fadhaa’il (virtues) of memorising the Qur’aan Kareem and the Ahaadeeth are well-known. 

3) When it comes to the Qur’aan Kareem and `Ilm of Deen, the Taalib-e-`Ilm should have a serious attitude and should not take it lightly. The Deen is not to be taken as a joke. If this person does not cultivate within himself the qualities of `Azm (strong resolve) and Istiqaamah (constancy), he will fail. 

Imaam ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri رحمة الله عليه said:

“Whoever seeks to acquire `Ilm all at once will lose it all at once; `Ilm is acquired over days and nights.” 
The serious attitude the Taalib-e-`Ilm should have is not only with regards to studying the Deen, but also with regards to acting upon it and defending it. The `Ulama are supposed to be Islaam’s “shield for the flak”. They are supposed to be the defenders of the Deen. Thus, it is necessary that they be powerful in their defence of the Deen. 

These days, unfortunately, the Ulama (of Soo) are the first to sell out the Deen, the first to grovel at the feet of the Kuffaar, the first to twist the Qur’aan and Ahaadeeth, the first to reject aspects of Islaam which the Kuffaar are not pleased with, the first to cower and tremble when the Kuffaar make any threats. As a result of this weak, feeble, deluded sell-out attitude of the “scholars” of today, the ones who have become “Tujjaar-ud-Deen” (people who sell the Deen to make money), the people have lost their respect for the Ulama. With many of the “Ulama” today, their purpose of becoming an “Aalim” is to learn how to please America and the allies of America. They become a “scholar” for the sake of the Kuffaar. They have made it their goal in life to undermine the Deen. Daily they attempt to break down the edifice of Islam, one brick at a time.  

The `Ulama of the past died for “Laa Ilaaha Illallaah” and the Ulama of today eat bread with it.

4) Carrying out all of the commandments of the Shari`ah and abstaining from all of the prohibitions.

A Muslim must live his entire life “in the Shade of the Qur’aan”. His life must be governed by the Qur’aan Kareem and be in conformity with the Sunnah of Rasoolullaah ﷺ. The purpose of acquiring `Ilm is to act on it.

العلم للعمل

In the Battle of Yamaamah which Sahaabah-e-Kiraam fought against Musaylamah al-Kadh’dhaab, Hadhrat Saalim Mowlaa Abi Huzaifah رضى الله عنه had been placed in charge of the right flank of the army. The Muhaajireen came to him and said, “O Saalim, we fear that the Muslims may be overtaken from your side.”

Hadhrat Saalim رضى الله عنه said:

“What a terrible Haamil-ul-Qur’aan (Carrier of the Qur’aan) I will be if you are overtaken from my side!”

Hadhrat Saalim رضى الله عنه then fought the Kuffaar until his left arm – which had been holding the flag – was cut off. He picked up the flag with his right hand, and that arm too was cut off and he fell to the ground, the flag falling down as well.

Moments prior to him passing away, Hadhrat `Abdullaah ibn `Umar رضى الله عنه heard him reciting the Aayah:

“And how many a Nabi (from amongst the Ambiya) fought and along with him (fought) many pious men, learned (in Deen). Never did they lose heart over what befell them in the Path of Allaah. Never did they weaken or surrender themselves, and Allah loves those who have Sabr.” [Surah Aal-e-`Imraan, 3:146]

Thereafter, he became Shaheed. 

This is “taking the Kitaab with Quwwah”. 

In this battle, Hadhrat Abu Huzaifah called out to the Huffaaz who were present, saying:

“O People of the Qur’aan! Beautify the Qur’aan with your actions.” 

These days, people feel that the Qur’aan was revealed simply to be “sung”. They will organise “Jalsahs” to have some beardless, Faasiq “Qaari” who is a “Taajir-ud-Deen” (someone who has sold the Deen for a measly price) come to the Masjid and recite, and the Molvis who organise these events tell the Musallis, “It is important for us to attend, to establish a connection with the Qur’aan.”

To them, the extent of “establishing a connection with the Qur’aan” is to sit in a Masjid listening to some Qaari (who has to be paid afterwards) recite, and thereafter having a feast.

In this battle, Hadhrat Abu Huzaifah says to them, “Beautify the Qur’aan with your actions.”

More important than to beautify the Qur’aan simply with your voice is to beautify it with your a`maal.

There is a preponderance of Qurraa’ nowadays but the Qur’aan has no place – for most of them – in their practical life. It is simply to be “sung” in order to receive payments and gifts, and some recite simply for women to listen to them. Ikhlaas has disappeared from the Dunyaa.

5) To teach and convey the entire Deen, not a partial Deen, or a “watered down” Deen.

Allah Ta`ala says to Rasulullaah ﷺ in the Qur’aan Kareem:

“O Rasul ﷺ, convey everything that has been revealed to you from your Rabb (and do not fear the reaction of the Kuffaar). If you do not do so (if you hide something), then you have not conveyed His Risaalah (Message). Allaah will protect you from the people. Surely, Allaah does not guide the nation of Kaafireen.” [Surah al-Maa’idah, 5:67]

The particle used in this Aayah, “ما“ gives the meaning of “everything”. Everything that Allaah Ta`aalaa had revealed, Rasoolullaah ﷺ was to convey to the people, without omitting a single thing and without fearing anyone.
ولا يخافون لومة لائم

“They do not fear (for the Pleasure of Allaah) the blame of any blamer.” [Qur’aan]

The majority of Ulama today fail to carry out this Command of Allaah Ta`ala. They convey parts of the Deen and conceal other parts. This is known as “Kitmaan-ul-Haqq” and is Haraam. Severe warnings have been sounded against those who conceal the Haqq. Worse than this are those who not only conceal the Haqq, but they also propagate Baatil. They twist clear Aayaat and Ahadeeth from the meanings intended by Allah Ta`ala and Rasulullaah ﷺ, interpreting them away in a manner which they think their Kuffaar masters will be pleased with.

There are so-called “Ulama” (in reality, Kaafirs) in America who have issued a “Fatwa” that certain Surahs of the Qur’aan must not even be recited in Salaah – Surahs such as Surah al-Anfaal, Surah at-Tawbah, etc. According to them, even in Salaah these Surahs must not be recited.

فإلى الله المشتكى وهو المستعان

Any “Aalim” who is propagating a “partial” or “diluted” Deen is not conveying the Deen at all. This Deen of Allaah Ta`ala is not a game to be played with. The Fardh duty of the `Ulama is to convey the entire Deen as revealed by Allaah Ta`aalaa, not to change it or dilute it. Let alone being the “Defenders of the Deen”, the Ulama of today have become the “Destroyers of the Deen”.

If a person is not conveying the entire Deen, then he has not “taken this Kitaab (Qur’aan) with Quwwah”. Instead, he has taken this Kitaab (Qur’aan) and sold it.

اللهم أرنا الحق حقا وارزقنا اتباعه وأرنا الباطل باطلا  وارزقنا اجتنابه

آمين يا العالمين

والله تعالى أعلم و علمه أتم و أحكم

Qur’an About the Origin Of Milk

The formation of milk from blood and FARTH فرث (dissolved or digested food’s material), mentioned in the Noble Quran and confirmed by Science!

The sections of this article are:

1-  Allah Almighty’s Divine Claims.

     (a)-  Analysis on what chyme is.
     (b)-  The Translations and Detailed Analysis on the Arabic word فرث.
     (c)-  So what do we see?

2-  Blood, protein, calcium, vitamins, sugars and the many other minerals – the Scientific Notion and Miracle!

      –  Red blood creating white milk???

3-  The Scientific Proofs.
4-  Conclusion.

1-  Allah Almighty’s Divine Claims:

The Noble Quran is filled with scientific statements and notions. These are statements of Allah Almighty describing how He created things on earth and in the Universe. What’s most amazing is that all of these scientific statements and notions had been proven to be in perfect agreement with science and our modern-day scientific discoveries. Allah Almighty made the Noble Quran be Prophet Muhammad’s (peace be upon him) Everlasting Divine Miracle and proof for Prophethood. The Holy Book certainly stood the test of time 1,500 years ago with Its Claims, Prophecies and Miraculous language eloquence, and it does again and again in our day today with Its overwhelming agreement with science and discoveries that were not known to man 1,500 years ago.

Allah Almighty in Noble Verse 16:66 Said that the cattle’s milk is formed from its blood and FARTH فرث : 

Noble Verse(s) 16:66 Arabic (from right to left):

16:66 وان لكم في الانعام لعبرة نسقيكم مما في بطونه من بين فرث ودم لبنا خالصا سائغا للشاربين

[016:066] Verily, ye have in cattle a lesson; we give you to drink from that which is in their bellies, between chyme and blood,- pure milk,- easy to swallow for those who drink.

Notice the following four key Arabic words:

1-  بين 
which means  “between”

2-  فرث 
which means “dissolved food” as we will clearly see below. 

3-  و 
which means “and”.  

4-  دم 
which means “blood”.

(a)-  Analysis on what chyme is:

We’ve clearly seen from the English translations, above, “chyme” is one of the meanings of the Arabic word فرث.  So what is chyme??


Digestion from mouth to stomach

Digestion begins in the mouth. Chewing is very important to good digestion for two reasons. When chewed food is ground into fine particles, the digestive juices can react more easily. As the food is chewed, it is moistened and mixed with saliva, which contains the enzyme ptyalin. Ptyalin changes some of the starches in the food to sugar.

After the food is swallowed, it passes through the oesophagus into the stomach. In the stomach it is thoroughly mixed with a digestive juice by a vigorous, to-and-fro churning motion. This motion is caused by contractions of strong muscles in the stomach walls.

The digestive juice in the stomach is called gastric juice. It contains hydrochloric acid and the enzyme pepsin. This juice begins the digestion of protein foods such as meat, eggs, and milk. Starches, sugars, and fats are not digested by the gastric juice. After a meal, some food remains in the stomach for two to five hours. But liquids and small particles begin to empty almost immediately. Food that has been churned, partly digested, and changed to a thick liquid is called chyme. Chyme passes from the stomach into the small intestine.

(b)-  The Translations and Detailed Analysis on the Arabic word فرث:

1-  In Dr. Zaghloul Al-Naggar’s (one of the world’s top geologists) web site, we read the following:

(Arabic is read from right to left)

ثانيا‏ :‏ تكون اللبن من بين فرث ودم في ضروع الأنعام :‏
يتكون اللبن أساسا من البروتينات‏ ,‏ والكربوهيدرات‏ ,‏ والدهون‏ ,‏ والعديد من العناصر‏ ,‏ والفيتامينات‏ ,‏ والماء‏ .‏ وكل ذلك يستمد من غذاء الحيوان وشرابه ومن دمه والذي وصفته هذه الآية الكريمة بقول الحق‏ (تبارك وتعالى‏) :‏ من بين فرث ودم‏ ,‏ والفرث هو الأشياء المأكولة والمنهضمة بعض الانهضام في الكرش‏ ,‏ ولذا يطلق عليه أحيانا ثقل الكرش‏ ,‏ فإذا خرجت من الكرش سميت روثا ‏ .‏


My translation:

Second: The formation of milk from between FARTH and blood inside the cattle:

Milk is essentially formed from proteins, carbohydrates, fat, and many other elements, and vitamins and water.  And all of this is extracted from the animal’s nutrition (food), drink and blood, which this Noble Verse has described through Allah Almighty’s Statement: “from between FARTH فرث and blood.”  And the FARTH is the substances that are eaten and are not completely digested in the gut, and because of that it (the farth) is sometimes also called the gut’s load (food), and when it is extracted from the gut it is called ROUTH روث.

(End of translation)

So when Allah Almighty Said that milk is formed from the PROCESSED FARTH (food or gut’s load) and the blood, He, the Almighty, basically Said that the substance of milk is essentially created from the processed or dissolved substances that come from the GUT’S LOAD or FARTH (which is what we humans call today proteins, vitamins, sugars, minerals and so on…) and BLOOD.

2-  Google’s Online Arabic-English dictionary contradiction:

Google erroneously translated فرث as dung [1].  But when we look up dung, it translates it as روث only [2]. 

3-  From the Encyclopedic 10-Book Lisan Al-Arab [2] Dictionary:

الفَرْثُ: السِّرْجينُ، ما دام في الكَرِشِ، والجمع فُرُوثٌ. ابن سيده: الفَرْثُ السِّرْقِينُ، والفَرْثُ والفُراثة: سِرْقِينُ الكَرشِ.
وفَرَثْتُها عنه أَفْرُثُها فَرْثاً، وأَفْرَثْتُها، وفَرَّثْتُها، كذلك، وفَرَثَالحُبُّ كَبِدَه، وأَفْرثَها، وفَرَّثَها: فَتَّتَها.
وفَرَثْتُ كَبِدَه، أَفْرِثُها فَرْثاً، وفَرَّثْتُها تَفْريثاً إِذا ضَرَبْتَه حتىتَنْفَرِثَ كَبِدُه؛ وفي الصحاح: إِذا ضَرَبتَه وهو حَيٌّ، فانْفَرَثَتْكَبِدُه أَي انْتَثرتْ.
وفي حديث أُم كُلْثوم، بنتِ عليٍّ، قالت لأَهل الكوفة: أَتدرون أَيَّ كَبِدٍ فَرَثْتم لرسول الله، صلى الله عليه وسلم؟ الفَرْثُ:تَفْتيت الكَبِد بالغم والأَذى.

My Translation:

The FARTH is the food being digested (al-sirjeen) as long as it is still in the gut.  It’s plural is FUROOTH.  Ibn Sydah said: the FARTH means al-sirqeen.  The FARTH is also al-furatha, which means the gut’s sirqeen (the food being dissolved/processed in the gut).
وفَرَّثَها: فَتَّتَها means to FARTH something is to dissolve it.
And in Um Kalthoom’s Hadith (the grand daughter of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him), the daughter of Ali, she said to the people of Kufah: Do you know which liver you caused to FARTH of the Prophet of Allah, peace be upon him? (this is metaphoric, because the Prophet had already passed away.  She was referring to the injustice that these people were doing to the Prophet’s immediate family).  The FARTH: Dissolving (the liver of the Prophet by the injustice done to his family).

(End of translation)

Furthermore, فتت (fattah) in Arabic, which is what فَتَّتَها (to dissolve it), above, is derived from, means:

فَتَّ الشيءَ يَفُتُّه فَتّاً، وفَتَّتَه: دَقَّه.

Fattah something is to break it down into small pieces.  And fattatahu وفَتَّتَه  means دَقَّه to pound it or to turn it into powder (From me, Osama Abdallah: This is similar to pounding wheat into flour دقُّ القمح).

(c)-  So what do we see?

We see the English translations of Noble Verse 16:66, above, translating فرث as “chyme” and “digested food”.  We also saw from the encyclopedic 10-Book Lisan Al-Arab Dictionary that to فرث something means to dissolve it.  And we’ve also seen from Dr. Zaghloul Al-Naggar’s analysis that:

1-  فرث means dissolved or digested food.

2-  روث means dung.

I’ve also pointed out Google’s online Arabic-English dictionary’s error and contradiction in it’s translations of  فرث and روث

2-  Blood, protein, calcium, vitamins, sugars and the many other minerals – the Scientific Notion and Miracle!

Blood here is the key word in Noble Verse 16:66, because our modern-day scientific terms (calcium, vitamins, protein, and so on) were not known to man 1,500 years ago. That is why Allah Almighty summed them all up in one lone Notion that was only mentioned once in the entire Noble Quran, which is the word FARTH.  That is indeed a Miraculous Notion because the Noble Word, FARTH, has indeed perfectly described all of the protein, vitamins, sugars, all of other substances that we know of today that are contained in milk.

Red blood creating white milk?!

Of course, blood inside our bodies isn’t red and neither did Allah Almighty say it is red, but to man 1,500 years ago, it was red, and the fact that Allah Almighty mentioned (red) blood – that man visually sees in animals – to be combined with the substances of FARTH, further demonstrates that we have indeed an indisputable Scientific Notion and Miracle in the Noble Verse 16:66, because for man to claim that red blood is part of white milk’s ingredients was most probably perceived as a very crazy or absurd statement, to man, 1,500 years ago. But yet, it is scientifically true as we clearly see below.  This is why Allah Almighty told the Arabs that Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was not crazy:

Noble Verse(s) 15:6 Yusuf Ali:

[015:006] They say: “O thou to whom the Message is being revealed! truly thou art mad (or possessed)!

Arabic (from right to left):

15:6 وقالوا ياايها الذي نزل عليه الذكر انك لمجنون

Noble Verse(s) 26:27 Yusuf Ali:

[026:027] (Pharaoh) said: “Truly your apostle who has been sent to you is a veritable madman!”

Arabic (from right to left):

26:27 قال ان رسولكم الذي ارسل اليكم لمجنون

Noble Verse(s) 37:36 Yusuf Ali:

[037:036] And say: “What! shall we give up our gods for the sake of a Poet possessed?”

Arabic (from right to left):

37:36 ويقولون ائنا لتاركوا الهتنا لشاعر مجنون

Noble Verse(s) 44:14 Yusuf Ali:

[044:014] Yet they turn away from him and say: “Tutored (by others), a man possessed!”

Arabic (from right to left):

44:14 ثم تولوا عنه وقالوا معلم مجنون

 Noble Verse(s) 51:39 Yusuf Ali:

[051:039] But (Pharaoh) turned back with his Chiefs, and said, “A sorcerer, or one possessed!”

Arabic (from right to left):

51:39 فتولى بركنه وقال ساحر او مجنون

Noble Verse(s) 52:29 Yusuf Ali:

[052:029] Therefore proclaim thou the praises (of thy Lord): for by the Grace of thy Lord, thou art no (vulgar) soothsayer, nor art thou one possessed.

Arabic (from right to left):

52:29 فذكر فما انت بنعمة ربك بكاهن ولامجنون

 Noble Verse(s) 68:2 Yusuf Ali:

[068:002] Thou art not, by the Grace of thy Lord, mad or possessed.

Arabic (from right to left):

68:2 ماانت بنعمة ربك بمجنون

 Noble Verse(s) 68:51Yusuf Ali:

[068:051] And the Unbelievers would almost trip thee up with their eyes when they hear the Message; and they say: “Surely he is possessed!”

Arabic (from right to left):

68:51 وان يكاد الذين كفروا ليزلقونك بابصارهم لما سمعوا الذكر ويقولون انه لمجنون

 Noble Verse(s) 81:22Yusuf Ali:

[081:022] And (O people!) your companion is not one possessed;

Arabic (from right to left):

81:22 وماصاحبكم بمجنون

All Praise and Glory are due to Allah Almighty Alone!  Let us now see how science describes the formation of milk, and whether or not the blood and FARTH (فرث) that Allah Almighty mentioned are indeed confirmed by science.

3-  The Scientific Proofs:

The following articles clearly and indisputably confirm Allah Almighty’s Divine Claim in Noble Verse  16:66.

Article #1:

“Milk Biosynthesis

Milk is synthesized in the mammary gland. Within the mammary gland is the milk producing unit, the alveolus. It contains a single layer of epithelial secretory cells surrounding a central storage area called the lumen, which is connected to a duct system. The secretory cells are, in turn, surrounded by a layer of myoepithelial cells and blood capillaries.

The raw materials for milk production are transported via the bloodstream to the secretory cells. It takes 400-800 L of blood to deliver components for 1 L of milk.

Proteins: building blocks are amino acids in the blood. Casein micelles, or small aggregates thereof, may begin aggregation in Golgi vesicles within the secretory cell.Lipids:C4-C14 fatty acids are synthesized in the cellsC16 and greater fatty acids are preformed as a result of rumen hydrogenation and are transported directly in the bloodLactose: milk is in osmotic equilibrium with the blood and is controlled by lactose, K, Na, Cl; lactose synthesis regulates the volume of milk secretedThe milk components are synthesized within the cells, mainly by the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and its attached ribosomes. The energy for the ER is supplied by the mitochondria. The components are then passed along to the Golgi apparatus, which is responsible for their eventual movement out of the cell in the form of vesicles. Both vesicles containing aqueous non-fat components, as well as liquid droplets (synthesized by the ER) must pass through the cytoplasm and the apical plasma membrane to be deposited in the lumen. It is thought that the milk fat globule membrane is comprised of the apical plasma membrane of the secretory cell.

Milking stimuli, such as a sucking calf, a warm wash cloth, the regime of parlour etc., causes the release of a hormone called oxytocin. Oxytocin is relased from the pituitary gland, below the brain, to begin the process of milk let-down. As a result of this hormone stimulation, the muscles begin to compress the alveoli, causing a pressure in the udder known as letdown reflex, and the milk components stored in the lumen are released into the duct system. The milk is forced down into the teat cistern from which it is milked. The let-down reflex fades as the oxytocin is degraded, within 4-7 minutes. It is very difficult to milk after this time.”(Source)

Article #2:

“The carbohydrate lactose gives milk its sweet taste and contributes about 40% of whole cow milk’s calories. Lactose is a composite of two simple sugars, glucose and galactose. In nature, lactose is found only in milk and a small number of plants (McGee 17). Other components found in raw cow milk are living white blood cells, mammary-gland cells, various bacteria, and a large number of active enzymes (McGee 16).

“White blood cells in Milk- Milk contains varying levels of white blood cells, depending upon the health of the source animals;….

“No study has ever conclusively demonstrated that the levels of white blood cells found in normal milk actually pose any health risk to normal individuals. The concept of pus in one’s milk is somewhat reviling, but evidence for an impact on health is not existent….

“In addition, the cows frequently contract an udder infection known as mastitispartly responsible for the aforementioned prevalence of blood cells in dairy products. (Source)

As we clearly and indisputably see in the above scientific articles, the formation of milk from FARTH and blood is clearly confirmed!  Indeed, all Praise and Glory are due to Allah Almighty alone!

It’s just quite amazing!

It is truly quite amazing that Allah Almighty in the Noble Quran Said these precise words through the tongue of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, that no ordinary person would’ve thought about. I mean who would’ve been able to come up with such sentences and words 1,500 years ago to describe the formation of milk from red blood and processed food?  Who on earth would’ve thought about that??

The answer is simple. The Prophet didn’t think about anything. He only spoke what was sent down to him from Divine Truth and Revelations!  Allah Almighty Said:

“We will soon show them Our signs in the Universe and INSIDE THEIR SELVES, until it will become quite clear to them that it is the truth. Is it not sufficient as regards your Lord that He is a witness over all things?  (The Noble Quran, 41:53)

Indeed, all Praise and Glory are due to Allah Almighty alone for making the Noble Quran be the Perfect and Everlasting Miracle, for us humans, out of all of His Divine Miracles!  And may Allah Almighty send His Peace, Mercy and Blessings upon our Beloved and Blessed Prophet, Teacher and Role Model, Muhammad.  Ameen.

 4-  Conclusion:

Again, the Noble Quran is filled with scientific statements and notions.  These are statements of Allah Almighty describing how He created things on earth and in the Universe.  What’s most amazing is that all of these scientific statements and notions had been proven to be in perfect agreement with science and our modern-day scientific discoveries.  Allah Almighty made the Noble Quran be Prophet Muhammad’s (peace be upon him) Everlasting Divine Miracle and proof for Prophethood.  The Holy Book certainly stood the test of time 1,500 years ago with Its Claims, Prophecies and Miraculous language eloquence, and it does again and again in our day today with Its overwhelming agreement with science and discoveries that were not known to man 1,500 years ago.

Allah Almighty’s miraculous claim and notion regarding milk being formed from processed FARTH (food or gut load) and blood is indeed confirmed by science.  Neither was the knowledge regarding the contents of FARTH known to man, nor did man know that blood, which was visually known TO BE RED to man 1,500 years ago, would form WHITE MILK.

Indeed, all Praise and Glory are due to Allah Almighty alone for making the Noble Quran be the Perfect and Everlasting Miracle, for us humans, out of all of His Divine Miracles!  And may Allah Almighty send His Peace, Mercy and Blessings upon our Beloved and Blessed Prophet, Teacher and Role Model, Muhammad.  Aameen.

Courtesy: answering-christianity site.

Christian & Jewish Beliefs Regarding The Return Of The Messiah and Plots Against Masjid Al-Aqsa

Islaam, Christianity, and Judaism all believe in the coming of the leader of the great and final battle whom they all call the Messiah.

The Jews are looking forward to his coming because they claim he will bring about God’s kingdom on Earth, after the establishment of a Jewish nation in Palestine. They await a leader from among the children of Prophet Dawud, alayhes salam. According to Imaam Ibnul Qayyim, when this leader “moves his lips in prayers all the nations will die.” They claim that he is the promised Messiah, and call him the ‘Prince of Peace’. Believing that he will make all mankind subservient to the state of Israel, they are preparing for his arrival by gathering in Palestine. According to their beliefs, he will come to rule the Earth and reside in Jerusalem, which he will take as his capital. The person they are waiting for is the Dajjal, whom the Christians call the Antichrist. This is why the majority of the Dajjal’s followers will be from the Jews.

The Christians and the Muslims agree that this promised Messiah leader is Eesa (Alayhis salaam) who will descend from heaven and return to Earth to lead the great battle. This battle will be led by Eesa (alayhis salaam) against the Dajjal and his followers.

The Christians believe that before the second coming of Eesa (alayhis salaam), those who believe in Eesa (alayhis salaam) as the son of God will experience ‘the rapture’ when they will be raised up into the heavens to meet their Lord, and thereby will be saved from the Antichrist. They base their belief on the corrupted text of the Bible: “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ [i.e., the dead Christians] will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.” (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). The rest of the people will be left to perish with the king of darkness, son of Satan. 

“Then the king [Dajjal] shall do according to his own will: He shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done” (Daniel 11:36).

The Christians believe that the Armageddon will take place in a small valley called Meggido in Palestine. They claim that the battle which will be led by Eesa (alayhis salaam) against the Dajjal and his followers, will be crowned by victory for the Christians and the complete destruction of the non-Christians who will all drown in a lake of fire burning with brimstone. This is based on the corrupted text of the Bible: “Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, ‘Come and gather together for the supper of the great God, that you may eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses, and of those who sit on them, and the flesh of all people both free and slave, both small and great.’ And I saw the beast, the kings of the Earth, and their armies gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse against his army. Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast, and those who worshipped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh.” (Revelation 19:17-21)

Why the Judeo-Christian Alliance in Palestine?

Allaah the Exalted said: “O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are but friends of one another” [5:51]. Although they differ in their theories of the outcome of al-Malhamah, the Jews and Christians have become allied against the Muslims in Palestine. Al-Aqsa Masjid is located in Jerusalem and is the third holiest site for Muslims. 

According to the corrupted text of the Old Testament, all of the Jews must return to Palestine and establish a Temple in the exact location of al-Aqsa before the Messiah will come. It is from this perspective that both the Jews and the Christians agree on the establishment of the state of Israel, and the immigration of all the Jews to Palestine. The Christians believe that the Messiah will come at the end of the Gregorian millennium, and rule on Earth for one thousand years. Allaah says: “Each [one of us, for the outcome of this] is waiting, so wait, and assuredly you shall know who are the travelers on the even path, and who is guided.” [20:135].

Masjid Al-Aqsa is in Danger

The Christians, specially the evangelicals, believe that Eesa (alayhis salaam) will kill the Dajjal who would be a Jew as well as his followers. But they believe that all of the Jews will convert to Christianity after the defeat of the Dajjal. Therefore the Christians do not object to the gathering of the Jews in Jerusalem. The Jews, however, believe that their victory and the re-establishment of their state will not take place until the ‘Temple’ has been rebuilt. This temple will have to be built in the same spot on which al-Aqsa exists today. They are waiting for signs that cause this to happen but because they believe that they can (and should) hasten their occurrence, they would like very much see al-Aqsa Masjid be destroyed sooner than later. They are, however, ready to rebuild the temple anytime now because they have taken all the necessary steps to prepare for that. Some are mentioned in the following:


‘The temple’ is an ancient name for the chosen place of worship before Islaam. The temple that existed two millenniums ago in Jerusalem represented the steps of Al-Aqsa mosque before Islaam. The Prophet, sallallahu alayhi wasallam, was asked about the first Masjid ever built. He said: “Al-Masjid al-Haram (in Makkah),” and when asked about the second Masjid, he said: “Al-Masjid al-Aqsa,” then he added that between the two were forty years (Bukhari). Both were built by prophet Ibrahim, alayhis salaam. The first temple that was built was destroyed around 587 BC at the hands of the king of Babylon, and the second temple was destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE and was not rebuilt since.

At the advent of Islaam the great event of al-Israa (The night journey of the Prophet from Makkah to Jerusalem) was an indication that the area has become the heritage of the Muslims, and that such a sacred place should not stay at the hands of disbelievers. Therefore freeing the land from them was the Muslims’ immediate goal after uniting the Arabian Peninsula (hence the battle of Tabuk). Now after two thousand years of the destruction of the temple and 1344 years of the building of al-Aqsa mosque the Jews want to destroy the mosque and rebuild a third temple at its place. Unfortunately they have made great steps toward this goal:

Occupation of al-Quds by the Jews:

Al-Quds (Jerusalem), the town where al-Aqsa Masjid was built, has been half eaten by the Jews when they annexed its Western part after the 1948 war. Now they have a plan (called Jerusalem 2000) to swallow the Eastern part, where Muslims are. First, Jewish settlers invaded the area which was 100% inhabited by Palestinians, to the point that the town became ‘a stronghold of the radical Jews’ (Newsweek 9/5/96). Their goal is to assure a strong Jewish majority in the Eastern town. Second, urban sprawl is allowed for the Jewish settlers all around the town to isolate it from the rest of the Palestinian land and hence its annexation would become easier.

Collecting holy stones to build the temple:

On 1989 the Jews claimed that they found a ‘holy’ stone weighing more than five tons which they put as the foundation stone for the third temple near al-Aqsa Masjid. Since then, they went on a frenzy looking for holy stones everywhere, even uprooting the city’s pavements to look for them. The radical Jews prepared everything according to their rituals to build the temple. They brought stones from the Neguev desert to be cut and polished in Jerusalem. They will need six million stones. ‘It is no more a secret that the temple has been designed in the USA by American Jewish architects. The blueprints are at the disposition of the Israeli government.’ (France Agence Press, August 1997).

Other preparations are underway to revive the rituals that were practiced in the temple. The altar is now ready. Rabbis are preparing whole generations to attend to the execution of the rituals. All utensils, such as recipients and even prayer rugs that would be needed once the temple is built are now ready.

The menorah, the tabut, and the sacred cow:

For the Jews, the sacredness of the temple is not complete without the menorah, their religious symbol. The Jews believe that the menorah which was in the first temple still exists, and was saved from fire when this later was burned down, but it has been missed since then. They are incessantly looking for it. Meanwhile, a huge menorah costing three million dollars was made of gold to be put in the temple.

The Jews are also looking for the tabut (the Ark of the Covenant) a wooden box containing a remnant of what Musa and Harun left behind (Muslims believe that this tabut was given to the people of Israel as a sign of the kingship of Saul as stated in the Qur’an 2:248). They believe that exists buried under the rubbles of the first temple. To search for it, they are undertaking extensive excavations under al-Aqsa Masjid!

In summary, the Jews have got everything ready before even the temple is built. But they cannot start building until they get a sign from God as they believe. This sign is a red cow that should fulfill the description mentioned in their book. This cow would be slaughtered and burned and its ashes would be used to ‘purify’ the people of Israel, for you see none can enter the temple without being purified, and the Jews believe that they all are impure now until they are cleaned by the cow’s remains! Well this cow they claim was born in 1997. “The ritual slaughter of the red cow will take place three years after its birth; the count down to the great return of the Jews to their original place of worship, and the glad tidings of he coming of the savior, the Messiah. The attempt to accomplish this return will lead to an unforgettable beginning of the third millennium.” (The Observer, 9/7/97)

Excavations under the Masjid

This perhaps is the most dangerous and most malicious plot to destroy the mosque. These excavations have been going on for decades and are still underway. The goal is: to empty the ground under the two mosques, al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock, leaving them standing on hollow foundations so that they are vulnerable to collapse at the slightest natural or man-made tremor. Of course the Israeli government does not reveal this goal, but claims that the only purpose of the excavations is archeological; to find the remains of the second temple and other artifacts.

Digging tunnels under al-Aqsa:

These operations not only contribute to threatening the foundations of the mosque but also will facilitate and complement the project of the temple in future phases. In September 1996 a tunnel has been officially inaugurated, an indication that the steps to turn the mosque into a Jewish temple has officially started. Other tunnels are being dug under the Masjid, which means that now the Jews share the area with the Muslims. These tunnels can be used temporarily for worship, while the Israeli government has put electronic screens inside them showing al-Quds (Jerusalem), and at the place of al-Aqsa Masjid and the Dome of the Rock, the Jewish temple is shown surrounded by new buildings of Jewish architecture.

Also Read: The Mystery Beneath Masjid Al Aqsa and the Dajjalic “New World Order”

Polygamy in Islam and Compared to The Bible

by Ebrahim Saifuddin

People from different religions often point fingers at the permissibility of Polygamy in Islam. This is due to their lack of understanding as far as polygamy in Islam is concerned. In due course of this article which I intend to keep short and sweet, I will explain what polygamy in Islam is.

According to the Online Merriam Webster Dictionary

Polygamy: marriage in which a spouse of either sex may have more than one mate at the same time.

Polygyny: the state or practice of having more than one wife or female mate at one time

Polyandry: the state or practice of having more than one husband or male mate at one time

Hence it would only be appropriate to mention that polygyny is allowed in Islam and not polygamy as a general term. But in this article I will refer to it as polygamy for the ease of the reader.

It should be pointed out that Islam never introduced Polygamy. It was already prevalent. Probably the only religion that does claim to prohibit it is Christianity but in reality the Bible never prohibited Polygamy. I will discuss the Bible as regards to Polygamy towards the end.

In the Quran, Surah Nisa, verse 3, it is mentioned:

“If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.” [Quran 4:3]

This verse was revealed after the Battle of Uhud in which nearly half the Muslim population was wiped out. Hence Allah Ta’ala in all His Wisdom told Muslims to:

FIRST opt for adopting an orphan.

If injustice was feared,
THEN if you can be just, opt for marrying up to four women.

If injustice was feared,
THEN marry only ONE.

As it is from the above verse it is clear that polygamy was never the first choice. The purpose of this Noble Verse was two folds:

1) To give protection to the orphans
2) To increase the Muslim population primarily by adopting and giving protection to the orphans.

Hence despite the fact that the Muslims had lost a lot of men Allah Ta’ala still did not want polygamy to take place and the first option that He gave was for them to adopt. Regarding polygamy He strictly said that you have to be just between your wives and even if you FEAR that you cannot be just, you are to marry only ONE.

Being “Just” with your wives is not an option but a compulsion. Hence if a man fears that he might not be able to be just with his wives then he cannot marry more than one woman.

From the verse it is also clear that Polygamy is not something compulsory but only permissible. Everything that is permissible is not compulsory. Also no one can force anyone to marry. In Islam both the parties have equal rights to choose their partners hence a man cannot force a woman to marry him.

There are many cases that occur where a husband divorces his wife for various reasons. These reasons may include anything; individual cases have different reasons. Many a times the wife is physically abused to the extent where she finds no way out other than to opt for divorce. I have personally seen cases where the husband throws the wife along with the children out of the house without any financial support. These are only some of the cases that take place in this world. Those who have undergone it are hurt and totally broken from the inside. It is not easy for such a woman to survive along with her children. Apart from that it is her natural and biological desire to have a family and a husband.

Realizing these factors one must also recognize the fact that not many single men are willing to marry a divorcee. If such a divorcee has children then her case gets more complicated. Why should a woman whose divorce is not her fault, suffer through life without a family and a husband? Islam recognizes the need and carnal desires for people to have a partner. In such cases there is nothing wrong if an already married man wishes to marry such a woman to support her and provide her with a family. This also keeps the society in order and minimizes the chances of corruption.

Comparing Polyandry to Polygyny

Some people including feminists often argue why Polyandry is not permitted. Why can the female not have more than one husband and why is man allowed more than one wife. If polyandry were allowed then greater problems would be faced as compared to monogamy. Below I will analyze the points discussed above and some more points in light of polyandry.

1) If in a case like loss of male population e.g. that which occurred after the Battle of Uhud, we practice polyandry, then the purpose of re-population is defeated. I would like the people who advocate for polyandry, use their wisdom and explain how re-population can be achieved with polyandry.

2) Further it should also be noted that a female is highly likely to develop STD when she has multiple sexual partners e.g. Bacterial Vaginosis

3) Imagine a woman with more than one husband, and all her husbands want to have a child. Who will have it first? Fine they agree on turns. So this year one husband has a child the next it’s the other. Again medically this is unhealthy for the woman. She will be having children every year!! Would she be able to tend to all her husbands and her infants? No way is it practical. Any logical sane mind would accept that it is not possible.

Polygamy (Polygyny) as seen in the Bible

It is a misconception that the Bible does not allow polygamy. Christians often talk about Bible prohibiting polygamy. There is not a single verse in the Bible which would say “marry only one”. The Quran is the only scripture that has this phrase. Polygamy is clearly seen in the Old Testament. I will quote some of the verses below:

“If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, [both] the beloved and the hated; and [if] the firstborn son be hers that was hated” [Deuteronomy 21:15]

“If he take him another [wife]; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.” [Exodus 21:10]

From the above verses it is clear that the Bible acknowledges and allows polygamy. Biblical personalities are often quoted as to having more than one wife. Examples of such are Solomon, David, Rehoboam etc:

“And Rehoboam loved Maachah the daughter of Absalom above all his wives and his concubines: (for he took eighteen wives, and threescore concubines; and begat twenty and eight sons, and threescore daughters.)” [2 Chronicles 11:21]

“And he (Solomon) had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.” [1 Kings 11:3]

When 1 Kings 11:3 is quoted many Christians, in their defense, quote the following verse:

“Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD; he did not follow him unreservedly as his father David had done.” [1 Kings 11:6]

They suggest that because Solomon was polygamous, God declared him as being evil and compares him to his father David, who according to God, followed His commands. What our Christian brothers fail to realize is that the verse 1 Kings 11:6 does not explain the evil. It does not say that the evil was polygamy.
Secondly the verse compares him to his father David and what exactly was David?

“And David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David.” [2 Samuel 5:13]


“[These were] all the sons of David, beside the sons of the concubines, and Tamar their sister.” [1 Chronicles 3:1-9]

David was polygamous as well! So it is clear that 1 Kings 11:6 does not refer to polygamy when calling Solomon evil.

Analyzing Matthew 19:3-12

Nearly all of Christendom would quote Matthew 19:4-6 as being the verses that prohibit polygamy. The verses are as follows:

“‘Haven’t you read,’ he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.” [Matthew 19:4-6]

Now they say that Jesus talked about the Creator making male and female and for this reason the man will leave his father and mother and be united with a woman and the two will become on flesh therefore polygamy is prohibited.

When one reads the verse in context i.e. from Matthew 19:3 onwards we see that some Pharisees came to Jesus and asked him:

“Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?’” [Matthew 19:3]

They simply asked if it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason. You see at the time of Jesus there were 2 schools of thought present there.

One was Hillel and the other was Shammai.

Shammai understood that divorce was allowed only when the wife was unfaithful.

Hillel understood that divorce could be given for any reason.

Shammai practiced polygamy.
Hillel did not.

So first it is important for us to know which school of thought did these Pharisees belonged to. As Shammai already knew that a wife cannot be divorced unless she is unfaithful, therefore they could not have asked this question to Jesus.

Hillel understood that divorce can be given for whatever reason therefore if one uses logic it is evident that it were the Hillel who asked Jesus this question and not the Shammai.

Further, the Hillel did not practice polygamy therefore the answer given by Jesus could not have possibly been in reference to polygamy (as Hillel never practiced it) and therefore was in reference to divorce.

Let’s further analyze the “2 become 1″ phrase.

Jesus used his words very carefully and he used the term “In the beginning”, he did not say “from now”, so if Christendom wants to apply this 2 become 1 rule for polygamy then they have to agree that it was true for all times SINCE the beginning. So when this “universal law” is applicable since the beginning, why does the same God approve of polygamy when He said:

“If he take him another [wife]; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.” [Exodus 21:10]

Why did the same God allow polygamy? Did 2 not become 1 at that time? Ofcourse it did! Jesus(as) said “In the beginning”!

Moreover what did the Pharisees understood out of Matthew 19:4-6? Did the Pharisees understood it to mean Polygamy? No they did not. This can be seen from the proceeding verse where they ask Jesus(as) after his “2 become 1″ parable:

They asked:

“Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?” [Matthew 4:7]

They did not ask why Moses gave the command that polygamy is allowed!

They asked why Moses allowed divorce.

So then our Christian brothers quote the following:

“I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.” [Matthew 19:9]

The message in this verse is again clear – if you divorce your wife for any reason other than her being unfaithful, and marry someone else, only then are you committing adultery. Any marriage post divorce (except for reason of unfaithfulness) is declared invalid. The ruling is for post divorce and not for pre divorce. You see Jesus used his words very carefully. Why people are hell bent on twisting his words is beyond me. He said in the simplest words possible – Do not divorce. And do not divorce does not mean do not marry another woman. Jesus is only warning the others that they dare not divorce their wives for any and every reason unless it is unfaithfulness. He is only securing the rights of women! But if a person divorces his wife for any other reason then the punishment for him according to the Law of God is that every other woman would be forbidden to him and he would therefore be committing adultery even if he marries someone else. Jesus is only securing the women.

Analyzing Matthew 5:32

A verse often quoted by Christians to prove prohibition of Polygamy:

“But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.” [Matthew 5:32]

Again it is interesting to see that Matthew 5:32 is not related to the incident of the Jews. After reading a few verses before and after the verse pointed out, one can see that Jesus is declaring a set of laws. While declaring these set of laws, what prevented Jesus from using clear terms regarding Polygamy? Polygamy was practiced by the Jews and it was approved of in the OT. Therefore if it was indeed such an evil act, why did Jesus(as) not prohibit it here in clear words? Indeed his intention was not to prohibit it.

Another problem in this verse is the injustice to the woman. A woman who is divorced without the reason of being unfaithful, cannot marry another man because the verse says that whoever marries such a woman would be committing adultery. Remember, the Bible remains silent about the remarriage of an unfaithful wife who is divorced. Hence an unfaithful wife who is divorced can remarry but a faithful wife who was divorced cannot remarry another man!! This is injustice!

Below I will apply this law in Matthew 5:32 to practical situations.

Let’s apply this to a man who already has 3 wives and converts to Christianity. What in the world would become of him and his wives? Technically if we go with the interpretation provided by Christendom, then, he will have to divorce 2 of them because if he doesn’t then he will be committing a sin. If he does, then again he will be committing a sin. The poor man will go insane and the poor wives that he will divorce will not be able to remarry either thus leading to injustice.

You see a religion or the laws set by God have to include various possibilities. If you go with the explanation that I have provided then everything fits into place and thus eliminating these complications and injustices that can arise.

Islam provides solution for such situations.

Islam has a solution.
Christianity has NO solution.

Further Evidence for Polygamy in the Bible

a) In 1 Timothy 3:2 which I quote below:

“A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;” [1 Timothy 3:2]

There is a statement of “husband of one wife” but who is it applicable to?

The Bishop! Not common man.
If Polygamy was prohibited then why would it be made specific to the Bishop to marry ONLY ONE?

Naturally if Polygamy was prohibited then the Bishop would marry only one hence then this verse would make no sense.

b) Similarly I will quote another passage:

“A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.” [1 Timothy 3:12]

Again this statement is for the deacon. If polygamy was so obviously declared prohibited in the Bible, then this statement would not really make any sense as the deacon would naturally marry only one.

c) In Matthew 22:24 there is again an incident where some Sadducees come up to Jesus(as) and remind him of the law stated by Moses(as). The law was that when a man dies and leaves behind his wife and no children, then his brother has to marry his wife:

“Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.” [Matthew 22:24]

Note how the Bible makes it a law for a man to marry his brother’s widow, provided his brother had no children. The Bible does not mention the marital status of the man who will have to fulfill this law. Therefore whether married or unmarried, the man will have to marry his brother’s widow. Jesus did not forbid or deny this law and accepted it. This can be seen if one reads the proceeding verses. Again there is evidence of polygamy as being permissible in the Bible.

Do All Christians say Polygamy is prohibited in the Bible?

No they do not. Many, like the Mormons believe it to be permissible in the Bible. I would like you to read the following link and the interpretation they have given for 1Timothy 3:2

Scriptural Polygamy

In the end I would like to say that our Christian brothers should not forget that Jesus did not come to abolish the previous law. He came to fulfill it.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” [Matthew 5:17]