Mansoor: You are right about my reason for posting on this forum

Submitted by Plato (India), May 10, 2008 at 06:12

Mansoor, you wrote:

>>I can well understand your purpose, because newcomers on this website always find you with hard hitting questions..but they never know that they have been answered thousand times before..<<

You are right Mansoor, that is the reason why I post here. Some newcomers have no idea what the issues were or are. They have been answered by both sides of the divide many times but they may not be inclined to search the blog looking for answers.

>>I stand firm on the matter of corruption of previous divine scriptures. The reason very clearly mentioned in Quran that those who were made responsible to guard the book themselves corrupted, altered and changed the message for their own petty purpose. The impact is so visible as the world is divided in different faiths.<<

Read what I have underlined. Does the Koran not claim that Allah is all-knowing? How did this all-knowing Allah not know that the people being given the responsibility to guard his precious words would themselves turn against it? So this all-knowing Allah's claim is proven false. Mansoor, it is time you looked for a more powerful god to worship. This Allah is incapable of protecting his word, so you cannot be sure what is in the Koran is also not corrupted.

>>[62:5] The example of those who were ordered to bear (the responsibility of acting upon) the Torah, then they did not bear it, is like a donkey that carries a load of books.<<

Let us assume the Jews failed to bear their responsibility and because of that Allah was forced to repeat Himself in the Koran. It took Allah thousands of years to realize that the people he had created were incapable of guarding His words and so He took it upon Himself to guard it by releasing a final version of His word through a new loudspeaker, Muhammad.

>>[62:6] Say, ―O you who are Jews, if you claim that you are the friends of Allah to the exclusion of all other people, then express your desire for death, if you are true<<

My tafsir of this verse for what it is worth: The Jews proved to be fickle friends of Allah. They claimed they had exclusive rights to Allah's affection but betrayed Him nevertheless, according to the Koran. The underlined words sound suspiciously like Muhammad's as it does not make any sense for Allah to make such challenge as life and death He claims is in His hands.

Interestingly Allah then went ahead and chose a new chosen people, the Muslims. He tells them they are special in 3:110. Now no one can reach paradise unless he becomes a Muslim. How silly is this Allah who cannot choose from His own creation people who will protect His word. He is even sillier for not having created everyone to be Muslims so that He can rest in peace without having to get into a rage every time an infidel worships a piece of rock or wood.

>>[62:8] Say, ―Indeed, the death from which you (try to) run away has to visit you, then you will be sent back to the Knower of the Unseen and the seen, and He will tell you what you used to do.<<

This again sounds suspiciously like Muhammad in the guise of Allah threatening Jews. But the claim to be knower of the unseen is false as He did not know that the Jews would betray His word. If Allah had this power to know the unseen would He have foolishly entrusted His word to them?

>>Now after testing human who breeched the accord and changed and reformed the divine revelations according to their evil will, <<

This just goes to show that Allah is not all-knowing as He claims. An all-knowing Allah would not have to test humans to figure out whether they would try to reform His revelation. He knew all along that they would use their evil will to tamper with His messages. Why did Allah not protect His words from people He knew were evil?

>>Allah took the charge of the matters and proved that He is all powerful and all capable to ensure the security of his final revelation the Quran.<<

It took Allah thousands of years to realize His messages were being corrupted. As I have said above, this just goes to prove Allah's helplessness against human will. Or it took Allah that much time to devise a plan to protect His revelation from being corrupted.

What makes you so certain that this so-called final message has also not been corrupted? After all Allah proved incapable of protecting any of His previous messages.

>>You talked about different books of other religions like Sikhs in particular. For your kind information, Granth Sahib the Sikhs book includes the Hyms and notes by various saints based on their personal perception of Lord (Guru)..it is not perfect to call it of divine nature. Thus it is no where near to Quran...<<

True. But your claim was that since the Koran has not changed from the day it was revealed proves it to be the word of god. Similarly the Guru Granth has not changed after it was codified. You also claim that it consists of hymns of various saints. The Koran too is a poor cut and paste job from the Bible and Torah.

>>Regarding Shahada...just read it completely to understand the wordings which clearly declare that

"I testify that there is no God worthy of worship but God (Allah), and I testify that Muhammad is the messenger of God."

Better clear your mind Plato<<

Thank you for giving me another opportunity to do a tafsir on Islam's most important mantra.

I found this in Wikipedia:

There are seven critical conditions of the Shahadah, without which it is considered to be meaningless:^{[citation needed]}

• Al-`Ilm: Knowledge of the meaning of the Shahadah, its negation and affirmation.
• Al-Yaqeen: Certainty – perfect knowledge of it that counteracts suspicion and doubt.
• Al-Ikhlaas: Sincerity which negates shirk.
• Al-Sidq: Truthfulness that permits neither falsehood nor hypocrisy.
• Al-Mahabbah: Love of the Shahadah and its meaning, and being happy with it.
• Al-Inqiad: Submission to its rightful requirements, which are the duties that must be performed with sincerity to God (alone) seeking His pleasure.
• Al-Qubool: Acceptance that contradicts rejection.

This would mean that the millions who were converted or converted to Islam were pseudo Muslims. Even the Muslims who intone this mantra perphaps would not fulfil all these seven conditions with their requirement of perfect knowledge, sincerity etc.

Testifying to the existence of one god is one thing but why has Muhammad appended his own name to this mantra. Does not including his name in any way detract from ‘shirk'? Seems to me adding Muhammad's name is a clear case of shirk. No human's name should be breathed along with the glorious Allah's. Can't you see, Mansoor, this is just your apostle's self-love, mirroring the self-love of the Allah he claims to speak for, speaking? Can you explain to me how not including Muhammad in the sahada detracts from the greater glory of Allah?

Regards

Plato.

---

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