Nozzi: You have called Imams like Ibn Ishaq, Bukhari, Ibn Kather, Tabari unclean pagans

Submitted by Plato (India), May 11, 2009 at 09:16

Nozzi, you wrote:

>>You have extracted the few books as below to support how bad Prophet Muhammad was. However, I suspect the reliability of the sources. I have a few queries about the sources as below:

a) Are these sources reliable for all muslims to believe that was done by Prophet Muhammad?<<

If the biographies of Ibn Ishaq, Tabari, Ibn Sad and Ibn Kathir, Bukhari are not reliable how would you know Muhammad even existed? The Koran does not tell you much about him. Without these sources how will you ever understand the Koran. Take the verse 'The Palm fibre' (Surah 111) where you find Allah somebody the Father of the Fire and his wife. How will you why Allah has got mad enough to curse two puny human beings?

Or how would you know, as Muslims scholars who are unable to explain this cursing verse in the Holy Koran explain it away by claiming that this verse proves the Koran is from Allah as all Abu Lahab had to do to disprove the Koran was to convert and become Muslim, in which case all his sins are forgiven and he ends up in heaven disproving the prophecy of his going to hell. The Cambridge historians you quote would have no clue to who Abu Lahab was without the original sources I quote.

>>How could it be that Muhammad would have secret relationship with non-muslims, the unclean people?<<

There was no need for him to have secret relationship as he also began life as an unclean pagan (born to pagans and brought up as a pagan, even worshipping in the Kaaba full of najees in the form of idols).

>>We, muslims, treat non-muslims to be unclean and do not let these unclean people to enter into mosque. We, muslims, do not even want our muslim children to marry with non-muslim people, the unclean ones and don't expect us to touch any of your parts for fun or whatever since it is unclean.<<

I must congratulate once again for being a proper Muslim and learning your Koranic lessons well. But as for not touching our unclean parts for fun, that is something Allah has made halal for Muslims. Allah allows Muslims to take and keep non-Muslims girls for fun. Maybe you are not aware of this law of Allah, so read these verses:

004.024 YUSUFALI: Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess:

004.003 YUSUFALI: 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.

Nozzi you can touch the parts of slave girls even if they be unbelievers. Now all you need to do is go out and capture your share of slave girls or be allotted some by your imam (ruler). LOL

>>The same as we treat pork and pig. We do not even want to touch pork, the unclean thing. Thus, your sources to accuse Muhammad is certainly not reliable. I strongly believe that it must be those non-muslims that protested against Muhammad and his followers intentionally created rumours and unpardonable sins to him.<<

I was wondering where this talk of unclean non-Muslims was leading. Now I know that what you are trying to tell me is that the sources of the stories about the Prophet were all unclean unbelievers and should not be believed. But sorry to inform you that all of them were imams of great learning and venerated and respected to this day. Check with the maulana in your mosque where Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Kathir, Malik Ibn Anas, Bukhari, Ibn Sad and Tabari stand in the pantheon of Islamic scholars. Be careful about telling him that you suspect they were uncelean pagans, especially if he is authorized to issue fatwas.

>>b) Remember, in one of your comment and you did bring out a discussion about he slaugthered a woman and yet he let her children to be separated from her. For instance, if Muhammad liked to lust with women, he would simply have a certain internal relationship with her instead of slaughtering he.<<

You are losing the script again, Nozzi. Muhammad was not lusting after Asma Bint Marwan. He was thirsting for her blood. He did not go out to spill her blood he let another do the dirty work on his behalf. The blind man was mandated only to kill the woman and not the children.

>>c) Could you prove to us, muslims, how true are those sources that you have collected? I am certain that not only me, all the muslims would not believe all these sources since we, muslims, treat all non-muslims to be unclean.<<

The people I quote often are revered Muslims. Ibn Ishaq: 'The Life of Muhammad', translated by Alfred Guillaume, Mas Printers Karachi, Pakistan. Would any Pakistani dare publish any book that defames, Muhammad?

'The Life of the Prophet Muhammad' (Al Sira al-Nabawiyya) of Ibn Kathir Vol II and Vol III brought out by the Centre for Muslim Contribution to Civilisation, Qatar, chaired by H.E. sheikh Muhammad bin Hamad al-Thani.

Al-Muwatta of Imam Malik ibn Anas, Distributed by Saba Islamic Media Sdn Bhd, Jalan Setiawangsa 11, 54200 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Summarised Shahi Bukhari, translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Islamic University, Al Madina Al Munawwara, Distributed by Maktba Dar ul Salam, Riyadh.

The four-volume 'The Exegesis of the Grand Holy Koran' by Al-Hafiz ibn Kathir, distributed, by Dar Al-Kotob al Hikmah, Beirut, Lebanon.

WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY NOZZI, NOW THAT I HAVE PROVIDED PROOF THAT ALL MY SOURCES ARE IMPECCABLE ANCIENT MUSLIM SOURCES??

>> We, muslims, will never let our children marry with you and even your children, the unclean things.<<

I feel sorry for you Nozzi and even sorrier for your children for trying to wash their minds of all that is good in human nature. The dirt of prejudice against your fellow beings that you are filling your children with will not give them clean minds, that is for sure. I hope they can rise above the prejudices that you are planting in their tender minds. But I can sympathise with you. You probably had the same done to you either at home like you doing to your children or in your madrassa.

>>As we, muslims, treat all non-muslims to be unclean, those people that want to marry with muslims have to be converted to muslims before they could be recognised by muslim people.<<

Muslims criticize the caste system of the Hindus. Now you tell us that Allah himself has ordained the caste system of clean Muslims (no matter how much they stink physically or spiritually) and the unclean unbelievers (no matter how clean they are physically or spiritually). He also has a caste system based on gender with males a degree above females. Are males cleaner than females? Is it because Allah considers women to be impurt because they menstruate?

>>You, especially you, Plato, the unclean thing, don't expect we would welcome you to the mosque since mosque is holy and you are unclean and dirty fellow.<<

Coming from you, Nozzi, I am inclined to take what you say about me as a compliment.

>>As all muslims treat pagans to be unclean, the sources about Muhammad that you have gathered to us are definitely not reliable.<<

Imam Kathir, Imam Malik Ibn Anas, Imam Bukhari all unclean pagans?? ROTFL

>>If your support that the Holy Quran supports fighting against non-muslims is correct from your own point of view, that is even without logic. This is due to if muslims have to slaughter non-muslims is true, do you think Muhammad would have secret relationship with slave? Certainly, he would not. This is due to if your support that muslims must fight with non-muslims, Muhammad should have slaughtered the slave instead of mixing with the unclean thing, the slave woman.<<

I have no idea what is you are trying to tell me. But the underlined sentence tells me that the Prophet mixed with unclean slaves (Maria, Rehana or the other concubines he kept?). How come instead of following the example of your prophet you refuse to mix with unclean people, to the extent indoctrinating your children that unbelievers are najees?

>>Please answer me this question if you support the following extracts are true: For instance, if Muhammad was so cruel that he would kill pagans as he liked, would you think he would not slaughter the slave and let the unclean thing, the slave, to associate with him. Disgusting! I have no part with unclean thing! Yeah! Disgusting!Only you, unclean thing, Plato that could think Muhammad would do. We, Muslims, would never believe this lie since we do not touch even the pork, the unclean, do not think we believe Muhammad would touch the unclean thing, the slave girl? Back off! Who to believe a lie?<<

Maria was a slave girl he received as a gift from Egypt. He did some 'disgusting' stuff with the unclean thing and had a son called Ibrahim with her, who died despite all his pleas to Allah to spare his life. He had a beautiful Jewish slave woman concubine called Rehana from the Banu Quraiza with whom he must have done some fun dirty stuff. Your prophet seemed to have no problems with dirty disgusting pagans as long as they were fe!males.

>>Only you the ignorant, the simple mind. i tell you the truth. You speak to muslims children and yet might fool them. You tell this to muslim adults. They will not believe the lie.<<

Nozzi a man (Plato?) tells you that an angel told him that someone called Halla, claiming to be the creator of the Universe, whom no one ever sees, has made him into his final messenger and all must believe him and do whatever he says. Would you call him (Plato)a con man or a god man?

>>I extract below what Plato would believe as below (Surely many muslims would not believe this lie): Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 637:…

Bukhari Book 008, Number 337…, Bukhari Book 008, Number 3373:..

"BukhariVolume 7, Book 71, Number 589…<<

Which Muslim who comes to this site wants to stand up and say that Bukhari was lying and trying to defame the prophet with these sahih hadith?

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".