Our dear Deb islam and slavery and gem time

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Feb 26, 2010 at 07:21

Our dear Deb al-tablighee you see our dear deb we proud kuffar have a saying: Ignorance is bliss, Knowledge is blessed, and half knowledge is darn dangerous and you are no more than the half knowledge as you shall see

> HI DNM,

Whatever

>Once again you come back to unfairly criticise me.

Poor baby. You know the old saying: if you cannot stand the heat then you get out of the kitchen right our dear Deb?

I wrote>>For the readers anyone who is interested in reading a great work on slavery and Islam I suggest Brenard Lewis great work: ""Race and slavery in the Middle East. An Historical Enquiry"

My Answer >>>> Why you are referring Bernard Lewis ?

Hello: Because it is great work

> He is a pro-Zionist historian.

What does this have to do with the fact that this is great work? Oh I see it hurts that a pro-Zionist is exposing slavery and islam right?

>His writings can not be neutral.

Then read the book first and write a book review to prove him wrong. But you know what? You are ignorant right?

>Bye the bye if you do not trust the sources of Islamic history as authentic then why should I trust someone like Bernard Lewis as authentic ?

Mr. ignorant: We kuffar apply the tools of literary criticism to the Islamic historical tradition and the end result is:

1. al-Hadith: No hadith can be linked to the historical Muhammad and al-ahadith are a reflection of the social, economic, religious and ethnic concerns of Muslims in the 3rd century of islam and no hadith can be linked to the historical Muhammad period or with Mecca or Medina between 610CE and 632CE and any tradition that has something to do with color or race is a suspect tradition

2. al-sira al-nabawiyya wa al-maghazi are no more than tafseer of the Quranic pericopes and logias and they not independent historical source

3, al-tarikh is no more than "history" that is made of literary formulas that means nothing and leads no where

4. Mecca and Meccan tarde are the biggest joke in the history of islam. We have no evidence external to the Muslim sources that were written by Persians and other non Arabs 3 centuries after the death of Abul Qasim that there was indeed such thing as Meccan Trade and what is most amazing about it is that the Syriac, Greek, Coptic and Hebrew sources about early islam (see Hoyland survey) are silent about a certain Muhammad al-tajir (the trader) and at least we should have had some one saying in the civilized Middle East in 633CE " Oh those Arab invaders come from the land of Muhammad who was a big time tajir and who met a certain Bahira al-rahib " and you know what? The silence of the sources here is very significant and do you know why? Because there was no such thing as Meccan trade and if it really existed then why did it disappear after the Arab invasion and if Mecca was such a wealthy place then why did the Umayyad's move their capital to Damascus? Let me help you because there was no such thing as Meccan trade and Mecca was no more than a poor miserable place and the source of such qissa is no more than tafseer of surat Quraish (Q106) a sura that no one has a clue what it means not back then and not now

And here is your bonus for today: What does the word Ilaf is surat Quriash mean? Let me help you: No one has a clue which cast doubt on the whole bogus story of Meccan Tarde

Now do you get it our dear Deb?

Then I wrote

>>Hello" Your source of such story about a certain Bilal is al-sira al-nabawiyya and al-maghazi and both are unhistorical souces in other words they are no more than little qissas (read this as stories of fiction) and such story is very much anachronistic. How come you did not know that? The Arabs called and still call black people al-3abeed wa al-barabra and they are both vile words just like the N word

And this is our dear Deb al-tablighee's answer:

>My Answer >>>>> If I had a time machine I would have taken you back to Mecca during the time of the prophet. For the moment though you have to listen to the writings about the prophet to understand who Billal was.

Gobbledygook

And if there was indeed a certain Bilal and he was one of Abul Qasim's (aka Muhammad) slaves then why was he not "released" from slavery by Muhammad the Arabian warlord and caravan raider and had to be "released" by the so called Abu Bakr? Any guesses?

>My Answer >>> Hazral Billal was not a slave of the prophet Mohammad , he was a slave of one of the enemies of the prophet in Mecca.

Bogus. As usaul in the islamic tradition he was the slave of a certain Ummaya ibn Khalaf and in other traditions he was a slave of Abu Bakr (see Muqatil) or Muhammad and only Allahu a3lam

>Now when Hazrat

ROTFL Urdu Arabic! Are you aware that the word hazart is a vulgar word in Arabic the language of your masters the Arabs and it means; I will pass gas! So do you plan to pass gas our dear Deb? Now do you see what happens when you become the salve of a foreign language and tradition?

> Billal recited the Shahada for the first time ,

Hello: the first extant al-shahada as in ash hadu ana la ilaha ila allah wa ash hadu ana Muhammadan rasul Allah cannot be dated before the mid of the 2nd century of Islam and for the readers: I urge you to check the inscriptions of al-masjad al-aqsa where you can see clearly that Muslims were still working on al-shahada 72 years after the death of Muhammad. So much for a certain Hazrat (ROTFL) Bilal reciting al-shahada for the first time

>his master decided to punish him by putting a huge rock on his chest as well as putting him under the hot mid-day sun of mecca.

Hello: this is a qissa but again if you can believe that Muhammad spoke to Allah via an angel then you can believe anything

>The owner of Hazrat Billal wanted him to renounce Islam and start worshipping the false gods of the Meccans. But Hazrat Billal endured that terrible pain for some time. Now at this time Hazrat Abu Bakar sold a grat portion of his fortune and purchased Hazrat Billal and then Hazrat Billal was freed.

So why did Abul Qasim not "release" him? Any guesses?

>I hope this answer will satisfy our dear readers.

I will leave this remark to the readers to judge you and judge your ignorance

---

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".