Thoughts and Truth from the Impossible Life

Ahmadinejad: World forces must annihilate Israel

See on Scoop.itIslam Revealed

(JPost) – In Ramadan speech to Islamic country ambassadors, Iranian president says liberation of Palestine will solve all world problems.

n a speech published on his website Thursday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the ultimate goal of world forces must be the annihilation of Israel.

Speaking to ambassadors from Islamic countries ahead of ‘Qods Day’ (‘Jerusalem Day’), an annual Iranian anti-Zionist event established in 1979 by Ayatollah Khomeini and which falls this year on August 17, Ahmadinejad said that a “horrible Zionist current” had been managing world affairs for “about 400 years.” 

Repeating traditional anti-Semitic slurs, the Iranian president accused “Zionists” of controlling the world’s media and financial systems.

It was Zionists, he said, who were “behind the scene of the world’s main powers, media, monetary and banking centers.” 

“They are the decision makers, to the extent that the presidential election hopefuls [of the USA] must go and kiss the feet of the Zionists to ensure their election victory,” he added.

Ahmadinejad added that “liberating Palestine” would solve all the world’s problems, although he did not elaborate on exactly how that might work.

“Qods Day is not merely a strategic solution for the Palestinian problem, as it is to be viewed as a key for solving the world problems,” he said.

He added: “Anyone who loves freedom and justice must strive for the annihilation of the Zionist regime in order to pave the way for world justice and freedom.”

The Iranian president said that Israel reinforced “the dominance of arrogant powers in the region and across the globe” and that Arab countries in particular – he cited Bahrain, Yemen, Libya, Syria and Turkey – were affected by Israel’s “plots.”

Ahmadinejad, who has called the Holocaust a myth, has previously called for Israel’s annihilation, in a 2005 speech in which he used a Persian phrase that translates literally as “wiped off the page of time.” 

See on

August 2, 2012 Posted by | Israeli-Palestinian Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Versions Of The Qur’an?

Front of the Quran

See on Scoop.itIslam Revealed

Versions Of The Qur’an?…

See on

August 2, 2012 Posted by | Israeli-Palestinian Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Today’s Quran in the light of its early manuscripts

The end of the Quran as Muslims know it

Today’s Quran in the light of its early manuscripts

By Oskar

“The Quran is a record of the exact words revealed by God through the Angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad. It was memorized by Muhammad and then dictated to his Companions, and written down by scribes, who cross-checked it during his lifetime. Not one word of its 114 chapters, Suras, has been changed over the centuries, so that the Quran is in every detail the unique and miraculous textwhich was revealed to Muhammad fourteen centuries ago.” (, search for ‘What is the Qur`an?’; accessed 19 May 2011)

The fundamental Islamic belief that no word of the Quran has changed is put in question by a rather unique ancient manuscript, a palimpsest, known as ‘DAM 0 1-27.1.’1 It was discovered by Muslims in 1972 at the ancient Great Mosque of Sana’a in Yemen. According to the latest academic studies, aided by the use of ultraviolet photography, the palimpsest contains many differences when compared with today’s Arabic Quran. They range from different and missing words and dissimilar spelling, to a changed order of Surahs and words within verses. The find is part of a bundle of parchments thought to be the oldest surviving copies of the Quran.

A palimpsest is a manuscript from which a text has been scraped or washed to make room for another one in order to re-use the expensive parchment. Such a process would normally only be done after several centuries. However, in the case of ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’ it took place within the first century of the ‘Hijrah’ (7th and early 8th century AD), shortly after the Uthmanic recension. This is confirmed by the fact that the primary writings that reappeared and the secondary ones that followed, including the corrections of both, were found to be made in the ‘Hijazi’ style of the first Islamic century. The characteristic, irregular lines of that particular style exist in all the four above mentioned developmental stages of the text.

1. The Evidence

The palimpsest known as, ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’ contains at least 38 Quran leaves. They were each written on parchment with an approximate size of 36.5 x 28.5 cm. Since on the majority of the leaves a primary text is visible and both texts contain parts of over 70 % of today’s Quran, the palimpsest must be a remnant of two, previously complete, yet different Qurans. ‘Folio 16r’2below contains Surah 9:70-80 in the less visible primary writing and Surah 30:26-40 in the better visible secondary writing. The numbers on the right side of the image written in cursive type refer to the lines of the earlier, primary text. The normal ones identify the lines in the later, secondary text.

In the following examples changed words from the primary writing are compared with the Standard text (StT). These changes represent only a very small part of a much bigger, in-depth analysis conducted by Dr E. Puin.3

2. Examples

A. Several words are missing within a paragraph leading to a different meaning:4

Sahih International translation: ‘… (if) they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And there will not be for them on earth (any protector or helper.)

Sana’a manuscript, ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’, translation: ‘… (if) they turn away, Allah will punish them in this world. And there will not be for them on earth (any protector or helper.)

The finishing letter, ‘Alif’, in, ‘yatawallaw’‘they turn away’, found in today’s standard text of the Quran is missing in the early manuscript under discussion, as indicated by the empty box with a black frame above. Moreover, in the the verb, ‘yu’addibhum’, ‘he (Allah) will punish them’, found on, ‘Fol. 16r, Z.13’, is not explained with, ‘adaban aliman’‘with a painful punishment’, as in the Standard Text (StT). There one finds, ‘fi‘l-dunya wa-‘l-ahirati’, ‘in this world and in the Hereafter.’ The Sana’a manuscript contains only, ‘in this world’ and therefore fits better with the end of the verse in both versions: ‘And there will not be for them on earth any protector or helper.’

B. Words are different from today’s Quran:5

The word, ‘gahannnamu,’ ‘hell’, found in the Standard Text has been replaced with the synonym, ‘l-naru’, ‘the fire’, found in the box with the interrupted frame. It is almost identical with a parallel text found in today’s Surah 24:57:

The word, ‘yaqsimuna’ in the old manuscript has been changed by the different, yet synonymous, ‘yahlifuna’, ‘they swear,’ in today’s Quran. The words that follow, crossed with horizontal lines, have been reconstructed with certainty. Behind the ‘Kaf’ of, ‘kalimat’, ‘(the) word’, a part of the manuscript is missing. The grey, shaded area indicates uncertainty about the original word. The room left on the parchment allows only for, ‘(ka)limata ‘l kufri’, ‘(the) word (of) the disbelief’, and not the remaining 38 words of the verse found in the Standard Text. The first four of these missing words on the manuscript are again indicated by the white box with the black frame.

Whereas the secondary text of the examined palimpsest comes close to the content of today’s Quran, it is still not 100% identical. None of the numerous changes under discussion are mentioned in the Qirâ’ât literature that is concerned mostly with methods of pronunciation used in the recitations of the Qur’an. The changes are also different from those found in the collections of the Quran by Ibn Mas’ud, known primarily for the absence of Surah 1, 113 and 114, and Ubay bin Ka’b who listed two additional Surahs.6

3. Questions of Muslims answered

A. Why should we listen to Western Orientalist scholars who are known to be against Islam?

Sadly there are not many other scholars who dare to approach the sensitive subject of early Quranic manuscripts in an objective manner. A notable exception was Dr Nasr Abu Zaid, formerly a lecturer in Koranic Studies at Cairo University.7 He argued that the Quran is a literary text which needs to be examined through a literary approach. The highest court in Egypt ruled in 1995 that he was an apostate and therefore his marriage was annulled.

Salim Abdullah, director of the German Islamic Archives, affiliated to the powerful pan-Islamic Muslim World League, is open to critical research too, saying: “I am longing for this kind of discussion on this topic.”8

Since, for the above mentioned reasons, currently no other scholars have done as detailed a research as Dr E. Puin, Saarbrücken, Germany, on the palimpsest, ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’, there was no other option available then the one chosen. However, other eminent scholars have examined different manuscripts and reached the same conclusion that the Quran has a history of textual development.9

B. Was it just a bad copy used by those whom the Uthmanic text had not yet reached?

There are several problems with such an assumption:

1.     The palimpsest ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’ has been proven to actually contain four different Qurans: A complete primary and secondary text, and both showing later corrections. Therefore we are not just dealing with one but four ‘bad copies’ within the first Islamic century. If the Uthmanic text had not yet reached the mosque, upon what basis were the corrections of the two different texts made?

2.     The Great Mosque of Sana’a where the manuscripts were found was built in the 6th year of the Hijrah by one of Muhammad’s companions.10 It was a centre of Islamic learning and as such must have been supplied with Uthman’s text immediately and urgently, since the Qurans found in any mosques have naturally been in use among the Muslims.

3.     Since even the secondary text with the corrections does not resemble the Uthmanic text 100%, the question arises as to why it was not corrected when the ‘Authorized Version’ arrived? To keep a different Quran in an Islamic centre of learning is a recipe for passing on false teachings.

4. Where do we go from here?

It has become clear that the Quran is not a record of the exact words revealed by God. Instead, the palimpsest, known as ‘DAM 0 1-27.1,’ demonstrates clearly that the holy book of Muslims has gone through stages of historical developments. There are at least three ways people can respond to these facts:

A. Anger

There is a right kind of anger, when people are treated unjustly, or God’s will is misrepresented and neglected. While the world could definitely do with more of that kind of righteous anger expressed in productive ways, uncontrolled rage fueled by self-interest is sadly much more common. It is fully understandable that people resent a change of thought about what in many ways lies at the very heart of their faith and society. However, if painstaking examination of evidence has proven certain dearly held beliefs to be false, then it would be foolishness to stubbornly hold on to them, just because one has always done so. Change never comes easy but it is better to bring a painful end to lies than to keep on living in the pain of deception without end.

B. Ignorance

Some people decide to turn a blind eye on the facts discussed so far. They try to live in denial and carry on as usual. After all it has been rather comfortable so far, so they think. Such individuals and communities act a bit like someone who has lived in a small room for a long time. They will be happy with it until they realize that other people live in a spacious house. The truth that the Quran has been changed, not just in transmission but in the actual text as well, has far reaching, potentially life-changing implications.

C. Jesus

Lastly, the third way people can respond to the findings of this academic research is Jesus. He says about himself literally, “I am the way and the truth and the life.”11 He is the answer to the prayer Muslims are to perform five times every day, saying: ‘Show us the straight way, the way of those on whom you have bestowed your Grace…’ Jesus did not say, ‘I am showing you the way into Christianity.’ He simply says, ‘I am the way.’ Eternal life in paradise comes from following him alone. It happens by grace, by an undeserved favour. Jesus wants us to turn around from our old ways and put our faith in him and what he has done for us on the cross. He does not ask people to abandon the good aspects of their culture or to embrace the sinful parts of a Western lifestyle. God will give us the power to be like Jesus in whatever situation we find ourselves in.

Jesus is not only the way but he is also the living word of God. The Quran calls him uniquely, ‘Kalimatullah’ – ‘The Word of God’ (Surah 4:171; cf. Revelation 19:13 & John 1); it is identical with God. The Bible is about Jesus. Many articles have been written to show that it is still trustworthy.12 However, the standard and definition by which the Holy Scriptures of the people of the Book has been revealed and preserved is different from the one given hundreds of years later by Muslims. Whoever examines the Bible on its own terms, praying earnestly and with an open heart for guidance will be blessed. I invite you to do so through a simple e-mail correspondence course. Please contact me to get the first of six lessons.


1 Codex Ṣanʿāʾ DAM 01-27.1 – A Qur’ānic Manuscript From Mid-1st Century Of Hijra, accessed 14th June 2011

2 Elisabeth Puin, “Ein früher Koranpalimpsest aus San’ā’ (DAM 01 -27.1). Teil III: Ein nicht-‘utmānischer Koran” in: Markus Groß / Karl-Heinz Ohlig (Hg.), Die Entstehung einer Weltreligion I. Von der koranischen Bewegung zum Frühislam, INARAH Schriften zur frühen Islamgeschichte und zum Koran, Band 5, Berlin/Tübingen 2010, pages 302-303 (here produced as one picture with permission from Dr E. Puin).

3 Ibid., pages 233-305

4 Ibid., p. 291, Picture copied and text summarized and translated into English with permission of Dr E. Puin.

5 Ibid., pp. 289-290

6 ‘Itqan I’ by Suyuti, p.62, 65, Bukhari, 6, No.521, Fihrist, I, pages 53-57, ‘Masahif’ by Ibn Abi Dawud, pp.180-181

7 Nasr Hamed Abu Zaid: The end of a controversial scholarly legacy, accessed 14th June 2011

8 Querying the KoranThe Guardian, accessed 15th June 2011

9 See for example: ‘HOLY BOOKS have a HISTORY, Textual Histories of the New Testament & the Quran’ by Dr. Keith Small, Avant Ministries, USA, 2010, 1st edition, 126 pages, $ 5, ISBN: 978-1-4507-4077-7, available through, or, from the same author, ‘Textual Criticism and Qur’an Manuscripts’, Lexington Books, ISBN-10: 0739142895, available through Amazon.

10 Maktabat al-Jami` al-Kabir (Maktabat al-Awqaf), The Great Mosque, San`a’-Yemen

11 John 14:6

12 What the Qur’an says about the Bible and About the Bible

August 2, 2012 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Multiple ARABIC Quran Versions

Quran, Mus'haf_Al_Tajweed.

Image via Wikipedia

Evidence of Multiple Arabic Qur’an Versions

Muslim source materials report that at least four different versions of the Aur’an existed before the political order was given to require the books to be burned. (Refer to “al-Tamihid 2, 247). (3)
To begin, at least two versions were written by people close to Based on Muslims sources the differences were great enough to reports differences so serious as to cause one Muslim group to call another group heretics:
During the reign of Uthman, teachers were teaching this or that reading to their students. When the students met and disagreed about the reading, they reported the differences to their teachings. They would defend their readings, condemning the others as heretical. (Abu Bakr Abdullah b. abi Da’ud K. al Masahif)
So a political decision was made to have only one Qur’an. This did not go over well with the original people who created their unique version of the Qur’an. Who were these “chosen’ people ?
Muslim source materials reveal some of these select people who are known to have created their unique version of the Qur’an (Sahih Bakhari, Volume 5, Book 58 Number 150). (4)
I heard the Prophe saying “Learn the recitation of Qur’an from four persons; (a) Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud (b) Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa (killed in 633 battle), (c) Ubayy B. Ka’ab and (d) Muadh bin Jabal.”

So a few select people close to Muhammad (as well as other people) thought they knew the Qur’an and collected their personal version. These versions f the Qur’an became widely distributed and used. This is why Muslim soldiers were arguing and calling one another heretics. After the “official” Quran was released and the order was given to burn all other versions, some very bad feeling came out. Let’s begin with mas’ud, who was asked to burn his personal version of the Qur’an.

Muhammad Said, “Learn The Qur’an from Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud
“How can you order me to recite the reading of Zaid, when I recited from the very mouth of the prophet some seventy Surahs ?” “Am I,” asks Abdullah, “to abandon what I acquired form the very lips of the Prophet ?” (Abu Bakr Abudullah b. abi Da’ud “K. al Masahif). (5)
Below is one of the most important questions that Muslims need to answer.


Since Mas’ud refused to burn his unique version of the Qur’an, it is doubtful that Mas’ud would honestly answer that the Qur’an of toaday is pure. It is important to ask, “Why did Masu’d refuse to give in and destroy his unique version of the Qur’an ?

Mas’ud was a close companion and personal servant of Muhammad. The prophet Muhammad taught the Qur’an to Masu’d in person. Due to his close relationship with the prophet, Mas’ud would have had confidence that he was qualified to create his unique version of the Qur’an.

Mas’ud, moved to Kufa, Iraq where he completed his unique version of the Qur’an (called the Kufan Codex). The unique Qur’an created by Mas’ud was completed years after the most important original manuscript (634 CE) that Hafsah kept until she died in 667 CE. In addition, the Qur’an version creatd by Mas’ud did not have chapters 1, 113 and 114 that are in the ‘official” Quran of today. Is the Qur’an truly pure as believed by Muslims today ?(6)


Another unique Qur’an was created by Ubayy B. Ka’ab, which became accepted by Muslims living in Syria. Ubayy was a close companion of Muhammad and served as a secretary to Muhammad. Ubayy could recite much of the Qur’an, which he had learned from the prophet Muhammad. Scholars have found that Ubayy’s version different from the “official” Qur’an with two additional chapoters (entitled in Arabic; Surat al-khal and surat al-afd). Since Ubayy was taught the Qur’an by the prophet Muhammad, why doesn’t the “official” Qur’an contain the two additional chapters ?

Ubayy died during the reign of Umar, which was before the “official” Qur’an was created by Uthman. Therefore, Ubayy did no have to witness that his version of the Qur’an was burned by fire. Since Ubayy created a unique versin fo the Qur’an and had learned from the mouth of the prophet Muhammad, would be have agreed with Mas’ud by refusing to give in and destroy his unique version of the Qur’an ?

Due to Uthman’s decision to create an “official” version of the Qur’an, Ubayy’s version of the Qur’an was di\estroyd. It is important to ask, “Is the Qur’an pure ?”


Muadh bin Jabal was the fourth person chosen by Muhammad to learn how to recite the Qur’an. Appendix E discusses what Muadh bin Jabal reported about Muhammad foretelling the future.

Now consider the original Qur’an called the Hafsah Codex. It was destroyed by Muslims leaders immediately after Hafsah died. It is most important to ask, “Wy did Hafsah not wish to have this most important original manuscript of the Qur’an to be burnt?”

We know that the “official” Qur’an version of today comes from Zaid ibn Thabit, who was the youngest writing member. Zaid, being younger, outlived others who had spent more time with Muhammad. However, in the end it was Zaid’s version of the Qur’an that was selected by Uthman for the “official” Qur’an.

Muslims who had been close to Muhammad become righteously angry when Uthman insisted that only one version of the Qur’an be used. Islamic sources show that the purity of the Qur’an from the days of Muhammad was compromised. If no variants existed, then no book burning party would have been required.

Standard Muslim Response
Muslims believe that seven versions of the Qur’an exist but that only Uthman’s Qur’an is correct. So Muslims disregard the “official” book burning party cited in Muslim source materials. However, this acceptance shows that Muslims are living on “Blind faith” in the “Official” Qur’an.

The Einstein Method approach to finding words from outside time-space supports the conclusion that Muslims are living on “blind faith” alone. If Muhammad could consistently foretell the future, then the Qur’an could be regard as coming from God. However, this has not been demonstrated. The politically motivated book burning party of early Muslim leaders supports that the Qur’an is from a false Gabriel.



The 5 versions of the Arabic Qu’ran

Translations are bound to have very small,sometimes negligible differences that don’t alter the main message of the texts.
We have had several muslim apologists boast of the one Al Koran in arabic,un touched and unchanged,just like allah delivered it unto his prophet Muhammad.
Some have gone as far as making claims that the Bible is corrupted since it has various translations even though the various English translations have no contrasting messages.

Now we know the English translations of the Koran differ in style of writing so the Muslims tell us the Koran is basically useless in any other language but arabic and claim there is only one Arabic Koran.

What do you say if I tell you that claim is false
There are different Korans and I have proof.

The five current versions of the Koran are:The Transmitter Hafs, who is Hafs ibn Suleyman ibn Al-Mugheerah Al-Asadi Al-Kuufi (d. 180H):
His Qiraa’ah named Hafs from ‘Aasim is the most popular reading of the Quran in the world today, except for some parts of Africa. Hafs was officially adopted by Egypt in 1924. His chain from ‘Aasim:

He heard from ‘Aasim ibn Abu Najud Al-Kuufi (d. 128H) who was Taabi’i, i.e, among the generation following the Sahaabah, who heard from Abu Abdur-Rahman Abdullah ibn Habib As-Sulami, who heard from Uthman ibn Affan and Ali ibn Abi Talib and Zayd ibn Thaabit and Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

The Transmitter Duuri, is Abu ‘Amr Hafs ibn Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz ibn Subhan Ad-Duuri Al-Baghdaadi (d. 246H):
His Qiraa’ah named Duuri from Abu ‘Amr is popular in parts of Africa like Somalia, Sudan as well as in other parts. His chain of from Abu ‘Amr:

He heard from Abu Muhammad Yahya ibn Mubarak ibn Mugheerah Yazidiyy (d. 202H), who heard from Abu ‘Amr Zuban ibn ‘Ala Maziniyy Al-Busriyy (d. 154H), who heard from the Qiraa’aat from Sahaabis Ali and Uthman and Abu Musa and Umar and Ubayy ibn Ka’b and Zayd ibn Thaabit, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

The Transmitter Warsh, who is Abu Saeed Uthman ibn Saeed Al-Misri, nicknamed Warsh, (d. 197H):
HIs Qiraa’ah named Warsh from Naafi’ is popular in North Africa. His chain from Naafi’:

He heard from Naafi’ ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Abu Nu’aim Al-Madani (d. 169H), who heard from Abu Ja’far Yazid ibn Al-Qa’qaa’ and Abu Dawud Abdur-Rahman ibn Hurmuz Al-A’raj and Shaybah ibn Nisah Al-Qaadhi and Abu Abdullah Muslim ibn Jundub Al-Hudhali and Abu Rawh Yazid ibn Ruman, who heard from Abu Hurairah and Ibn Abbaas and Abdullah ibn ‘Ayyaash ibn Abi Rabii’ah, who heard from Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

The Transmitter Suusi:
His Qiraa’ah named Suusi from Abu ‘Amr is also found around the world in small parts.

The Transmitter Qaaluun, who is Imaam Qaaluun:
His Qiraa’ah named Qaaluun from Naafi’ is popular in places like Libya in Africa. His chain from Naafi’:

He heard from Naafi’ ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Abu Nu’aim Al-Madani (d. 169H), who heard from Abu Ja’far Yazid ibn Al-Qa’qaa’, who heard from Abdullah ibn Abbaas and Abu Hurairah, who heard from Ubayy ibn Ka’b and Zayd ibn Thaabit, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

In case Muslim readers should be greatly concerned: The variances between these different versions of the Koran are generally quite small and minor, although there are a substantial number of them. Muhammad Fahd Khaaruun has published a version of the (Hafs) Koran which contains the variant readings from the 10 Accepted Readers in its margins. About 2/3 of the ayat (verses) have some sort of variant reading. The great majority are differences in the vowels inserted in certain words (remembering that the early written kufic texts of the Koran did not include vowels or diacritical marks). There appears to be only one difference that might represent a significant effect on belief, that in surah 2:184. There are many Islamic scholars’ discussions about these many differences. As an example of one, in Hafs, surah 2:140 reads taquluna, while in Warsh, that text is in surah 2:139 and reads yaquluna. Another example: Hafs surah 2:214 reads yaquula while Warsh surah 2;212 reads yaquulu. Muslim scholars agree that such variations do not seriously alter the meaning of statements made in the Koran.

August 2, 2012 Posted by | Israeli-Palestinian Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 17 Comments

The Quran Says that People of Other Religions are to be Violently Punished in This World

The Quran Says that People of Other Religions are to be Violently Punished in This World

Allah himself fights against the unbelievers (9:30), so why should Muslims not fight in his cause rather than in the cause of evil (4:76)? About 19% of the Quran is devoted to the violent conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims:
Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides, whom ye may not know (8:60)
Strive hard (Jihad) against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed. (66:9, See also 9:73)

Muslims are to expect a reward in this life as well as the next (4:134), so it makes sense that unbelievers should be punished in this life as well:

…He whom Allah sendeth astray, for him there is no guide. For them is a penalty in the life of this world, but harder, truly, is the penalty of the Hereafter… (13:33:34)
All beings on heaven and earth will be forced to bow down to Allah, either willingly or by force:
And unto Allah falleth prostrate whosoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly (13:15)
Those who resist Islam will be humiliated:
Those who resist Allah and His Messenger will be among those most humiliated. (58:20 – The context for this verse is the eviction of the Jewish tribes of Medina and the confiscation of their wealth, land, and children by Muhammad).
Non-Muslims are to be fought until religion is only for Allah:
And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah… (8:39 – “Persecution” in this context means resistance to Islam – defined in the prior verse as an unwillingness to believe (see verse 38). This passage was “revealed” following a battle that Muhammad deliberately provoked. Verse 2:193 essentially says the same thing and was also “revealed” at a time when the Muslims were not under physical attack).
Those with “diseased hearts” – which include Christians and Jews according to 5:52 – are to be “seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter” (33:60-62) along with “hypocrites” (Muslims who are judged not to be true believers by their associations with unbelievers or their unwillingness to engage in Jihad).

Non-Muslims are to be encroached on and pressured by the Muslims:

See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? (13:41 – See also 21:44)
And He made you heirs to their land and their dwellings and their property, and (to) a land which you have not yet trodden, and Allah has power over all things. (33:27, See also Bukhari 53:392)

Allah will grant Muslims authority and power over all other people:

Allah has promised, to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will, of a surety, grant them in the land, inheritance (of power), as He granted it to those before them; that He will establish in authority their religion… (24:55)
(Muhammad’s companions continued to self-fulfill this prophecy with an aggressive and senseless military expansion that left a trail of bodies from Spain to India).

Allah provides instructions to Muslims for dealing with unbelievers who are unwilling to accept Islamic rule:

Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.” This because they contended against Allah and His Messenger: If any contend against Allah and His Messenger, Allah is strict in punishment. (8:12-13)
Defeating non-Muslims should be easy for true believers because they are superior in intelligence and understanding:
O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a hundred (steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk without intelligence (8:65)

Other verses of violence may be found here:

Remember that the Quran says that not all men are equal in Islam. This also applies to Muslims themselves with regard to their aggressiveness toward unbelievers. Those who kill or are killed on behalf of Islam are more pleasing to Allah:
Not equal are those of the believers who sit at home… and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and lives” (4:95)

  • PLAGIARISM BY Mohammad in the Quran (
  • America and Sharia Law (
  • Multiple ARABIC Quran Versions (
  • Chinese-made Qur’ans full of errors, warns Iranian official (
  • How do the Qur’an and the New Testament contradict one another (
  • The biggest threat to Islam (
  • Versions Of The Qur’an? (
  • August 2, 2012 Posted by | Israeli-Palestinian Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

    Over 200 verses missing from the Quran

    The Collection Under ‘Uthman According to tradition, the next step was taken under ‘Uthman (644-656). One of ‘Uthman’s generals asked the caliph to make such a collection because serious disputes had broken out among his troops from different provinces in regard to the correct readings of the Koran. ‘Uthman chose Zayd ibn Thabit to prepare the official text. Zayd, with the help of three members of noble Meccan families, carefully revised the Koran comparing his version with the “leaves” in the possession of Hafsa, ‘Umar’s daughter; and as instructed, in case of difficulty as to the reading, Zayd followed the dialect of the Quraysh, the Prophet’s tribe. The copies of the new version, which must have been completed between 650 and ‘Uthman’s death in 656, were sent to Kufa, Basra, Damascus, and perhaps Mecca, and one was, of course, kept in Medina. All other versions were ordered to be destroyed. This version of events is also open to criticism. The Arabic found in the Koran is not a dialect. In some versions the number of people working on the commission with Zayd varies, and in some are included the names of persons who were enemies of ‘Uthman, and the name of someone known to have died before these events! This phase two of the story does not mention Zayd’s part in the original collection of the Koran discussed in phase one. Apart from Wansbrough and his disciples, whose work we shall look at in a moment, most modern scholars seem to accept that the establishment of the text of the Koran took place under ‘Uthman between 650 and 656, despite all the criticisms mentioned above. They accept more or less the traditional account of the ‘Uthmanic collection, it seems to me, without giving a single coherent reason for accepting this second tradition as opposed to the first tradition of the collection under Abu Bakr. There is a massive gap in their arguments, or rather they offer no arguments at all. For instance, Charles Adams after enumerating the difficulties with the ‘Uthmanic story, concludes with breathtaking abruptness and break in logic, “Despite the difficulties with the traditional accounts there can be no question of the importance of the codex prepared under ‘Uthman.” But nowhere has it yet been established that it was indeed under ‘Uthman that the Koran as we know it was prepared. It is simply assumed all along that it was under ‘Uthman that the Koran was established in its final form, and all we have to do is to explain away some of the difficulties. Indeed, we can apply the same arguments to dismiss the ‘Uthmanic story as were used to dismiss the Abu Bakr story. That is, we can argue that the ‘Uthmanic story was invented by the enemies of Abu Bakr and the friends of ‘Uthman; political polemics can equally be said to have played their part in the fabrication of this later story. It also leaves unanswered so many awkward questions. What were these “leaves” in the possession of Hafsa? And if the Abu Bakr version is pure forgery where did Hafsa get hold of them? Then what are those versions that seemed to be floating around in the provinces? When were these alternative texts compiled, and by whom? Can we really pick and choose, at our own will, from amongst the variants, from the contradictory traditions? There are no compelling reasons for accepting the ‘Uthmanic story and not the Abu Bakr one; after all they are all gleaned from the same sources, which are all exceedingly late, tendentious in the extreme, and all later fabrications, as we shall see later. But I have even more fundamental problems in accepting any of these traditional accounts at their face value. When listening to these accounts, some very common- sensical objections arise which no one seems to have dared to ask. First, all these stories place an enormous burden on the memories of the early Muslims. Indeed, scholars are compelled to exaggerate the putatively prodigious memories of the Arabs. Muhammad could not read or write according to some traditions, and therefore everything depends on him having perfectly memorized what God revealed to him through His Angels. Some of the stories in the Koran are enormously long; for instance, the story of Joseph takes up a whole chapter of 111 verses. Are we really to believe that Muhammad remembered it exactly as it was revealed? Similarly the Companions of the Prophet are said to have memorized many of his utterances. Could their memories never have failed? Oral traditions have a tendency to change over time, and they cannot be relied upon to construct a reliable, scientific history. Second, we seem to assume that the Companions of the Prophet heard and understood him perfectly. Variant Versions, Verses Missing, Verses Added Almost without exceptions Muslims consider that the Quran we now possess goes back in its text and in the number and order of the chapters to the work of the commission that ‘Uthman appointed. Muslim orthodoxy holds further that ‘Uthman’s Quran contains all of the revelation delivered to the community faithfully preserved without change or variation of any kind and that the acceptance of the ‘Uthmanic Quran was all but universal from the day of its distribution. The orthodox position is motivated by dogmatic factors; it cannot be supported by the historical evidence…. Charles Adams While modern Muslims may be committed to an impossibly conservative position, Muslim scholars of the early years of Islam were far more flexible, realizing that parts of the Koran were lost, perverted, and that there were many thousand variants which made it impossible to talk of the Koran. For example, As-Suyuti (died 1505), one of the most famous and revered of the commentators of the Koran, quotes Ibn ‘Umar al Khattab as saying: “Let no one of you say that he has acquired the entire Quran, for how does he know that it is all? Much of the Quran has been lost, thus let him say, ‘I have acquired of it what is available’” (As-Suyuti, Itqan, part 3, page 72). A’isha, the favorite wife of the Prophet, says, also according to a tradition recounted by as-Suynti, “During the time of the Prophet, the chapter of the Parties used to be two hundred verses when read. When ‘Uthman edited the copies of the Quran, only the current (verses) were recorded” (73). As-Suyuti also tells this story about Uba ibn Ka’b, one of the great companions of Muhammad: This famous companion asked one of the Muslims, “How many verses in the chapter of the Parties?” He said, “Seventy-three verses.” He (Uba) told him, “It used to be almost equal to the chapter of the Cow (about 286 verses) and included the verse of the stoning”. The man asked, “What is the verse of the stoning?” He (Uba) said, “If an old man or woman committed adultery, stone them to death.” As noted earlier, since there was no single document collecting all the revelations, after Muhammad’s death in 632 C.E., many of his followers tried to gather all the known revelations and write them down in codex form. Soon we had the codices of several scholars such as Ibn Masud, Uba ibn Ka’b, ‘Ali, Abu Bakr, al-Aswad, and others (Jeffery, chapter 6, has listed fifteen primary codices, and a large number of secondary ones). As Islam spread, we eventually had what became known as the metropolitan codices in the centers of Mecca, Medina, Damascus, Kufa, and Basra. As we saw earlier, ‘Uthman tried to bring order to this chaotic situation by canonizing the Medinan Codex, copies of which were sent to all the metropolitan centers, with orders to destroy all the other codices. ‘Uthman’s codex was supposed to standardize the consonantal text, yet we find that many of the variant traditions of this consonantal text survived well into the fourth Islamic century. The problem was aggravated by the fact that the consonantal text was unpointed, that is to say, the dots that distinguish, for example, a “b” from a “t” or a “th” were missing. Several other letters (f and q; j, h, and kh; s and d; r and z; s and sh; d and dh, t and z) were indistinguishable. In other words, the Koran was written in a scripta defectiva. As a result, a great many variant readings were possible according to the way the text was pointed (had the dots added). Vowels presented an even worse problem. Originally, the Arabs had no signs for the short vowels: the Arab script is consonantal. Although the short vowels are sometimes omitted, they can be represented by orthographical signs placed above or below the letters—three signs in all, taking the form of a slightly slanting dash or a comma. After having settled the consonants, Muslims still had to decide what vowels to employ: using different vowels, of course, rendered different readings. The scripta plena, which allowed a fully voweled and pointed text, was not perfected until the late ninth century. The problems posed by the scripta defectiva inevitably led to the growth of different centers with their own variant traditions of how the texts should be pointed or vowelized. Despite ‘Uthman’s order to destroy all texts other than his own, it is evident that the older codices survived. As Charles Adams says, “It must be emphasized that far from there being a single text passed down inviolate from the time of ‘Uthman’s commission, literally thousands of variant readings of particular verses were known in the first three (Muslim) centuries. These variants affected even the ‘Uthmanic codex, making it difficult to know what its true form may have been.” Some Muslims preferred codices other than the ‘Uthmanic, for example, those of Ibn Mas’ud, Uba ibn Ka’b, and Abu Musa. Eventually, under the influence of the great Koranic scholar Ibn Mujahid (died 935), there was a definite canonization of one system of consonants and a limit placed on the variations of vowels used in the text that resulted in acceptance of seven systems. But other scholars accepted ten readings, and still others accepted fourteen readings. Even Ibn Mujahid’s seven provided fourteen possibilities since each of the seven was traced through two different transmitters, viz.

  • PLAGIARISM BY Mohammad in the Quran (
  • America and Sharia Law (
  • Multiple ARABIC Quran Versions (
  • Chinese-made Qur’ans full of errors, warns Iranian official (
  • How do the Qur’an and the New Testament contradict one another (
  • The biggest threat to Islam (
  • Versions Of The Qur’an? (
  • August 2, 2012 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

    Proof the the Quran contains errors and that Mohammad was wrong – Facebook Discussion

    العربية: القرآن في متحف التاريخ الطبيعي في نيو...

    Master OfUniverse

    It is the theory that the qu’ran exists because allah had to send a new messenger when he was unable to protect his word from corruption. Thus, my question is to address the errors in the qu’ran since the intent is to explain need for the qu’ran to exist. If musims are right that the Holy Bible is corrupted (a point in full dispute), then mohammad was wrong when he stated the Holy Bible was correct is the Holy Word of God and it HAS NOT changed since his death. And if mohammad was wrong about God’s Holy Word, then he can’t be a prophet. Thus, we are addressing the real issue (rather than trying to disprove the Holy Bible which means to disprove mohammad).

    There are three basic categories of contradictions in the Qur’an: 1. Internal contradictions: Verses contradicting each other or the laws of logic 2. External errors: Verses contradicting the f…

    Like ·  · Unfollow Post · Share · 25 minutes ago
      • توصف محمد

        ‎__r OfUniverse addressing issue one by one.1)//# Who suffers loss if Muhammad was wrong? Sura 34:50 commands Muhammad to say, “If I go astray, I go astray only to my own loss,” which is a severe factual error in the Qur’an as well as c…See More

        18 minutes ago · Like ·  1
      • توصف محمد i am answering you violating the code i usually follow…that is, no argument from links!
        better make your argument and quote the source link if you may : )

        14 minutes ago · Like
      • Master OfUniverse But mohammad was WRONG. When he is in error and others follow that error, THEN they suffer the consequences of that error.

        9 minutes ago · Like
      • Master OfUniverse Anyone who follows the error IS accountable for his own error is he not?

        9 minutes ago · Like
      • Master OfUniverse Unless you can show in the Holy Bible or the qu’ran that says you ARE NOT responsible for your own errors/sins/mistakes?

        8 minutes ago · Like
      • توصف محمد ‎__ OfUniverse
        ||”If I am astray, I only stray to the loss of my own soul: but if I receive guidance, it is because of the inspiration of my Lord to me: it is He Who hears all things, and is (ever) near.””IF” means a possibility and FACTUALLY did not happen !||”If I am astray, ||
        Precondition failed means following assertions fail to happen.

        3 minutes ago · Like
      • Master OfUniverse SO then lets discuss the Satanic Verses when mohammad DID go into error.

        2 minutes ago · Like
      • Master OfUniverse And thus led others astray at THEIR peril not just his.

        about a minute ago · Like
      • توصف محمد ‎___OfUniverse why !when you cannot prove a contradiction as you claimed !

        about a minute ago · Like
      • Master OfUniverse I JUST did. You my dear friend have quite a problem. Because WE ALL know he went into error and said so himself and thus he was wrong in his Sura 34:50 as well. Now we have TWO admitted errors.

        a few seconds ago · Like
      • Master OfUniverse Of course, there are many others we can move onto.

    August 2, 2012 Posted by | Christianity / God, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

    Wendy’s Stumbles into Chick-fil-A Controversy

    See on Scoop.itIslam Revealed

    Wendy’s stepped into a world of controversy this afternoon after Wendy’s franchisee Jim Furman was forced to remove “We Stand With Chick Fil A” on a number of his stores’ signs.

    See on

    August 2, 2012 Posted by | Pending Classification | Leave a comment


    %d bloggers like this: