Egyptian-German Hamed Abdel-Samad wrecks Islam

[Gr]

http://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article146903739/Mohammed-war-ein-Massenmoerder-und-ein-kranker-Tyrann.html#disqus_thread



Found a translation:

"Mohammed was a mass murderer and a sick tyrant"

Author Hamed Abdel-Samad retraces the fatal consequences of a sacrosanct prophet. Fanatics and Moderate able to refer to him. And rightly so.

The German-Egyptian author Hamed Abdel-Samad wants to stir up trouble, he says. He calls on Muslims to critically engage with their religion, to challenge their structures and foundations that are perceived as sacrosanct, to reinterpret and adapt them to their present living conditions. This has earned him a lot of trouble and a lot of enemies. His book "The Islamic Fascism" (Droemer 2014) resulted in a fatwa, a religious legal opinion, which demanded his murder. Abdel-Samad went into hiding. But he did not remain silent. The 43-year-old lives under police protection. His new book goes one step further. This time the subject of his criticism is the Prophet himself. "Mohammed - A Reckoning" (Droemer, 224 pages, 19.99 euros) will be released next Thursday. A conversation about hubris, paranoia, delusions and the gigantic religious influence of a man who has been dead for 1400 years.

Die Welt: You say that you would like to bury the Islamic Prophet Muhammad for good. What do you mean by that?

Hamed Abdel-Samad: Mohammed died while 1,400 years ago, but he was never really buried. He remains one of the most powerful people in the 21st century. He still prevails and is a model for 1.4 billion Muslims, peaceful and violent ones alike. All derive their legitimacy from his texts and traditional acts. Its rules are followed even by non-Muslims: He should not be criticized or drawn. And we comply with that. I do not accept that. Mohammed and his deeds have never been critically examined. Nobody dares to see him as a person of his time, with all his weaknesses, illnesses, doubts and self-doubt. It is time to settle accounts with him and bury him in his time. He does not deserve this devotion, and he does not deserve even this power in the 21st century.

Die Welt: You are very hard on the Prophet, calling him a "pathological tyrant," a "narcissist", "paranoid" and even "mass murderer". Many moderate Muslims won't like this, either...

Abdel-Samad: I'm assuming a multiple disease that resulted from his personal history and that the Muslims absorbed. Narcissism and paranoia originate very often in feelings of inferiority, rejection, failure. Mohammed has often been rejected as a child. His father he did not know, the mother gave him away and died when he was six years old. He had no role models, knew no love, no tenderness, no recognition. Thus was formed a personality who suffered compulsion to control, fear of loss and paranoia. This also explains why Muhammad married so many women and collected them like dolls. His craving for recognition was also causal for receiving a divine revelation. He certainly didn't lie or copy. He really received an inspiration, but he only had it because he was in such a fragile state of mind. He made a virtue of necessity.

Die Welt: But his success in spreading his inspiration among the people was initially modest.

Abdel-Samad: Yes, he was not successful at the beginning, although the first Koran passages have been gentle and peaceful. Coexistence, tolerance, consideration - no one was impressed. Then he changed his strategy - and the language changes. Mohammed forms war alliances, in the shadow of the sword came success. Only when spoils of war were held out in prospect, Islam became an economic project which was becoming increasingly popular. Many warlords that Muhammad had fought earlier, now sided with him, because they wanted to bet on the winning horse.

Die Welt: This is your personal picture of the prophet. But you use and interpret the same sources that you criticize. How does that fit together?

Abdel-Samad: Everything is contained in the sources, some was covered up, some mystified, some added. I'm just trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. There are stories that you can not invent or their invention does not make sense. From this I conclude what concerend, worried, or frightened Muhammad. So a very human picture of the prophet emerges.

Die Welt: Many will accuse you of blasphemy ...

Abdel-Samad: That's fine. The fundamentalists and conservatives call it that. But I call it reason. Historical-critical reading. Others do not dare to do that, they prefer to justify and talk nice. They say: "Yes, perhaps Muhammad has killed 900 Jews in one day, but back then it was quite normal." For real? Which tribe has killed 900 people in one day, back then? None, because it was common practice to release prisoners for ransom. Did Mohammed marry off his daughters when they were six years old? Hardly. I don't believe many of these things. I'm trying to create an overall picture from many puzzle pieces.

Die Welt: At the moment everyone makes their own interpretation the prophet, extracts whatever is useful for them. The terrorist militia Islamic State (IS) have nothing to do with the true Islam, one hears again and again. But is that true?

Abdel-Samad: This assertion is not only misleading but dangerous. That would mean that we can leave Islam the way it is. The IS does nothing that Mohammed hasn't also done himself. It draws a religious legitimacy from the historical texts for each of its actions. Whether beheadings, enslavement, rape, marriage with minors, the expulsion of Jews and Christians - for everything documents can be found either in the Qur'an or in the Hadith (Muhammad's traditions of deeds and statements).

Die Welt: But what about the mass murder of fellow believers? Where we find the in the traditional texts?

Abdel-Samad: Nowhere, but the IS looks at his Muslim victims not as coreligionists, but as apostates who have fallen away from the true faith.

Die Welt: Then everything can be interpreted into the prophet and anything be justify .

Abdel-Samad: I could say that the IS terrorists have misunderstood and misinterpreted Mohammed if one could conclude from the authentic sources and texts that Muhammad had been a monk who has proclaimed his message under a palm tree, then died peacefully, and people have founded a religion after his death, which was then abused. But that's not how it happened. Mohammed was warlord, he did the same things that the IS-terrorists do today.

It is the mindset of Muhammad, who distrusted the people, which has survived until today. The mindset of a megalomaniac narcissist that defines an inner circle of followers and all those who are outside this circle, are regarded as enemies who are extinguished. The IS is the legitimate child of Mohammed, in word and deed. Nobody understands Mohammed as well as the IS. Just like the religious police in Saudi Arabia, the fanatics in Indonesia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, al-Shabab in Somalia and the Hamas in the Gaza Strip. They come from different cultural contexts, but all rely on the same multiple diseases of the Prophet and thus his religion.

Die Welt: You want to break through people's reserve, you already did so with your previous books. But this time you attack the Prophet directly. Do you not fear that you might alienate everyone, including those enlightened Muslims who would perhaps be receptive to your approach?

Abdel-Samad: I have completely different experiences. I have recorded the main theses of the book in several internet lectures and posted them at YouTube. In just the past three months, 1.1 million people have seen them in the Arab world. I'm used to insults and threats. But I was surprised at how much encouragement I got. There is a discourse, and that is a sign that Muslims in the Arab world are ready for an open discussion about their religion and their prophet. In the diaspora, with the luxury to maintain a romanticized image of Islam, the need for discussion is not great. The West is still of the opinion of having to hold a protective hand over the Muslims.

[Gr]

Die Welt: So you want to instigate a revival, reformation, by breaking taboos?

Abdel-Samad: There is the phenomenon of enlightenment by bewilderment. I would like Islam- and Muhammad-criticism to become normal. A Christian writing a book "Jesus - a reckoning" would never be asked these questions. Nobody would ever think to ask the author whether he was not afraid to alienate two billion Christians. The fact that I'm being asked these questions is the best justification for the book. I want to ensure that no author or artist has to fear for his life, just because he criticizes a character who died 1,400 years ago.

Die Welt: Do Christians have an advantage over Muslims ?

Abdel-Samad: Yes, because Jesus invites us to do good, and you can say with complete justification that the Crusaders have abused the teaching of Jesus, because Jesus never conducted a campaign and never beheaded anyone. Three key messages of Christianity are: 1. "The sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." 2. "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." 3. "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's!" From this you can develop a humanistic doctrine without any problems. The religious rules were written by men, they do not have this immunity as in Islam.

Die Welt: Does the reform process need Muslims being able to laugh at themselves?

Abdel-Samad: Yes, but that only happens by challenging people. At the moment, the fundamentalists are setting the rules. They say you mustn't write about Mohammed like that. And we accept that. But I am a free man, and I have paid dearly. I'm serious about liberty. And I don't make concessions. Many hate me for it. But there are also many to whom I give a voice. I'm not looking for allies, I was always alone. And I am not upset about the fundamentalists who want to kill me. I get upset over the supposedly liberal Muslims and Germans who tell me, you're going too far. I live under police protection and I fear for my life - but I go too far? Have we let ourselves be indoctrinated so much by the logic of the fundamentalists?

Die Welt: Or is it fear of the violence of the Islamists, preemptive obedience in view of a new mass immigration to Germany?

Abdel-Samad: Perhaps, but it is wrong. Germany is in danger of repeating the mistake it made with the migrant workers and their children. At that time you didn't dare to intervene out of cultural sensitivity, to not patronize the immigrants. But today you have to ask the question: What are people fleeing? They flee from exactly this Islamic mindset of hatred for dissenters and "infidels", from an ideology that has solidified over the centuries. And then they come here, and we are not able to tell them that they can't revive here the very thing they have fled? There is a reason that people flee to Germany, the land of "infidels" and not to Mecca in the heart of Islam. The reason is that Germany has a free and open society in which people can do research and think freely. That is why Germany now lives in security and prosperity.

Die Welt: What is politics doing wrong?

Abdel-Samad: It hopes to get help from Islam organizations that build - with state funds! - Islamic kindergartens, schools and mosques, and want to indoctrinate the refugee children. Eventually the adolescent Muslims will then have the feeling that in this society, they can not live their faith, in the land of sin, where people drink alcohol. Then they are lost to the ideologues of the IS.

Die Welt: So we should demand the unconditional acceptance of our life style from the immigrants?

Abdel-Samad: Yes. The refugees need support, but also clear rules from the outset. German society is a "participatory society". Dear refugees, dear immigrants: Join, or you will have a hard time. See to it that your children learn German. And if you do not want to learn to swim, at least let your daughter go to the swimming and sports classes, because this country is committed to helping your child in his personal development. If you believe that you do not want to do all this, then get your next train back to Hungary. It's that simple. If they aren't made to understand this now, then it will happen maybe never. The message must be: This country is good, because it is free, its citizens can flourish and faith is a private matter. That makes this country loveable and liveable. And you benefit now! So stop complaining and adapt!

Die Welt: What is your solution for Islam?

Abdel-Samad: It requires honesty. This presupposes depriving Muhammad of his halo. The divine message - that is its immunity, that's the trick. I do not think that Islam can be reformed. But Muslims can reform their thinking, reform their mindset and modernize their relationship to religion by struggling through to the conviction that faith is a private matter. It is necessary to begin the demystification of Muhammad and the religion founded by him. You have to say goodbye to parts of the authentic Islam, to the constraints, to the legitimation of violence. To regard Arabs as the eternal victims of the West is counterproductive. That way the victim attitude is cemented. That's almost racist. Someone has to break the ice. I want to be such an icebreaker.

[Mr Feeny]

Oh boy. Yup. This is "destroying" Islam. Yup. Makes sense.

[imdaman99]

Sounds like an attention whore to me.

Didn't read because it sounds like bullshit to me. This guy wants to make a name for himself by saying something as ludicrous as that? He just wants a Fatwa set on him so he could sell more books.

Didn't read his name, so won't remember him :oldlol:

[NumberSix]

Sounds like an attention whore to me.

Didn't read because it sounds like bullshit to me. This guy wants to make a name for himself by saying something as ludicrous as that? He just wants a Fatwa set on him so he could sell more books.

Didn't read his name, so won't remember him :oldlol:
Translation: "upon NOT reading it, I have decided that what is written is bullshit."

[imdaman99]

Translation: "upon NOT reading it, I have decided that what is written is bullshit."
I read the questions that were asked to him. I didn't read his responses.

Credit to the interviewer than :pimp:

Die Welt: You say that you would like to bury the Islamic Prophet Muhammad for good. What do you mean by that?

Die Welt: You are very hard on the Prophet, calling him a "pathological tyrant," a "narcissist", "paranoid" and even "mass murderer". Many moderate Muslims won't like this, either...

:lol

[Gr]

Oh boy. Yup. This is "destroying" Islam. Yup. Makes sense.

Yes, it is. The mind is a harder nut to crack though. The Islam indoctrinated mind harder than the Christianity indoctrinated mind. The days of religion are numbered.

[Nick Young]

[QUOTE=Gr

[imdaman99]

http://i.qkme.me/3qlt9r.jpg

:oldlol:

[Gr]

http://i.qkme.me/3qlt9r.jpg

:oldlol:

One of my best friends that I grew up with is a Muslim of Turkish origin (meaning, rather mild). Had to go to the mosque. Had to do Ramadan. I'm very proud of him that he doesn't do any of that any more now that he can completely decide for himself. He was successfully de-brainwashed. The only thing he kept is that he won't touch pork. He just finds it gross.

[Mr Feeny]

[QUOTE=Gr

[Mr Feeny]

[QUOTE=Gr

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

This writer, whoever he is, is undergoing some kind of hell that puts his criticism way off base. WAY WAY OFF base. This dude's as inaccurate as Rondo with Parkinson's on a fifth of Vodka shooting a cannonball at a rim the size of a mosquito's eye.

Not only is nothing he mentioned remotely novel.. people INSIDE the Ummah have been doing this for.. uhh hundreds of years.. but even worse it's plain wrong. Here's why.

The best resource to know about the Prophet Muhammad is the most accurate Hadiths, and the things written; including but not limited to the Last Message and the Qu'ran.

Why on Earth would Sufi leaders and spiritual Imams give unanimous respect to Prophet and have IN THEIR CORE teachings, teach NOT to interact with tyrants and oppressors of all sorts.. measuring the sin of oppression to be WORSE than slaughter.



The author is shooting blanks at the unknown. I will give respect in that most leaders with big egos are guilty of these If he wants to inject modern psychology in trying to demystify a popular hero as Hitchens did Theresa, then he needs to be on point with his criticism.



It is disappointing that a person that was born in Europe and had an enormous library at hand could even honor such an inaccurate, off-base criticism let alone see them as true.





It requires honesty. This presupposes depriving Muhammad of his halo

The Prophet just like Jesus and all the others before him, never wanted the halo in the first place; and REPEATEDLY throughout their deeds mentioned. Actually, most of the reason why people of OTHER faiths dislike Christianity is this diefication of Christ, despite the general core teachigns being one and the same. It's flawed human nature that wants to idolize other human beings and create superstars and heroes. He was putting BRICKS on top of houses with slaves, letting the then dregs of society ride his own camels, and even in his last message said "I am NOTHING but a Messenger."
But surely this is the mark of narcissism, megalomania, and a halo huh?

Oh wait....


Yes, but that only happens by challenging people. At the moment, the fundamentalists are setting the rules. They say you mustn't write about Mohammed like that. And we accept that. But I am a free man, and I have paid dearly. I'm serious about liberty. And I don't make concessions. Many hate me for it. But there are also many to whom I give a voice. I'm not looking for allies, I was always alone. And I am not upset about the fundamentalists who want to kill me. I get upset over the supposedly liberal Muslims and Germans who tell me, you're going too far. I live under police protection and I fear for my life - but I go too far?



That's 14 "I's" in the midst of one paragraph. You know who else talks like that? Teenage girls. You know what they have going in their mind? Yup you betcha.

Sounds like an extreme sense of self eh? What's that personality disorder called?

I want to be such an icebreaker.
Sounds like someone with ambitions.. that are borderline umm what's thta word?

And would you say that speech like this defines a "craving for recognition?"


Now, why on earth would a man who meditated in the Cave of Hijra for multiple days, who took his people AWAY from Makkah for a short duration of time and was described as SHY multiple times over, be craving recognition?








This country is good, because it is free, its citizens can flourish and faith is a private matter. That makes this country loveable and liveable. And you benefit now! So stop complaining and adapt!

While I don't disagree with a country stating the rules and rejecting its citizens accordingly; "it is good because it is free" is kind of a simplistic statement. One would imagine stating Germany is good because of the virtue of its people would be more accurate, no?





Paranoid Sounds like the author is talking about his OWN PERSONALITY into areas into parts of the unknown. It stands to reason that a person who rejects their traditional upbringing (he was the SON of an IMAM and later became atheist) and sees it coming back to haunt him in his new nation would suffer from fears, no? A very common intellectual error.

If there is anything to be understood about the mindset, spiritual bliss, and emotional equilibrium within the beings of the Caliphates, were that they were, cool as cucumbers even through the most difficult times; smiling to people even in poverty. Islam, the culmination of praying 5 times a day in addition to fasting, submission to Allah, doing good deeds, giving to charity and avoiding haram things; quite literally results in a silent tranquility where one's will is harmonious with that of the Creator. And it's not even a new phenomenom. This was written in Egypt years ago. Why would they be paranoid?

You can read this interview on Khomeini to give a descriptive perspective on them: http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/vol7-no4/a-meeting-with-imam-khomeini/meeting-imam-khomeini


What an utterly useless pile of drivel.


However, he's right about honesty.

How sad it is that before the man became a Prophet this honesty his prominent, primary, and most potent characteristic and now some schlub, using his freedom of speech, is telling an audience that he was "megalomaniac, narcisstic, suffered from fear of less, craved recognition."


leave the hero bashing to Hitchens. He does it infinity times better.

[Patrick Chewing]

Sounds like an attention whore to me.

Didn't read because it sounds like bullshit to me. This guy wants to make a name for himself by saying something as ludicrous as that? He just wants a Fatwa set on him so he could sell more books.

Didn't read his name, so won't remember him :oldlol:


How can it sound like bullshit if you didn't read it?


At least prove to us you're an objective person towards someone that criticizes Islam. You just sound butthurt.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

How can it sound like bullshit if you didn't read it?


At least prove to us you're an objective person towards someone that criticizes Islam. You just sound butthurt.

Because he was smart enough to realize that the entire thing was composed of trash and projection.

Now my dumbass attention span has spent the last 3 minutes reading something that has zero value.

And if a person who considers himself a writer DOESN'T EVEN have a solid foundation of material read to deduce from and throws his own closet-skeletons onto that ignorance, then it's not honest writing.

[Mr Feeny]

This writer, whoever he is, is undergoing some kind of hell that puts his criticism way off base. WAY WAY OFF base. This dude's as inaccurate as Rondo with Parkinson's on a fifth of Vodka shooting a cannonball at a rim the size of a mosquito's eye.

Not only is nothing he mentioned remotely novel.. people INSIDE the Ummah have been doing this for.. uhh hundreds of years.. but even worse it's plain wrong. Here's why.

The best resource to know about the Prophet Muhammad is the most accurate Hadiths, and the things written; including but not limited to the Last Message and the Qu'ran.

Why on Earth would Sufi leaders and spiritual Imams give unanimous respect to Prophet and have IN THEIR CORE teachings, teach NOT to interact with tyrants and oppressors of all sorts.. measuring the sin of oppression to be WORSE than slaughter.

And according to the Bukhari among others, megalomaniac. narcissism.

Most of the prophets were all about humility. Even the last Islamic leader, written in his books, HAD NO megalomania and narcissim to speak of.


Megalamanic and Narcissism aka Excessive Love and Excessive Ego. is .


The author is shooting blanks at the unknown. I will give respect in that most leaders with big egos are guilty of these If he wants to inject modern psychology in trying to demystify a popular hero as Hitchens did Theresa, then he needs to be on point with his criticism.

Last I recalled


It is disappointing that a person that was born in Europe and had an enormous library at hand could even honor such an inaccurate, off-base criticism let alone see them as true.





The Prophet just like Jesus and all the others before him, never wanted the halo in the first place; and REPEATEDLY throughout their deeds mentioned. Actually, most of the reason why people of OTHER faiths dislike Christianity is this diefication of Christ, despite the general core teachigns being one and the same. It's flawed human nature that wants to idolize other human beings and create superstars and heroes. He was putting BRICKS on top of houses with slaves, letting the then dregs of society ride his own camels, and even in his last message said "I am NOTHING but a Messenger."
But surely this is the mark of narcissism, megalomania, and a halo huh?

Oh wait....




That's 14 "I's" in the midst of one paragraph. You know who else talks like that? Teenage girls. You know what they have going in their mind? Yup you betcha.

Sounds like an extreme sense of self eh? What's that personality disorder called?

Sounds like someone with ambitions.. that are borderline umm what's thta word?

And would you say that speech like this defines a "craving for recognition?"


Now, why on earth would a man who meditated in the Cave of Hijra for multiple days, who took his people AWAY from Makkah for a short duration of time and was described as SHY multiple times over, be craving recognition?









While I don't disagree with a country stating the rules and rejecting its citizens accordingly; "it is good because it is free" is kind of a simplistic statement. One would imagine stating Germany is good because of the virtue of its people would be more accurate, no?





Paranoid Sounds like the author is talking about his OWN PERSONALITY into areas into parts of the unknown. It stands to reason that a person who rejects their traditional upbringing (he was the SON of an IMAM and later became atheist) and sees it coming back to haunt him in his new nation would suffer from fears, no? A very common intellectual error.

If there is anything to be understood about the mindset, spiritual bliss, and emotional equilibrium within the beings of the Caliphates, were that they were, cool as cucumbers even through the most difficult times; smiling to people even in poverty. Islam, the culmination of praying 5 times a day in addition to fasting, submission to Allah, doing good deeds, giving to charity and avoiding haram things; quite literally results in a silent tranquility where one's will is harmonious with that of the Creator. And it's not even a new phenomenom. This was written in Egypt years ago. Why would they be paranoid?

You can read this interview on Khomeini to give a descriptive perspective on them: http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/vol7-no4/a-meeting-with-imam-khomeini/meeting-imam-khomeini


What an utterly useless pile of drivel.


However, he's right about honesty.

How sad it is that before the man became a Prophet this honesty his prominent, primary, and most potent characteristic and now some schlub, using his freedom of speech, is telling an audience that he was "megalomaniac, narcisstic, suffered from fear of less, craved recognition."


leave the hero bashing to Hitchens. He does it infinity times better.

That's actually well put. It was often mentioned how your prophet (I'm assuming you're Muslim) repeatedly asked for God's forgiveness and cried in doing so. He himself never claimed to want a halo or ask to be idolised. And that is precisely why most people have a problem with us. It might be because we are taught to believe that Christ was perfect - which even a 5 year old kid with more than ten brain cells and a modicum of rationality can tell is pure garbage. And I never truly believed that deep down, even as a child.

The interviewee is a bit uninformed it seems. And bitter if possible. He's coming across badly there.

[Mr Feeny]

How can it sound like bullshit if you didn't read it?


At least prove to us you're an objective person towards someone that criticizes Islam. You just sound butthurt.I stopped reading after the second sentence tbf. And could tell it was merit-less and pure trash. You don't need to waste your time going through the entire thing to know that it's drivel.

[Nick Young]

The best resource to know about the Prophet Muhammad is the most accurate Hadiths, and the things written; including but not limited to the Last Message and the Qu'ran.
But according to the resident Muslim scholars of ISH, the Hadiths should never be trusted and are not reliable academic sources and should be ignored. :confusedshrug:

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

But according to the resident Muslim scholars of ISH, the Hadiths should never be trusted and are not reliable academic sources and should be ignored. :confusedshrug:

They are not accurate when it comes to practicing the actual religion of Islam, which is primarily defined as "Regular Prayer, and Regular Charity, thus I have made it for you Right and Straight" Everything was in the Qu'ran and the Qu'ran itself, "warned of others not to take on other sources as guidance for they will be flawed." Moreover every Muslim recites "Lead us on the Straight Path, and not the path of those who have angered nor the deluded ones," multiple times over the course of a day because it is very very easy to be misguided.

An example is the Hadith where eating camel flesh renders ones ablution invalid. There is a backstory behind this. The person eating it actually used the restroom after and in order to be polite (protect the guy's dignity) this was stated temporarily. Eating camel means you are good to go when it comes to performing the Salat.

They are collections of sayings taken from the Prophet's Lifetime by primary and secondary sources which help clarify things including to but not limited to all the ways of life during that time. And as, Mr Feeny, mentor to Corey, Topanga, Sean, Angela and Eric Matthews has so astutely mentioned, the Prophets were not sinless and could have slipped in speech. But they were still the best of men.

[Nick Young]

They are not accurate when it comes to practicing the actual religion of Islam, which is primarily defined as "Regular Prayer, and Regular Charity, thus I have made it for you Right and Straight" Everything was in the Qu'ran and the Qu'ran itself, "warned of others not to take on other sources as guidance for they will be flawed." Moreover every Muslim recites "Lead us on the Straight Path, and not the path of those who have angered nor the deluded ones," multiple times over the course of a day because it is very very easy to be misguided.

An example is the Hadith where eating camel flesh renders ones ablution invalid. There is a backstory behind this. The person eating it actually used the restroom after and in order to be polite (protect the guy's dignity) this was stated temporarily. Eating camel means you are good to go when it comes to performing the Salat.

They are collections of sayings taken from the Prophet's Lifetime by primary and secondary sources which help clarify things including to but not limited to all the ways of life during that time. And as, Mr Feeny, mentor to Corey, Topanga, Sean, Angela and Eric Matthews has so astutely mentioned, the Prophets were not sinless and could have slipped in speech. But they were still the best of men.
Should the hadiths that talk about Mohammad ordering the executions of people be ignored? Are they false testimony written to posthumously demean Mohammad?

That is what Mr. Feeny and Imdaman and a few other posters have been saying. Ignore the hadiths and what they say about Mohammad as they are 100% fiction and unreliable.

Who wrote the hadiths and why would they repeatedly talk about Mohammad ordering executions? And if the hadiths are unreliable, why do so many muslims today follow them as part of their religion, if they make Mohammad look bad?

[Nick Young]

Should the hadiths that talk about Mohammad ordering the executions of people be ignored? Are they false testimony written to posthumously demean Mohammad?

That is what Mr. Feeny and Imdaman and a few other posters have been saying. Ignore the hadiths and what they say about Mohammad as they are 100% fiction and unreliable.

Who wrote the hadiths and why would they repeatedly talk about Mohammad ordering executions? And if the hadiths are unreliable, why do so many muslims today follow them as part of their religion, if they make Mohammad look bad?
Can some one answer this please? I am not trying to bait anyone or catch them in a trap. I honestly wish to know the real answer to these questions because I constantly hear conflicting things from every muslim or person knowledgeable about Islam that I ask.

[imdaman99]

Should the hadiths that talk about Mohammad ordering the executions of people be ignored? Are they false testimony written to posthumously demean Mohammad?

That is what Mr. Feeny and Imdaman and a few other posters have been saying. Ignore the hadiths and what they say about Mohammad as they are 100% fiction and unreliable.

Who wrote the hadiths and why would they repeatedly talk about Mohammad ordering executions? And if the hadiths are unreliable, why do so many muslims today follow them as part of their religion, if they make Mohammad look bad?
The simplest way to answer this is that not all Hadiths are the same or hold the same value.

Any Hadith that speaks negatively of the Prophet is false as he was as perfect a human could be. He was infallible and was incapable of committing the acts of savagery you claim to know so much about yet will Wikibore us to death with.

[Nick Young]

The simplest way to answer this is that not all Hadiths are the same or hold the same value.

Any Hadith that speaks negatively of the Prophet is false as he was as perfect a human could be. He was infallible and was incapable of committing the acts of savagery you claim to know so much about yet will Wikibore us to death with.
Who wrote these false hadiths and why do some Muslims follow them?

Jefferson Money says that not even the prophets are without sin, and you are saying that Mohammad was as perfect as a human can be. Which is it?

Did the Hadith's about Mohammad ordering the massacre of the Banu Qurayza tribe lie about the facts in this case? I believe this incident is also written about in the Koran as well.

What about the satanic verses part of the Koran when Mohammad compromises his message? Mohammad was not perfect in that moment of doubt, was he?


How do you feel about Mohammad consummating his marriage with Aisha when she was 9 years old?

[imdaman99]

Who wrote these false hadiths and why do some Muslims follow them?

Jefferson Money says that not even the prophets are without sin, and you are saying that Mohammad was as perfect as a human can be. Which is it?

Did the Hadith's about Mohammad ordering the massacre of the Banu Qurayza tribe lie about the facts in this case? I believe this incident is also written about in the Koran as well.

What about the satanic verses part of the Koran when Mohammad compromises his message? Mohammad was not perfect in that moment of doubt, was he?


How do you feel about Mohammad consummating his marriage with Aisha when she was 9 years old?
I will not entertain your question about false hadiths because I never wasted my time with Hadiths that claimed things like that.

Sorry but 'the massacre of the Banu Qurayza tribe' holds no truth. It goes against Qur'anic values. You can bring up that verse in the Qur'an but it speaks of nothing like a massacre.

Satanic verses? :oldlol: You're reaching, Muslims think Rushdie is a joke.

Again with that junk you bring up in a Hadith. You're like a broken record, you have your agenda and I have had this discussion with you about 3-4 times already. Just because he married a 9 yr old girl doesn't mean he did it for anything of lustful intent. It was to unite tribes. Go ahead and bring up a Hadith that talks about it, because I am sure Muhammad spoke of it afterwards right with some idiot wannabe historian???? Get out of here with that man, don't disguise your stupid line of questioning as being curious and inquisitive. It's about trolling. Rinse and repeat your questions. You are just out to waste people's time. This is where I fit in, as you have wasted about 10 mins of my time :facepalm I am the fool, as this is not the first time as well lol. Well played.

[Nick Young]

I will not entertain your question about false hadiths because I never wasted my time with Hadiths that claimed things like that.

Sorry but 'the massacre of the Banu Qurayza tribe' holds no truth. It goes against Qur'anic values. You can bring up that verse in the Qur'an but it speaks of nothing like a massacre.

Satanic verses? :oldlol: You're reaching, Muslims think Rushdie is a joke.

Again with that junk you bring up in a Hadith. You're like a broken record, you have your agenda and I have had this discussion with you about 3-4 times already. Just because he married a 9 yr old girl doesn't mean he did it for anything of lustful intent. It was to unite tribes. Go ahead and bring up a Hadith that talks about it, because I am sure Muhammad spoke of it afterwards right with some idiot wannabe historian???? Get out of here with that man, don't disguise your stupid line of questioning as being curious and inquisitive. It's about trolling. Rinse and repeat your questions. You are just out to waste people's time. This is where I fit in, as you have wasted about 10 mins of my time :facepalm I am the fool, as this is not the first time as well lol. Well played.

Who wrote the false hadiths and why do some Muslims follow them?

Why are you not able to answer this question?

Al-Waqidi, Mohammad's biographer, was the one who first wrote of the Satanic verses. Do you even know who Al-Waqidi is?

Here is the story for you, because it seems you aren't aware of it.
[QUOTE]In its essential form, the story reports that Muhammad longed to convert his kinsmen and neighbors of Mecca to Islam. As he was reciting Sūra an-Najm,[5] considered a revelation by the angel Gabriel, Satan tempted him to utter the following lines after verses 19 and 20:

Have ye thought upon Al-Lat and Al-‘Uzz

[imdaman99]

Just because you're bored with life doesn't mean I will be up giving you more than 10-15 mins of my life a night. Nice try but you are pathetic and your wiki copy and pasted info is a tired act. Give it a rest and get a life :oldlol:

[Nick Young]

Just because you're bored with life doesn't mean I will be up giving you more than 10-15 mins of my life a night. Nice try but you are pathetic and your wiki copy and pasted info is a tired act. Give it a rest and get a life :oldlol:
You don't seem to understand how wikipedia works. Every statement on the site is sourced and various hyperlinks are provided to click on if you wish to see the source yourself. The information on wikipedia is not invalid. Why doe sit make you laugh?

I ask questions because I wish to gain a further understanding of Islam. All you do is deny answering certain questions, and resort to personal insults. This suggests that there are questions you are afraid of answering truthfully, or that you are ignorant and do not know the history of the religion you claim to follow and love.

Are you denying Mohammad's genocide of the Banu Qurayza now? Did it never happen? Where did the Banu Qurayza go? :confusedshrug:

[Nick Young]

[COLOR="Red"]
Who wrote the false hadiths? Why did Jefferson Money say that the words in the hadiths should be followed and you're saying they should be ignored and are nothing but lies?

Why do some Muslims follow the false hadiths if they contain things that make Mohammad look bad and contradict the messages in the Koran?


Can any one answer this?

[poido123]

Nick, they have holes in their logic and religion and they know it.


They won't ever own up to them as that is a sign of weakness and "Allah" would never allow for that. Instead they will throw insults or undermine you and play the victim card.