Our Beacon Forum

Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
By:Dr Shabbir
Date: Thursday, 25 February 2010, 3:27 pm
In Response To: Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral? (Jawaid Ahmed)

Azizam Jawaid Saheb,

Dr Tisdall's book is easily defensible with correct translations and giving Ahadith the status they deserve.

It is our "Imams" who are the real problem. They ascribe every nonsense to the greatest man the world has seen. We can knock them out by their own confessions. Below are given only a few:

Let us examine the personal confessions of some of the most ancient and foremost "Imams" ('Canonical' authorities) who narrated History, Hadith, laid down Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) and did Tafseer (explanation) of the Qur’an.

Most Muslims have heard of one of the most ancient and famous Tafseer-e-Kabeer (The Great Exposition of the Qur’an) by Imam Fakhruddin Razi. This tafseer is one of the tops being followed by our Mullahs till this day. After writing his 300 volumes, the “great and authoritative” Imam confesses: "All my intellectual and supposedly logical statements in the explanation of the Qur’an turned out to be lame. All the explanations of the Qur’an done by the so-called Imams (Tabari, Zamakhshari, Ibne Kathir, Bukhari, Muslim etc) are misguided and misleading. All of us were the tools of Satan. Our souls were polluted by our physical desires. Our efforts of this world promise to bring us nothing but torture and doom."

• (Hadith-Ul-Qur’an by Allama Inayatullah Khan Al-Mashriqi, 1954 edition p190)

IMAM TABARI'S STRANGE CONFESSION: [838-923 CE, 224-310 AH, Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir / ibn Rustam at-Tabari]

“I am writing this book as I hear from the narrators. If anything sounds absurd, I should not be blamed or held accountable. The responsibility of all errors or blunders rests squarely on the shoulders of those who have narrated these stories to me.” So, Tabari wrote nothing but hearsay.
Tabari's Tareekhil Umam Wal Mulook (The History of Nations and Kings) popularly called "Mother of All Histories" is the first ever "History of Islam" written by 'Imam' Tabari at the junction of the third and fourth century AH. He died in 310 AH, 3 centuries after the Prophet (S). What were his sources? Not a scrap of paper! "He told me this who heard it from him who heard it from so and so," and so on. By compiling his 13 volume History and his 30 volume Exposition of the Qur’an under royal patronage, he became the Super Imam. The later historians until this day have persisted in following the trails of the Super Imam.

IBN KATHIR'S CONFESSION: [1301-1373 Abu Al-Fida, 'Imad Ad-Din Isma'il bin 'Umar bin Kathir Al-Qurashi Al-Busrawi]

Had Ibn Jareer Tabari not recorded the strange reports, I would never have done so. (Tafseer Ibn Katheer, Khilaafat-e-Mu'awiya-o-Yazeed, Mahmood Ahmed Abbasi)

(Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Hanbal Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Shaybani)

Allama Shibli Na’mani, on page 27 of his Seeratun Nabi has given a startling quote of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (780-855 CE, d. 241 AH), "Three kinds of books are absolutely unfounded, Maghazi, Malahem and Tafseer.” (The exalted Prophet's Battles, Dreams and prophecies, and Expositions of the Qur’an).

IBN KHALDUN'S THRASHING: [1332-1406 CE, 732-808 AH, Abu Zayd ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Muḥammad bin Khaldun Al-Hadrami]

The Muslim historians have made a mockery of history by filling it with fabrications and senseless lies. (Muqaddama)

SHAH ABDUL AZIZ DEHLAVI’S CRITIQUE: [1745-1823 CE] Six pages of Ibn Khaldun's History have been deliberately removed since the earliest times. These pages had questioned the most critical juncture of Islamic history i.e. the Emirate of Yazeed and the fiction of Karbala. [Even the modern editions admit in the side-notes that those pages have been mysteriously missing from the ancient original book. Khilaafat-e-Mu'awiya-o-Yazeed, Mahmood Ahmed Abbasi]

SHAH WALIULLAH DEHLAVI'S CHASTISEMENT: [1703-1762] Imam Jalaluddin Sayyuti's Tarikh-ul-Khulafa is the prime example of how our Historians, Muhaddithin and Mufassirin, each has played like Haatib-il-Lail (One who collects firewood at night not knowing which piece is good and which one is bad).

IMAM RAGHIB'S PROTEST: [Abul-Qasim Husayn ibn Muhammad al-Raghib al-Isfahani, 502 AH, 1027-1109 CE] Tabari, Waqidi, Mas'oodi, Sayyuti wrote any reports they heard. Moreover, Abu Mukhnif, Lut bin Yahya and Muhammad bin Saaeb Kalbi (in whose names the civil wars within Islam during the times of Hazraat Ali, Mu'awiya and Yazeed are reported) never existed. Their names have been concocted and narratives in their names have all been invented by one man, the Zoroastrian "Imam" Tabari bin Rustam.

"The True History of Early Islam" by Shabbir Ahmed has been compiled by carefully sifting through scores of ancient books. The author's Criterion of the Right and Wrong has been what it must be and that is the Authentic Qur’an. Hence, I have accepted only those accounts of History and Hadith that are in harmony with this Noble and Unassailable Criterion, the Book of Allah. Thanks to my respected readers around the world, I have had the advantage of having access to numerous hard to find or concealed books.

Like all other humble works of mine, this book is based on research by a life-long, fallible student, Shabbir Ahmed. It has taken much time and labor as the discerning reader can tell. While the author assures the reader of his intellectual honesty, he is always liable to make mistakes and projects no claims whatsoever. The strength of this work may indeed dwell in the fact that it leaves plenty of room for the reader's own research, rationale and judgment to accept or dismiss any statements made by this author or the ancient "authorities" quoted here. Criticism from any quarters will always be welcome and appreciated, and any errors will be corrected in the next edition with sincere gratitude.

Messages In This Thread

Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Dr Shabbir -- Wednesday, 24 February 2010, 9:34 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Sr.Saad -- Wednesday, 24 February 2010, 11:04 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Jawaid Ahmed -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 1:33 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Sr.Saad -- Friday, 26 February 2010, 4:37 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Jawaid Ahmed -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 8:55 am
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
UmeAimon -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 1:54 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Dr Shabbir -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 4:06 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Jawaid Ahmed -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 3:25 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Dr Shabbir -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 4:28 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Dr Shabbir -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 3:27 pm
"Imams" In Mutual Combat
Dr Shabbir -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 3:30 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Jawaid Ahmed -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 4:13 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Jawaid Ahmed -- Monday, 1 March 2010, 10:17 am
Dr Shabbir -- Monday, 1 March 2010, 12:16 pm
Jawaid Ahmed -- Monday, 1 March 2010, 3:15 pm
Re:NAMAZ Is Immoral?
Suhail -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 5:33 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Behroz -- Thursday, 25 February 2010, 8:01 pm
Re: Is NAMAZ Immoral?
Muhammad Rafi -- Friday, 26 February 2010, 10:18 am