MuktoMona:
Dear Readers, have you noticed there are many verses in Quran which uses Muhammad's word directly ? If we read those
verses, we clearly understand that those were Muhammad's own word, not Allah's.
My Response:
This is flawed understanding and moronic interpretation from the Mukto mona (MM). As I move on wit this rebuttal, readers will
notice how stupid and shallow minded the writer of the original article is when it comes to understanding the holy Quran.
We have severally seen in the Quran that Allah SWT uses the verbatim word of his prophets and not only Muhammad PBUH.
All prophets mentioned such as Musa PBUH, Isa PBUH, Ibrahim PBUH, Sulayman PBUH, Zulqurnain PBUH, Harun PBUH have
all been mentioned by Allah SWT in verbatim. Take the below verses for example:
Ale Imran 3:45-49
Behold! the angels said "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of
Mary held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah. (45) "He shall speak to the
people in childhood And in maturity and he shall be (of the company) of the righteous." (46) She said: "O my Lord! how shall I
have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: Allah createth what He willeth; when He hath decreed a plan,
He but saith to it `Be', and it is! (47) "And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel. (48) "And
(appoint him) an Messenger to the Children of Israel, (with this message): I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, in
that I make for you out of clay as it were the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave; and I
heal those born blind, and the lepers and I quicken the dead by Allah's leave; and I declare to you what ye eat, and what ye
store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe.(49)
Now let us look at this verse quite intellectually unlike the deprived manner MM would have us think. This is conversation
between Mariam AS and the angels who came to give her the tidings of a new born. Now because the conversation is quoted
in verbatim between the two parties concerned, would the inane author of the original article have us think that the Quran is
the actual word of the angels and Mariam AS? Or with the other prophets mentioned above, can we assume like the author of
this mentally acrobatic article that the Quran is the word of Adam, Nuh, Sulayman, Yakub, Yusuf, Zakariya, Musa, Harun,
Ibrahim, Isa, Muhammad (PBUTA)? Just think for once and let us consider the bare facts here. If we go along with what this
inane author says, can we then assume that each one of these prophets had an authorship in the Quran? If so, then can we
agree that the Quran traversed in all the times of these Prophets till it finally came down to the verbatim word of Muahmmad
PBUH? Or can we decide if the Quran was the verbatim word of Muhammad or the other prophets, through the eyes of
Muhammad PBUH, who may have never known all these conversations unless he was inspired in some way? Whose word was
it? If we consider what MM says then the Quran has an even bigger problem. Not only do we question if it is indeed the word of
Allah SWT, but is it also the word of Muhammad, or Isa, or Musa, Ibrahim, Zakariya, Yakub, Yusuf, Nuh, Adam, Maryam or the
angels. In fact, it also contains the word of Pharaoh. Now the predicament is compounded. Or this is logical too far fetched and
it truly is the word of Allah SWT and He had the sovereignty to choose to use the verbatim word of His prophets and angels
and revealed it to his last Messenger, Muhammad PBUH. It is truly wondrous that authors of worldly literature have the
freedom to choose how to author their works even if it means quoting verbatim the words of their characters, but when it
comes to the authorship of the Quran, similar literary styles are denied. MM is truly pathetic and shameful in its thought and
mode of argumentation and does not deserve a second read.
In truth, MM has very conveniently omitted the quote marks within the verses hence deeming the reader to understand the
Muhammad or the other prophets as it now seems have authored the Holy Scripture. MM thinks that by omitting the quote
marks they have omitted the intellectual capacity of readers. How shallow can one get I wonder? How stupid does one get for
them to realize they are stupid and perceived as idiotic? This is stupidity redefined. Allah SWT conversed and He did so
through inspiration to His prophets and even if He did quote them in verbatim, it still remains His word, as authored by Him,
and as original as He intended.
This sort of thought process is quite insidious and probably restrictive indefinitely. People with such thought process are
devoid of intellectual thinking and even when the need does arise of intellectual interpretation, even to save their own lives,
the guy will surely take a bullet. It is terminal disease where the sufferers cannot come out however much they endeavor. This
is an exercise in futility.
He does not speak out of his own fancy. This is nothing but an inspired revelation. He is taught by One who is Mighty in Power
and Vigorous." (53:3-6).
Therefore you remained (then). Your duty is only to remind than You are not their keeper. As for those who turn their back
and disbelieve Allah will inflict on them the supreme chastisement. To Us they shall return and We will call them to account. (88:
21-26)
Note this verse from the Holy Quran that clearly explain that the words in the Holy Quran maybe those from the palate of
Muhammad PBUH or any other Prophet of Allah, but they are inspired by the Supreme Lord. The bible too confirms the same:
Note this verse from the Holy Quran that clearly explain that the words in the Holy Quran maybe those from the palate of
Muhammad PBUH or any other Prophet of Allah, but they are inspired by the Supreme Lord. The bible too confirms the same:
Now more than half of humanity considers the words spoken by a prophet to be true word of God and yet MM here quite
clearly decides to bury their heads in the sand and assume (making an *** of U and ME – assume) that the intellectuals in the
readership of this article cannot see them or through their sorry excuse for an argument. This is indeed shaming at the lowest
scholarly cadre.
MuktoMona:
Well, according to the Muslims the Quran contains the words of God.
My Response:
Correction, once again! God! Where do I start with these intellectually drained individuals? If MM does not understand or
cannot even quote verbatim the beliefs of the Muslims, why bother posting articles subsequently show their stupidity, making
them easy targets and sitting ducks for Muslims all over. The correct statement is “Muslims believe the Quran IS the word of
God”. You will find this a better generalization to argue on and at least will show some knowledge among members at MM.
MuktoMona:
Quran is to be read as if God Himself had spoken these words stated in it. It is important to emphasize this point because if
Quran is the word of God then it should not contain any errors and it should hold true for all times. However, such is not the
case.
My Response:
So if Othello spoke in Othello by Shakespeare then Othello is the work of Othello and not that of Shakespeare? So
Shakespeare most probably should have spoken as himself in Othello if Othello was to be considered the true word of
Shakespeare by MM? MM is more dim-witted than dim-witted. I am sure the readers have seen the nonsense perpetrated by
these mental acrobats on MM. This is getting really embarrassing now. It’s almost underground when one sits to describe the
IQ levels of these morons on MM. It’s truly an ignominy when Neanderthalics post on the internet as “intellectuals”, for the
world to read and in the process expose themselves as intellectually deprived. This is the perfect exemplification of shooting
oneself in the foot. I will show you the fallacy of their purported expose’. This was a losing battle the moment they typed the
heading of this article. Read on.
MuktoMona:
Dear Readers, we will see how some of the verses in the Quran itself show clearly that these words were obviously spoken by
Muhammad and Not God.
The Opening Sura Fatihah:
(Quran 1:1-7)
In the name of the Merciful and Compassionate God.
Praise belongs to God,
The Lord of the worlds, the merciful, the
compassionate, the ruler of the day of
the day of judgment! Thee we serve and Thee
we ask for aid. Guide us in the right path,
the path of those Thou art gracious to;
not to those Thou art wroth with, nor of
those who err.
Someone need not be a rocket-scientist to comprehend that these words are clearly addressed to God, in the form of a
prayer. They are Muhammad's words of praise to God ("Guide us in the right path,..." ~ 001.006), asking for God's help and
guidance. Some Muslim compilers conveniently add the imperative "say" in the English translation of the Quran at the
beginning of the sura to remove this difficulty.
My Response:
I will show you the inanity in this MM argument. Lets us start with the major translators:
Yusuf Ali
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
1:1 In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
1:2 Praise be to God, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the world;
1:3 Most Gracious, Most Merciful;
1:4 Master of the Day of Judgment.
1:5 Thee do we worship, and Thine aid we seek.
1:6 Show us the straight way,
1:7 The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, those whose (portion) is not wrath, and who go not astray.
MH Shakir
1. In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.
2. All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds.
3. The Beneficent, the Merciful.
4. Master of the Day of Judgment.
5. Thee do we serve and Thee do we beseech for help.
6. Keep us on the right path.
7. The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors.
Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down,
nor of those who go astray.
Pickthall
1:1 In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.
1:2 Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds,
1:3 The Beneficent, the Merciful:
1:4 Owner of the Day of Judgment
1:5 Thee (alone) we worship; Thee alone we ask for help
1:6 Show us the straight path,
1:7 The path of those whom Thou hast favored; Not (the path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray
MuktoMona:
MM: Some Muslim compilers conveniently add the imperative "say" in the English translation of the Quran at the beginning of
the sura to remove this difficulty.
My Response:
The words of MM first up are important. They say “Some Muslim compilers…” Either they don’t know when the COMPILATION
of the Quran happened or they don’t know the difference between COMPILATION and TRANSLATION. Compilers do NOT add
the word “say”. They do not add words “in ENGLISH”. They just put the Quran together in the form of chapters and complete
verses in the original Arabic text, in the language the verses were revealed. They never made any changes in words or texts
or even contexts.
Compilation was done immediately after the demise of the prophet as the last revelation came down 2 months prior to the
passing of the Holy Messenger. This was done in the era of the first 4 Caliphs and completed by 30AH, 20 years after the
death of the Prophet. As far as we know none of the compilers added the word “say” in Arabic or English, unless MM want us
to believe that these early and only compilers knew the English language. This is the stupidity of these authors on MM.
Now, let us for once consider that the error on MMs part was that of typo and maybe they wanted to connote Translators
instead of Compilers. Ok. Which translator has done so in the previous widely translations I have provided? None. Zilch. Zero.
MM has clearly been caught lying again on the net and trying to hoodwink the readership. There isn’t a single translator who
has added the word “say” in this sura at the beginning. In fact there isn’t a mention of the word “say” in the WHOLE sura!
Strange how MM obtained their translation and then purported facts. Maybe MM concocted their own Quran and added the
word “say” at the beginning of the sura to orgasm on their “new found” error.
Now the question rises: Why is this sura considered the verbatim word of Allah SWT?
The verse: "Thee do we worship", shows that the whole chapter is revealed on behalf of man. Allah teaches him in this chapter
how to praise his Lord and how to show his allegiance to, and humility towards, Him. And the phrase, "All praise is due to
Allah", further strengthens this inference, as will be seen in the next paragraph.
Here, Allah SWT so aptly, in the first chapter of His Holy Book, the Book of life, at the onset, just like after birth of a child, the
parent, spoon feeds the child with something palatable, Allah SWT spoon feeds His people with the manner of approaching
Him in supplication. Allah SWT, as He always promises, shows the way to mankind, in verbatim, how to supplicate and ask for
help and guidance. And true to action, the truthful ones did. And in His Magnificence and Most Generous, responded again by
sending 113 further chapters in guidance to the supplication. We ask for His guidance 5 times daily, in obligatory prayers.
People often take the name of one of their great and powerful personalities at the time of doing or beginning a work. By this
association, it is believed, the work would achieve success, greatness and blessings; or that it would be a memorial to keep
the named one's memory alive for ever. This is also observed in naming a child, a project, a house or an association - they
give it the name of a deeply loved or highly respected person, so
that his name would continue in this form; for example, a man names his son after his father, in order to perpetuate the
father's memory.
This verse runs on the same line. Allah began His speech with His Own name - Great is His name - so that the ideas taught in
this chapter be stamped by, and associated with it. Also, it teaches a lesson to mankind, showing them the perfect manner of
starting all their talks and actions; it guides them to put the stamp of the divine name on all their activities; doing every work for
the sake of Allah, associating it with His good names and attributes. In this way that action would neither be rendered null and
void, nor remain incomplete; it has been started in the name of Allah, and negation and annihilation cannot reach that sacred
name.
Allah has declared variously in the Qur'an that what is not for His Person must perish, is in vain; He Will proceed to the deeds
not done for His sake and shall render them as scattered floating dust; He shall forfeit what they have done and shall nullify
their deeds; and that nothing shall remain except His honored Person.
Therefore, what is done for the sake of Allah and performed in His name shall continue and will not perish. Everything, every
work and every affair shall have its share of eternity - as much as it is related to Allah. It is this reality that has been hinted at
in the universally accepted tradition of the Prophet: "Every important affair, not begun with the name of Allah, shall remain
incomplete…." The word al-abtar (translated here as "incomplete'’) means a thing whose end is cut off, an animal whose tail is
severed.
The verse: "Thee do we worship", shows that the whole chapter is revealed on behalf of man. Allah teaches him in this chapter
how to praise his Lord and how to show his allegiance to, and humility towards, Him. And the phrase, "All praise is due to
Allah", further strengthens this inference.
It is clear that this chapter is an instruction manual of how the created is required to communicate to his Creator. I am not
comparing it to an instruction manual of a car or radio, Sina, knowing aptly your mode of reasoning. The Creator is unique and
His created beings are unique, in their own right.
Yes, you fellows are right. This is too philosophical for MM. let me explain in better terms.
When a child is born, a mother tries to teach the child in subtle ways of pronouncing words and phrases. The most common, in
fact I believe the guy who wrote this article on MM included, word that a mother teaches to the child is “mama” or a word that
denote “mother” so that the child knows at an early age how to call upon the one person responsible for its nourishment and
sustenance. Take Al-Fateha as a similar guidance from the Creator to the created, the Sustainer to the sustained, the
Nourisher to the nourished. And so aptly put, it is in the first chapter of the Holy Quran. So why should it sound strange when
Allah SWT brings down a chapter that teaches man, in verbatim, how to call upon his Lord? Does this mean that these are the
words of Muhammad PBUH? From what angle?
MuktoMona:
Not satisfied yet? Fine. On FFI forum home page;
The Dao of the forum or its 10 commandments
1. Do not insult other members, Do not utter racial slurs or call for violence against certain groups of people. Clashes of
opinions are welcomed but clashes of personalities are not.
2. Do not spam or flood the forum with too many postings. Limit your postings to maximum seven messages per day.
3. Think before writing. Quality matters more than quantity.
4. Do not use foul language nor override the general norms of civility. Let your words be the expression of who you are.
5. You’ll be “flamed” by other members if you behave unscholarly.
6. You do not have to be a scholar to participate in this forum but try to act like one.
7. Do not use an offensive nickname as your user name.
8. Be considerate of other members’ time and write only if you have something of value to say.
9. Remember that the membership to this forum is not a birthright, but rather a privilege. We love to see the flowers of all kinds
and hues in our garden but the moderators are always on the watch to weed out the “thorny” shrubs that try to suffocate other
plants.
10. This forum is for serious discussions. Please do not register multiple usernames like Muhammad and his Allah whose one
alias said one thing and his hidden alias came to his support. We can easily see if you use multiple usernames, do not like it
and will reveal your little secret. So don't do that.
Please join only if you agree.
I Agree
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum.htm
My Response:
This is the first page just before you enter the forum on FFI.org. It gives a list of requirements if you want to be a successful
poster i.e. if you want to post and then, very importantly, solicit a possible response from other posters, or the master himself
running the website, Ali Sina. These rules of course promulgated by the creator and administrator of the website. If you do as
required by the owner of the site, you stand a good chance of successful posting. Does this mean that it is someone other
than the creator of FFI who has promulgated the rules? In my view isn’t this similar to Al Fateha. If you call upon the Lord in a
manner as depicted in Al Fateha, there is a good chance your will be call will land on fertile ground. Not that FFI follow their
own set Doa principles but its serves as good rebuttal against their own argument.
What follows below is what you will find on the guidelines page of http://www.mukto-mona.com
MuktoMona:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/new_site/mukto-mona/muk-guidelines.htm
Guidelines for Submission of Articles/Messages
• 1. An article, originally submitted at FORUM, if considered scholarly and consistent with MM ideals and policy by the
moderator, would be posted at MM main page. However, submission of any articles/messages at forum does not automatically
qualify them to be posted at the main page.
• 2. We reserve the right to edit or not to post messages that are abusive, hateful, off-topic, duplicate and insulting to a race,
nation or person.
• 3. The writers are strongly encouraged to acknowledge the original sources of any citations/excerpts contained in their
articles. Article without the acknowledgement of citations may not be accepted.
• 4. We would try to post not more than 15 messages per day in the forum. Messages may be rejected at the discretion of the
moderators. Considering the large number of emails we receive from you at times, we may not be able to post each and every
message or to explain to the members the reasons for rejecting each message. In that case we would just pick and choose the
messages we consider most relevant to the scenario at that time. We hope that the members would not take this issue
negatively.
• 5. A message has to be at least more than three sentences to be eligible for posting in the forum.
• 6. Views expressed in a message/articles are those of the authors, and MM does not necessarily always endorse them
• 7. Any form of religious preaching will not be posted.
• 8. Personal attacks are strongly discouraged. A message may be rejected on the ground of personal attack.
• 9. We reserve the right to close a thread if a debate/discussion gets unnecessarily lengthy or turns into personal attacks.
• 10. We may not post a message that humiliates/offends a struggle of the oppressed.
• 11. A new member requires to submit his/her full name for posting a message. If any of you prefers to have a pen name,
please write to the moderator and your original name will not be published in the forum. We suggest not to choose a pen
name that is offensive to any race, religion or person.
• 12. If a member writes abusive email to another member based on the discussion in our forum, or continue to propagate
his/her vulgar/racist comment in forum moderator might cancel his/her membership.
• 13. Messages forwarded from other forums will be posted only after removing references to those forums. Members are
encouraged to forward original articles, not messages posted in other forums. MM may also not publish messages written
primarily in response to articles posted in other forum(s).
• 14. Any Bangla post written in Roman/English script will NOT be approved. Bangla articles or messages have to be written in
Bangla software. There are plenty free downloadable versions of Bangla software out there, such as, Bornosoft ( http://www.
bornosoft.com/freebasic). Members are requested to write their articles using Bangla SW, otherwise they will be
rejected/deleted without any notification.
My Response:
This is a simple guideline one has to follow if one would like to enjoy the privilege of posting articles, comments or views and
stand a chance to get a response on MM website. Now if one does not follow these initial and principle guidelines promulgated
by the administrators/creators of MM, then you will not have an inkling of chance of being able to post, let alone having the
possibility of getting a response.
Why is it that one never preaches what they practice? Why is it that ones blood is blood and that of the other is water? Why is
it that ones requirement are serious while others, let alone the Creator’s, are punch line to jokes?
MuktoMona:
This imperative form of the word "say" occurs at least 350 times in the Quran, and its obvious that this word has, in fact, been
inserted by later compilers of the Quran to remove countless similarly embarrassing difficulties. Thus, we have direct evidence
that the Quran starts out with the words of Muhammad.
(Quran 113:1)
I take refuge with the Lord of the Dawn.
One can clearly see, its Muhammad and NOT GOD HIMSELF who is seeking refuge in God.
My Response:
There is only one problem with this verse as quoted by MM, they have missed out the first word “say”, “qul” in Arabic. This
clearly means Allah SWT is informing the believers in how to seek refuge from evil of man by the verbatim prayer in this sura.
He, the Eternal, is showing how the believers are required to address Him when seeking refuge from the evil designs of
humans. What is so wrong in that? Why is it that when formally applying for a job, there is certain mode of drafting an
application letter while when writing to a friend the mode is different? How come we never question the same person when this
guy has written two letters, one formal the other informal and immediately query the letters authorship?
The matter of this sura suggests that man in difficulties, spiritual or physical, should seek refuge in the Omnipotent Lord who
alone can give him the relief needed. The Lord makes it effortless in fact, by showing man the formality required to place his
formal application for help in times of stress. The letter, as such, has been written by the Lord and spoon fed to man for his
use when in need. How much more Merciful can our Lord be? Where is it specified so that one can accuralet deduce that this
sura was verbatim, that of Muhammad? Remove the word “say” as have MM, and it becomes verbatim for whole of mankind.
What a stupid line of argument from MM. There is a thin line between logic and stupidity and MM have just crossed that line.
They are indeed blinded by their lack of understanding and this breed intellectual depravity. Inanity drips form every word
issued by MM.
MuktoMona:
(Quran 6:104)
Now have come to you, from your Lord, proofs
(To open your eyes): If any will see, it will
be for (the good of) his own soul; If any will
be blind, it will be to his own (harm): I am not
(here) To watch over your doings.
In this verse the speaker of the line "I am not to watch over your doings"- is clearly Muhammad. In fact Dawood in his
translation adds a footnote that the "I" refers to Muhammad here. And in previous verse (Quran 6:103) it is stated - 'No mortal
eyes can see Him, though He sees all eyes. He is benignant all knowing'. R. Bell said in his "A commentary on the Quran
(Manchester, England: Victoria university of Manchester, 1991) vol. 1. p. 201 '- The end of the verse shows that Prophet is
speaking his own words'.
My Response:
This is a beautiful verse that comprehensively shows the lack of obligation and freedom of choice as regards the matter of
religion. This verse in essence puts paid the argument of anti-islamists that islam is a religion forced down people’s throats by
the Quran. That is a blatant lie. Now as regards MMs inane assumption that this verse is from Muhammad.
He does not speak out of his own fancy. This is nothing but an inspired revelation. He is taught by One who is Mighty in Power
and Vigorous." (53:3-6).
If fire cuts fire, like for like, then a verse will clarify a verse. Reading in context verses 53:3-6 and verse 6:104, it is simple,
Muhammad spoke the words of Allah SWT. So did very other prophet in the Quran. Whence I register my arguments again:
With the other prophets mentioned in Quran in verbatim, can we assume like the author of this mentally acrobatic article that
the Quran is the word of Adam, Nuh, Sulayman, Yakub, Yusuf, Zakariya, Musa, Harun, Ibrahim, Isa, Muhammad (PBUH)? Just
think for once and let us consider the bare facts here. If we go along with what this inane author says, can we then assume
that each one of these prophets had an authorship in the Quran? If so, then can we agree that the Quran traversed in all the
times of these Prophets till it finally came down to the verbatim word of Muhammad PBUH? Or can we decide if the Quran was
the verbatim word of Muhammad or the other prophets, through the eyes of Muhammad PBUH, who may have never known all
these conversations unless he was inspired in some way? Whose word was it?
If we consider what MM says then the Quran has an even bigger problem. Not only do we question if it is indeed the word of
Allah SWT, but is it also the word of Muhammad, or Isa, or Musa, Ibrahim, Zakariya, Yakub, Yusuf, Nuh, Adam, Maryam or the
angels. In fact, it also contains the word of Pharaoh. Now the predicament is compounded. Or this is logical too far fetched and
it truly is the word of Allah SWT and He had the sovereignty to choose to use the verbatim word of His prophets and angels
and revealed it to his last Messenger, Muhammad PBUH. It is truly wondrous that authors of worldly literature have the
freedom to choose how to author their works even if it means quoting verbatim the words of their characters, but when it
comes to the authorship of the Quran, similar literary styles are denied. MM is truly pathetic and shameful in its thought and
mode of argumentation and does not deserve a second read.
Let me present the verse below to illustrate this:
(88:21-26)
"Therefore you remained (then). Your duty is only to remind than You are not their keeper. As for those who turn their back
and disbelieve Allah will inflict on them the supreme chastisement. To Us they shall return and We will call them to account.
Quran 6:104)
Now have come to you, from your Lord, proofs (To open your eyes): If any will see, it will be for (the good of) his own soul; If
any will be blind, it will be to his own (harm): I am not (here) To watch over your doings.
Muhammad PBUH has merely repeated the word of God! How simple can it get? Unless MM expect that whenever their inane
authors open the Quran. Allah SWT will pop out in the preface section proclaiming the Muhammad speaks not of his own
accord. That won’t happen. Verse for verse, MM knows nothing as regards the Quran. They mere intellectually deprived ploy
of picking verses at random and interpreting them with purposeful omission of words and contexts to suit foul ends, has to be
exposed one day and this is the start. MM are liars and intellectually moronic beings with no sesnse of dignity or
intellectualism. How easy can it get to interpret the verses of Quran in context of what was said and why it was said?
Muhammad PBUH was asked to deliver a message and so he did. It is simplicity in itself that a sovereign king would send a
messenger to a people to proclaim the king’s thought. The words would come out of the palate of the messenger, but they are
clearly considered as the word of the king.
(Quran 27:91)
For me, I have been commanded to serve the Lord of this city, Him Who has sanctified it
and to whom (Belong) all things; and I am commanded to be of those who bow in Islam to Allah's Will
MuktoMona:
Again, the speaker here is clearly Muhammad who is trying to justify killing of innocent Meccans who were not willing to follow
Muhammad's Islamic version of God. Dawood and Pickthall both interpolate "say" at the beginning of the sentence which is
lacking in the original Arabic version of the sura.
(Quran 81:15)
So verily I call to witness the planets - that recede...
Again, here it is Muhammad and NOT God who is swearing by the turning planets.
My Response:
Explanation adequately covered above. I do not need to address this inane argument repetitively. I have rebutted the same
quite extensively.
MuktoMona:
(Quran 84:16-19)
I swear by the afterglow of sunset, and by the night, and by the moon when she is at the full.
Once again it is Muhammad and NOT God. He is unable to disguise his pagan heritage. (Omnipotent Allah should not swear,
right?) Muhammad swears again in the name of the Sun and Moon, both of which were considered as holy deities by pre-
Islamic Arabs. (Dear Readers, have you noticed that YUSUFALI cleverly escaped the word "swear" while making the
translation, but PICKTHAL and SHAKIR used it).
My Response:
This is another blatant lie and very inane one at that too. Severally we have seen Allah SWT taking an oath by several
animate and inanimate objects. MM has already attributed a characteristic to an Omnipotent Lord of not swearing. Why not?
Isn’t He the Lord? He can swear if He wants, cant He, if he is Omnipotent? If we consider for once that Muhammad PBUH did
indeed swear to show his alleged pagan background,
-There is an oath taken by the fig and olive (sura at teen),
-Another oath of the mount Sinai,
-Another by the Holy city inviolable,
-Another oath by time (al asr),
-Another oath taken by snorting chargers (al adiyat),
-Another noonday, (ad duha)
-Another by dark night, (al layl)
-Another by Him who created male and female (wa maa khalqa dhakara wal untha)
-Another oath by heaven (wa samaha..)
-Another by earth (wal ardha…)
-Another by the perfected soul (wa nafsi wa maa sawaha)
Can MM decide which one of these were pagan gods relevant to Muhammad? The fig, olive, mouth Sinai, Holy city?, time, the
snorting chargers, the night, the day, the noon, the Creator of male and female, the sky, the earth, the soul….the list is
endless. Which one of these are pagan gods relevant to Muhammad PBUH if we consider the argument by MM to be true? Is
Muhammad PBUH actually swearing here or is it God. If Muhammad then I am sure MM will mentally perform acrobatics and
show that the fig and olive and mouth Sinai all were gods in pre-islamic Arabia. If we consider it is Allah SWT, then why would
Allah SWT need to swear? Simple. All the magnificent Lord would like to do is to draw the attention of man to these beautiful
creations that they may behold the supremacy of the Mighty Creator and Sustainer. He does not need to swear but by doing
so, it clearly draws the attention of the reader to splendor of these creations. It is only through beholding the creation that one
can realize the existence of the Creator. It is only after beholding the Mona Lisa that one can find Da Vinci from the midst of
the dustful pages of History. It is only through His creation that one can understand that the presence of the Creator is
incumbent. It is simply why Allah SWT swears by His creation.
Let now the readers decide on sanity and insanity.
I rest until challenged on this rebuttal.
zuher
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to the section of Zuher
Send Email to Zuher
Dear Readers, have you noticed there are many verses in Quran which uses Muhammad's word directly ? If we read those
verses, we clearly understand that those were Muhammad's own word, not Allah's.
My Response:
This is flawed understanding and moronic interpretation from the Mukto mona (MM). As I move on wit this rebuttal, readers will
notice how stupid and shallow minded the writer of the original article is when it comes to understanding the holy Quran.
We have severally seen in the Quran that Allah SWT uses the verbatim word of his prophets and not only Muhammad PBUH.
All prophets mentioned such as Musa PBUH, Isa PBUH, Ibrahim PBUH, Sulayman PBUH, Zulqurnain PBUH, Harun PBUH have
all been mentioned by Allah SWT in verbatim. Take the below verses for example:
Ale Imran 3:45-49
Behold! the angels said "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of
Mary held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah. (45) "He shall speak to the
people in childhood And in maturity and he shall be (of the company) of the righteous." (46) She said: "O my Lord! how shall I
have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: Allah createth what He willeth; when He hath decreed a plan,
He but saith to it `Be', and it is! (47) "And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel. (48) "And
(appoint him) an Messenger to the Children of Israel, (with this message): I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, in
that I make for you out of clay as it were the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave; and I
heal those born blind, and the lepers and I quicken the dead by Allah's leave; and I declare to you what ye eat, and what ye
store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe.(49)
Now let us look at this verse quite intellectually unlike the deprived manner MM would have us think. This is conversation
between Mariam AS and the angels who came to give her the tidings of a new born. Now because the conversation is quoted
in verbatim between the two parties concerned, would the inane author of the original article have us think that the Quran is
the actual word of the angels and Mariam AS? Or with the other prophets mentioned above, can we assume like the author of
this mentally acrobatic article that the Quran is the word of Adam, Nuh, Sulayman, Yakub, Yusuf, Zakariya, Musa, Harun,
Ibrahim, Isa, Muhammad (PBUTA)? Just think for once and let us consider the bare facts here. If we go along with what this
inane author says, can we then assume that each one of these prophets had an authorship in the Quran? If so, then can we
agree that the Quran traversed in all the times of these Prophets till it finally came down to the verbatim word of Muahmmad
PBUH? Or can we decide if the Quran was the verbatim word of Muhammad or the other prophets, through the eyes of
Muhammad PBUH, who may have never known all these conversations unless he was inspired in some way? Whose word was
it? If we consider what MM says then the Quran has an even bigger problem. Not only do we question if it is indeed the word of
Allah SWT, but is it also the word of Muhammad, or Isa, or Musa, Ibrahim, Zakariya, Yakub, Yusuf, Nuh, Adam, Maryam or the
angels. In fact, it also contains the word of Pharaoh. Now the predicament is compounded. Or this is logical too far fetched and
it truly is the word of Allah SWT and He had the sovereignty to choose to use the verbatim word of His prophets and angels
and revealed it to his last Messenger, Muhammad PBUH. It is truly wondrous that authors of worldly literature have the
freedom to choose how to author their works even if it means quoting verbatim the words of their characters, but when it
comes to the authorship of the Quran, similar literary styles are denied. MM is truly pathetic and shameful in its thought and
mode of argumentation and does not deserve a second read.
In truth, MM has very conveniently omitted the quote marks within the verses hence deeming the reader to understand the
Muhammad or the other prophets as it now seems have authored the Holy Scripture. MM thinks that by omitting the quote
marks they have omitted the intellectual capacity of readers. How shallow can one get I wonder? How stupid does one get for
them to realize they are stupid and perceived as idiotic? This is stupidity redefined. Allah SWT conversed and He did so
through inspiration to His prophets and even if He did quote them in verbatim, it still remains His word, as authored by Him,
and as original as He intended.
This sort of thought process is quite insidious and probably restrictive indefinitely. People with such thought process are
devoid of intellectual thinking and even when the need does arise of intellectual interpretation, even to save their own lives,
the guy will surely take a bullet. It is terminal disease where the sufferers cannot come out however much they endeavor. This
is an exercise in futility.
He does not speak out of his own fancy. This is nothing but an inspired revelation. He is taught by One who is Mighty in Power
and Vigorous." (53:3-6).
Therefore you remained (then). Your duty is only to remind than You are not their keeper. As for those who turn their back
and disbelieve Allah will inflict on them the supreme chastisement. To Us they shall return and We will call them to account. (88:
21-26)
Note this verse from the Holy Quran that clearly explain that the words in the Holy Quran maybe those from the palate of
Muhammad PBUH or any other Prophet of Allah, but they are inspired by the Supreme Lord. The bible too confirms the same:
Note this verse from the Holy Quran that clearly explain that the words in the Holy Quran maybe those from the palate of
Muhammad PBUH or any other Prophet of Allah, but they are inspired by the Supreme Lord. The bible too confirms the same:
Now more than half of humanity considers the words spoken by a prophet to be true word of God and yet MM here quite
clearly decides to bury their heads in the sand and assume (making an *** of U and ME – assume) that the intellectuals in the
readership of this article cannot see them or through their sorry excuse for an argument. This is indeed shaming at the lowest
scholarly cadre.
MuktoMona:
Well, according to the Muslims the Quran contains the words of God.
My Response:
Correction, once again! God! Where do I start with these intellectually drained individuals? If MM does not understand or
cannot even quote verbatim the beliefs of the Muslims, why bother posting articles subsequently show their stupidity, making
them easy targets and sitting ducks for Muslims all over. The correct statement is “Muslims believe the Quran IS the word of
God”. You will find this a better generalization to argue on and at least will show some knowledge among members at MM.
MuktoMona:
Quran is to be read as if God Himself had spoken these words stated in it. It is important to emphasize this point because if
Quran is the word of God then it should not contain any errors and it should hold true for all times. However, such is not the
case.
My Response:
So if Othello spoke in Othello by Shakespeare then Othello is the work of Othello and not that of Shakespeare? So
Shakespeare most probably should have spoken as himself in Othello if Othello was to be considered the true word of
Shakespeare by MM? MM is more dim-witted than dim-witted. I am sure the readers have seen the nonsense perpetrated by
these mental acrobats on MM. This is getting really embarrassing now. It’s almost underground when one sits to describe the
IQ levels of these morons on MM. It’s truly an ignominy when Neanderthalics post on the internet as “intellectuals”, for the
world to read and in the process expose themselves as intellectually deprived. This is the perfect exemplification of shooting
oneself in the foot. I will show you the fallacy of their purported expose’. This was a losing battle the moment they typed the
heading of this article. Read on.
MuktoMona:
Dear Readers, we will see how some of the verses in the Quran itself show clearly that these words were obviously spoken by
Muhammad and Not God.
The Opening Sura Fatihah:
(Quran 1:1-7)
In the name of the Merciful and Compassionate God.
Praise belongs to God,
The Lord of the worlds, the merciful, the
compassionate, the ruler of the day of
the day of judgment! Thee we serve and Thee
we ask for aid. Guide us in the right path,
the path of those Thou art gracious to;
not to those Thou art wroth with, nor of
those who err.
Someone need not be a rocket-scientist to comprehend that these words are clearly addressed to God, in the form of a
prayer. They are Muhammad's words of praise to God ("Guide us in the right path,..." ~ 001.006), asking for God's help and
guidance. Some Muslim compilers conveniently add the imperative "say" in the English translation of the Quran at the
beginning of the sura to remove this difficulty.
My Response:
I will show you the inanity in this MM argument. Lets us start with the major translators:
Yusuf Ali
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
1:1 In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
1:2 Praise be to God, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the world;
1:3 Most Gracious, Most Merciful;
1:4 Master of the Day of Judgment.
1:5 Thee do we worship, and Thine aid we seek.
1:6 Show us the straight way,
1:7 The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, those whose (portion) is not wrath, and who go not astray.
MH Shakir
1. In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.
2. All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds.
3. The Beneficent, the Merciful.
4. Master of the Day of Judgment.
5. Thee do we serve and Thee do we beseech for help.
6. Keep us on the right path.
7. The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors.
Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down,
nor of those who go astray.
Pickthall
1:1 In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.
1:2 Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds,
1:3 The Beneficent, the Merciful:
1:4 Owner of the Day of Judgment
1:5 Thee (alone) we worship; Thee alone we ask for help
1:6 Show us the straight path,
1:7 The path of those whom Thou hast favored; Not (the path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray
MuktoMona:
MM: Some Muslim compilers conveniently add the imperative "say" in the English translation of the Quran at the beginning of
the sura to remove this difficulty.
My Response:
The words of MM first up are important. They say “Some Muslim compilers…” Either they don’t know when the COMPILATION
of the Quran happened or they don’t know the difference between COMPILATION and TRANSLATION. Compilers do NOT add
the word “say”. They do not add words “in ENGLISH”. They just put the Quran together in the form of chapters and complete
verses in the original Arabic text, in the language the verses were revealed. They never made any changes in words or texts
or even contexts.
Compilation was done immediately after the demise of the prophet as the last revelation came down 2 months prior to the
passing of the Holy Messenger. This was done in the era of the first 4 Caliphs and completed by 30AH, 20 years after the
death of the Prophet. As far as we know none of the compilers added the word “say” in Arabic or English, unless MM want us
to believe that these early and only compilers knew the English language. This is the stupidity of these authors on MM.
Now, let us for once consider that the error on MMs part was that of typo and maybe they wanted to connote Translators
instead of Compilers. Ok. Which translator has done so in the previous widely translations I have provided? None. Zilch. Zero.
MM has clearly been caught lying again on the net and trying to hoodwink the readership. There isn’t a single translator who
has added the word “say” in this sura at the beginning. In fact there isn’t a mention of the word “say” in the WHOLE sura!
Strange how MM obtained their translation and then purported facts. Maybe MM concocted their own Quran and added the
word “say” at the beginning of the sura to orgasm on their “new found” error.
Now the question rises: Why is this sura considered the verbatim word of Allah SWT?
The verse: "Thee do we worship", shows that the whole chapter is revealed on behalf of man. Allah teaches him in this chapter
how to praise his Lord and how to show his allegiance to, and humility towards, Him. And the phrase, "All praise is due to
Allah", further strengthens this inference, as will be seen in the next paragraph.
Here, Allah SWT so aptly, in the first chapter of His Holy Book, the Book of life, at the onset, just like after birth of a child, the
parent, spoon feeds the child with something palatable, Allah SWT spoon feeds His people with the manner of approaching
Him in supplication. Allah SWT, as He always promises, shows the way to mankind, in verbatim, how to supplicate and ask for
help and guidance. And true to action, the truthful ones did. And in His Magnificence and Most Generous, responded again by
sending 113 further chapters in guidance to the supplication. We ask for His guidance 5 times daily, in obligatory prayers.
People often take the name of one of their great and powerful personalities at the time of doing or beginning a work. By this
association, it is believed, the work would achieve success, greatness and blessings; or that it would be a memorial to keep
the named one's memory alive for ever. This is also observed in naming a child, a project, a house or an association - they
give it the name of a deeply loved or highly respected person, so
that his name would continue in this form; for example, a man names his son after his father, in order to perpetuate the
father's memory.
This verse runs on the same line. Allah began His speech with His Own name - Great is His name - so that the ideas taught in
this chapter be stamped by, and associated with it. Also, it teaches a lesson to mankind, showing them the perfect manner of
starting all their talks and actions; it guides them to put the stamp of the divine name on all their activities; doing every work for
the sake of Allah, associating it with His good names and attributes. In this way that action would neither be rendered null and
void, nor remain incomplete; it has been started in the name of Allah, and negation and annihilation cannot reach that sacred
name.
Allah has declared variously in the Qur'an that what is not for His Person must perish, is in vain; He Will proceed to the deeds
not done for His sake and shall render them as scattered floating dust; He shall forfeit what they have done and shall nullify
their deeds; and that nothing shall remain except His honored Person.
Therefore, what is done for the sake of Allah and performed in His name shall continue and will not perish. Everything, every
work and every affair shall have its share of eternity - as much as it is related to Allah. It is this reality that has been hinted at
in the universally accepted tradition of the Prophet: "Every important affair, not begun with the name of Allah, shall remain
incomplete…." The word al-abtar (translated here as "incomplete'’) means a thing whose end is cut off, an animal whose tail is
severed.
The verse: "Thee do we worship", shows that the whole chapter is revealed on behalf of man. Allah teaches him in this chapter
how to praise his Lord and how to show his allegiance to, and humility towards, Him. And the phrase, "All praise is due to
Allah", further strengthens this inference.
It is clear that this chapter is an instruction manual of how the created is required to communicate to his Creator. I am not
comparing it to an instruction manual of a car or radio, Sina, knowing aptly your mode of reasoning. The Creator is unique and
His created beings are unique, in their own right.
Yes, you fellows are right. This is too philosophical for MM. let me explain in better terms.
When a child is born, a mother tries to teach the child in subtle ways of pronouncing words and phrases. The most common, in
fact I believe the guy who wrote this article on MM included, word that a mother teaches to the child is “mama” or a word that
denote “mother” so that the child knows at an early age how to call upon the one person responsible for its nourishment and
sustenance. Take Al-Fateha as a similar guidance from the Creator to the created, the Sustainer to the sustained, the
Nourisher to the nourished. And so aptly put, it is in the first chapter of the Holy Quran. So why should it sound strange when
Allah SWT brings down a chapter that teaches man, in verbatim, how to call upon his Lord? Does this mean that these are the
words of Muhammad PBUH? From what angle?
MuktoMona:
Not satisfied yet? Fine. On FFI forum home page;
The Dao of the forum or its 10 commandments
1. Do not insult other members, Do not utter racial slurs or call for violence against certain groups of people. Clashes of
opinions are welcomed but clashes of personalities are not.
2. Do not spam or flood the forum with too many postings. Limit your postings to maximum seven messages per day.
3. Think before writing. Quality matters more than quantity.
4. Do not use foul language nor override the general norms of civility. Let your words be the expression of who you are.
5. You’ll be “flamed” by other members if you behave unscholarly.
6. You do not have to be a scholar to participate in this forum but try to act like one.
7. Do not use an offensive nickname as your user name.
8. Be considerate of other members’ time and write only if you have something of value to say.
9. Remember that the membership to this forum is not a birthright, but rather a privilege. We love to see the flowers of all kinds
and hues in our garden but the moderators are always on the watch to weed out the “thorny” shrubs that try to suffocate other
plants.
10. This forum is for serious discussions. Please do not register multiple usernames like Muhammad and his Allah whose one
alias said one thing and his hidden alias came to his support. We can easily see if you use multiple usernames, do not like it
and will reveal your little secret. So don't do that.
Please join only if you agree.
I Agree
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum.htm
My Response:
This is the first page just before you enter the forum on FFI.org. It gives a list of requirements if you want to be a successful
poster i.e. if you want to post and then, very importantly, solicit a possible response from other posters, or the master himself
running the website, Ali Sina. These rules of course promulgated by the creator and administrator of the website. If you do as
required by the owner of the site, you stand a good chance of successful posting. Does this mean that it is someone other
than the creator of FFI who has promulgated the rules? In my view isn’t this similar to Al Fateha. If you call upon the Lord in a
manner as depicted in Al Fateha, there is a good chance your will be call will land on fertile ground. Not that FFI follow their
own set Doa principles but its serves as good rebuttal against their own argument.
What follows below is what you will find on the guidelines page of http://www.mukto-mona.com
MuktoMona:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/new_site/mukto-mona/muk-guidelines.htm
Guidelines for Submission of Articles/Messages
• 1. An article, originally submitted at FORUM, if considered scholarly and consistent with MM ideals and policy by the
moderator, would be posted at MM main page. However, submission of any articles/messages at forum does not automatically
qualify them to be posted at the main page.
• 2. We reserve the right to edit or not to post messages that are abusive, hateful, off-topic, duplicate and insulting to a race,
nation or person.
• 3. The writers are strongly encouraged to acknowledge the original sources of any citations/excerpts contained in their
articles. Article without the acknowledgement of citations may not be accepted.
• 4. We would try to post not more than 15 messages per day in the forum. Messages may be rejected at the discretion of the
moderators. Considering the large number of emails we receive from you at times, we may not be able to post each and every
message or to explain to the members the reasons for rejecting each message. In that case we would just pick and choose the
messages we consider most relevant to the scenario at that time. We hope that the members would not take this issue
negatively.
• 5. A message has to be at least more than three sentences to be eligible for posting in the forum.
• 6. Views expressed in a message/articles are those of the authors, and MM does not necessarily always endorse them
• 7. Any form of religious preaching will not be posted.
• 8. Personal attacks are strongly discouraged. A message may be rejected on the ground of personal attack.
• 9. We reserve the right to close a thread if a debate/discussion gets unnecessarily lengthy or turns into personal attacks.
• 10. We may not post a message that humiliates/offends a struggle of the oppressed.
• 11. A new member requires to submit his/her full name for posting a message. If any of you prefers to have a pen name,
please write to the moderator and your original name will not be published in the forum. We suggest not to choose a pen
name that is offensive to any race, religion or person.
• 12. If a member writes abusive email to another member based on the discussion in our forum, or continue to propagate
his/her vulgar/racist comment in forum moderator might cancel his/her membership.
• 13. Messages forwarded from other forums will be posted only after removing references to those forums. Members are
encouraged to forward original articles, not messages posted in other forums. MM may also not publish messages written
primarily in response to articles posted in other forum(s).
• 14. Any Bangla post written in Roman/English script will NOT be approved. Bangla articles or messages have to be written in
Bangla software. There are plenty free downloadable versions of Bangla software out there, such as, Bornosoft ( http://www.
bornosoft.com/freebasic). Members are requested to write their articles using Bangla SW, otherwise they will be
rejected/deleted without any notification.
My Response:
This is a simple guideline one has to follow if one would like to enjoy the privilege of posting articles, comments or views and
stand a chance to get a response on MM website. Now if one does not follow these initial and principle guidelines promulgated
by the administrators/creators of MM, then you will not have an inkling of chance of being able to post, let alone having the
possibility of getting a response.
Why is it that one never preaches what they practice? Why is it that ones blood is blood and that of the other is water? Why is
it that ones requirement are serious while others, let alone the Creator’s, are punch line to jokes?
MuktoMona:
This imperative form of the word "say" occurs at least 350 times in the Quran, and its obvious that this word has, in fact, been
inserted by later compilers of the Quran to remove countless similarly embarrassing difficulties. Thus, we have direct evidence
that the Quran starts out with the words of Muhammad.
(Quran 113:1)
I take refuge with the Lord of the Dawn.
One can clearly see, its Muhammad and NOT GOD HIMSELF who is seeking refuge in God.
My Response:
There is only one problem with this verse as quoted by MM, they have missed out the first word “say”, “qul” in Arabic. This
clearly means Allah SWT is informing the believers in how to seek refuge from evil of man by the verbatim prayer in this sura.
He, the Eternal, is showing how the believers are required to address Him when seeking refuge from the evil designs of
humans. What is so wrong in that? Why is it that when formally applying for a job, there is certain mode of drafting an
application letter while when writing to a friend the mode is different? How come we never question the same person when this
guy has written two letters, one formal the other informal and immediately query the letters authorship?
The matter of this sura suggests that man in difficulties, spiritual or physical, should seek refuge in the Omnipotent Lord who
alone can give him the relief needed. The Lord makes it effortless in fact, by showing man the formality required to place his
formal application for help in times of stress. The letter, as such, has been written by the Lord and spoon fed to man for his
use when in need. How much more Merciful can our Lord be? Where is it specified so that one can accuralet deduce that this
sura was verbatim, that of Muhammad? Remove the word “say” as have MM, and it becomes verbatim for whole of mankind.
What a stupid line of argument from MM. There is a thin line between logic and stupidity and MM have just crossed that line.
They are indeed blinded by their lack of understanding and this breed intellectual depravity. Inanity drips form every word
issued by MM.
MuktoMona:
(Quran 6:104)
Now have come to you, from your Lord, proofs
(To open your eyes): If any will see, it will
be for (the good of) his own soul; If any will
be blind, it will be to his own (harm): I am not
(here) To watch over your doings.
In this verse the speaker of the line "I am not to watch over your doings"- is clearly Muhammad. In fact Dawood in his
translation adds a footnote that the "I" refers to Muhammad here. And in previous verse (Quran 6:103) it is stated - 'No mortal
eyes can see Him, though He sees all eyes. He is benignant all knowing'. R. Bell said in his "A commentary on the Quran
(Manchester, England: Victoria university of Manchester, 1991) vol. 1. p. 201 '- The end of the verse shows that Prophet is
speaking his own words'.
My Response:
This is a beautiful verse that comprehensively shows the lack of obligation and freedom of choice as regards the matter of
religion. This verse in essence puts paid the argument of anti-islamists that islam is a religion forced down people’s throats by
the Quran. That is a blatant lie. Now as regards MMs inane assumption that this verse is from Muhammad.
He does not speak out of his own fancy. This is nothing but an inspired revelation. He is taught by One who is Mighty in Power
and Vigorous." (53:3-6).
If fire cuts fire, like for like, then a verse will clarify a verse. Reading in context verses 53:3-6 and verse 6:104, it is simple,
Muhammad spoke the words of Allah SWT. So did very other prophet in the Quran. Whence I register my arguments again:
With the other prophets mentioned in Quran in verbatim, can we assume like the author of this mentally acrobatic article that
the Quran is the word of Adam, Nuh, Sulayman, Yakub, Yusuf, Zakariya, Musa, Harun, Ibrahim, Isa, Muhammad (PBUH)? Just
think for once and let us consider the bare facts here. If we go along with what this inane author says, can we then assume
that each one of these prophets had an authorship in the Quran? If so, then can we agree that the Quran traversed in all the
times of these Prophets till it finally came down to the verbatim word of Muhammad PBUH? Or can we decide if the Quran was
the verbatim word of Muhammad or the other prophets, through the eyes of Muhammad PBUH, who may have never known all
these conversations unless he was inspired in some way? Whose word was it?
If we consider what MM says then the Quran has an even bigger problem. Not only do we question if it is indeed the word of
Allah SWT, but is it also the word of Muhammad, or Isa, or Musa, Ibrahim, Zakariya, Yakub, Yusuf, Nuh, Adam, Maryam or the
angels. In fact, it also contains the word of Pharaoh. Now the predicament is compounded. Or this is logical too far fetched and
it truly is the word of Allah SWT and He had the sovereignty to choose to use the verbatim word of His prophets and angels
and revealed it to his last Messenger, Muhammad PBUH. It is truly wondrous that authors of worldly literature have the
freedom to choose how to author their works even if it means quoting verbatim the words of their characters, but when it
comes to the authorship of the Quran, similar literary styles are denied. MM is truly pathetic and shameful in its thought and
mode of argumentation and does not deserve a second read.
Let me present the verse below to illustrate this:
(88:21-26)
"Therefore you remained (then). Your duty is only to remind than You are not their keeper. As for those who turn their back
and disbelieve Allah will inflict on them the supreme chastisement. To Us they shall return and We will call them to account.
Quran 6:104)
Now have come to you, from your Lord, proofs (To open your eyes): If any will see, it will be for (the good of) his own soul; If
any will be blind, it will be to his own (harm): I am not (here) To watch over your doings.
Muhammad PBUH has merely repeated the word of God! How simple can it get? Unless MM expect that whenever their inane
authors open the Quran. Allah SWT will pop out in the preface section proclaiming the Muhammad speaks not of his own
accord. That won’t happen. Verse for verse, MM knows nothing as regards the Quran. They mere intellectually deprived ploy
of picking verses at random and interpreting them with purposeful omission of words and contexts to suit foul ends, has to be
exposed one day and this is the start. MM are liars and intellectually moronic beings with no sesnse of dignity or
intellectualism. How easy can it get to interpret the verses of Quran in context of what was said and why it was said?
Muhammad PBUH was asked to deliver a message and so he did. It is simplicity in itself that a sovereign king would send a
messenger to a people to proclaim the king’s thought. The words would come out of the palate of the messenger, but they are
clearly considered as the word of the king.
(Quran 27:91)
For me, I have been commanded to serve the Lord of this city, Him Who has sanctified it
and to whom (Belong) all things; and I am commanded to be of those who bow in Islam to Allah's Will
MuktoMona:
Again, the speaker here is clearly Muhammad who is trying to justify killing of innocent Meccans who were not willing to follow
Muhammad's Islamic version of God. Dawood and Pickthall both interpolate "say" at the beginning of the sentence which is
lacking in the original Arabic version of the sura.
(Quran 81:15)
So verily I call to witness the planets - that recede...
Again, here it is Muhammad and NOT God who is swearing by the turning planets.
My Response:
Explanation adequately covered above. I do not need to address this inane argument repetitively. I have rebutted the same
quite extensively.
MuktoMona:
(Quran 84:16-19)
I swear by the afterglow of sunset, and by the night, and by the moon when she is at the full.
Once again it is Muhammad and NOT God. He is unable to disguise his pagan heritage. (Omnipotent Allah should not swear,
right?) Muhammad swears again in the name of the Sun and Moon, both of which were considered as holy deities by pre-
Islamic Arabs. (Dear Readers, have you noticed that YUSUFALI cleverly escaped the word "swear" while making the
translation, but PICKTHAL and SHAKIR used it).
My Response:
This is another blatant lie and very inane one at that too. Severally we have seen Allah SWT taking an oath by several
animate and inanimate objects. MM has already attributed a characteristic to an Omnipotent Lord of not swearing. Why not?
Isn’t He the Lord? He can swear if He wants, cant He, if he is Omnipotent? If we consider for once that Muhammad PBUH did
indeed swear to show his alleged pagan background,
-There is an oath taken by the fig and olive (sura at teen),
-Another oath of the mount Sinai,
-Another by the Holy city inviolable,
-Another oath by time (al asr),
-Another oath taken by snorting chargers (al adiyat),
-Another noonday, (ad duha)
-Another by dark night, (al layl)
-Another by Him who created male and female (wa maa khalqa dhakara wal untha)
-Another oath by heaven (wa samaha..)
-Another by earth (wal ardha…)
-Another by the perfected soul (wa nafsi wa maa sawaha)
Can MM decide which one of these were pagan gods relevant to Muhammad? The fig, olive, mouth Sinai, Holy city?, time, the
snorting chargers, the night, the day, the noon, the Creator of male and female, the sky, the earth, the soul….the list is
endless. Which one of these are pagan gods relevant to Muhammad PBUH if we consider the argument by MM to be true? Is
Muhammad PBUH actually swearing here or is it God. If Muhammad then I am sure MM will mentally perform acrobatics and
show that the fig and olive and mouth Sinai all were gods in pre-islamic Arabia. If we consider it is Allah SWT, then why would
Allah SWT need to swear? Simple. All the magnificent Lord would like to do is to draw the attention of man to these beautiful
creations that they may behold the supremacy of the Mighty Creator and Sustainer. He does not need to swear but by doing
so, it clearly draws the attention of the reader to splendor of these creations. It is only through beholding the creation that one
can realize the existence of the Creator. It is only after beholding the Mona Lisa that one can find Da Vinci from the midst of
the dustful pages of History. It is only through His creation that one can understand that the presence of the Creator is
incumbent. It is simply why Allah SWT swears by His creation.
Let now the readers decide on sanity and insanity.
I rest until challenged on this rebuttal.
zuher
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to the section of Zuher
Send Email to Zuher
| Response to an article on Muktomona "Quran: Word of God or Muhammad?" |
| Answering FaithFreedom.org |
| By Zuher |