The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Archive for July, 2012

Issue 64 [@1:10:10]: Abdullah Al-Araby – Director, The Pen vs. The Sword Publications – “Islam has to be known as more than a religion. The idea that Islam is spiritual religion like for instance Christianity is completely incorrect.”

Rebuttal 64: Al-Araby is right on the money when he states that “The idea that Islam is spiritual religion like for instance Christianity is completely incorrect.” Factually what he is telling us is that Islam is unlike the Pauline Christianity. How true and one cannot agree with him more. Al-Araby’s statement begets getting to know Christian basis of its spirituality a bit more closely.

Pauline Christian story is a very brief one: Adam committed a sin which committed his whole race to eternal perdition, but God the Father loved man so much that He sent His Only Begotten Son to redeem it. If we denude all the Christian sermons of spirituality, of every speaker in Christian history and every book written in the Christian world of those trappings, there will remain about two lines only to sum up Al-Araby’s whole religion. He may himself realize that such a story may be pleasing to infant ears, but yet incapable of inspiring any intelligent listener.

Official Christianity has been found to emanate from the cult of Mithraism, and not from the religion of Jesus. Paying attention to Christian doctrine would be an insult to intelligence. The Christians themselves have realized that the Church story of Christianity, from beginning to end, was only a faithful reproduction of the stories of several pagan gods; that the original narrative of Jesus was purposely lost sight of by the Early Church Fathers, who portrayed the Lord of Christianity purely from the pagan point of view; that they depicted him as the last of the generation of Pagan Christs – Nimrod/Baal, Heru Sa Aset and Bast – twins born of Aset i.e. Isis, Mithras, Horus, Attis, Dionysus the son of Zeus, Osiris(Egypt)/Adonis(Syria)/Tammuz(Babylon), Hercules, Perseus, Helios, Bacchus, Apollo, Jupiter, Hermes, Orpheus, Sol Invictus – (The “Unconquered Sun”), barring a few, of whom were reported to have been born of a Virgin on Christmas night that they all came, in their respective periods of history, to redeem the condemned human race by their blood, and willingly went to the Cross or were killed on the Friday afternoon immediately preceding Easter Sunday. It has also been established that all these pagan gods were buried and remained for two days in the grave; they rose again on the Easter Sunday morning and ascended to heaven afterwards, with a promise of a second coming in the latter days; and that the pagans used to participate in meals on Sunday in commemoration of their crucified god, believing that they ate his blood and flesh.

An excerpt from “The Myth and Ritual of Attis” by Sir James George Frazer (1854–1941), in his book The Golden Bough – pub. 1922, describes the pagan Easter of Attis in Phyrgia – But when night had fallen, the sorrow of the worshippers was turned to joy. For suddenly a light shone in the darkness: the tomb was opened: the god had risen from the dead; and as the priest touched the lips of the weeping mourners with balm, he softly whispered in their ears the glad tidings of salvation. The resurrection of the god was hailed by his disciples as a promise that they too would issue triumphant from the corruption of the grave. On the morrow, the twenty-fifth day of March, which was reckoned the vernal equinox, the divine resurrection was celebrated with a wild outburst of glee. At Rome, and probably elsewhere, the celebration took the form of a carnival. It was the Festival of Joy (Hilaria).

As if one Easter of Attis is not enough, we have the another from a Goddess as well:

Easter:
April was called Ostermonath—the month of the Ost-end wind (wind from the east). Easter is therefore the April feast, which lasted eight days. Our Easter Sunday must be between March 21st and April 25th. It is regulated by the paschal moon, or first full moon between the vernal equinox and fourteen days afterwards. (Teutonic, ostara; Anglo-Saxon, eastre.)
Easter. The Saxon goddess of the east, whose festival was held in the spring.
[E. Cobham Brewer 1810–1897. Dictionary of Phrase and Fable. 1898]

It has also come to light that, thousands of years before the birth of Jesus, the Egyptians used to worship the Cross on Easter Sunday as a sign of the new Lord, and ate eggs and hot-cross buns, like the Catholics of to-day, at the season when their Lord, they believed, used to give new life to the earth. These are the beliefs of the Church.

Easter or Pasch eggs, are symbolical of creation, or the re-creation of spring. The practice of presenting eggs to our friends at Easter is Magian or Persian, and bears allusion to the mundane egg, for which Ormuzd and Ahriman were to contend till the consummation of all things. It prevailed not only with the Persians, but also among the Jews, Egyptians, and Hindus. Christians adopted the custom to symbolise the resurrection, and they colour the eggs red in allusion to the blood of their redemption. There is a tradition, also, that the world was “hatched” or created at Easter-tide – “Bless, Lord, we beseech thee, this Thy creature of eggs, that it may become a wholesome sustenance to Thy faithful servants, eating it in thankfulness to Thee, on account of the resurrection of our Lord.”—Pope Paul V: Ritual. [E. Cobham Brewer 1810–1897. Dictionary of Phrase and Fable. 1898]

Besides Easter and Christmas, the pagans celebrated all the festivals which are now observed by the Romish Church. Most of the pagan gods, it is proved, had twelve disciples, and they were destroyed by one of their number. The various names given to Jesus were also the names of those pagan gods. To their great discomfiture, churchgoers have discovered that the cathedrals of the Roman Church are only a replica of buildings consecrated to the worship of Apollo, the Sun-god. The Holy water, the vestry, the position of the altar facing east, the choirs, the acolytes, the monks and the nuns with tonsures in commemoration of the Sun’s disc all come from the same Church of Apollo. It has also been established that Sunday was not God’s day but the Roman Dies Solis, the day reserved for the worship of the Sun-god. It was to serve his political ends that Constantine placed Jesus on the altar of Apollo, in the fourth century, while retaining every other vestige of pagan worship, and incorporating it into the Church of Jesus, if nothing else, the Sun is prominently displayed on east side of Arch of Constantine and his coins show Sun-god till 324 AD, while he converted in 312 AD. Last of all, and not the least, it has been found that Jesus was not born on the 25th..It was the birthday of the Sun as popularly of December, but believed in pagan circles. Churchgoers have now found out that they have for centuries been not worshipping Jesus, but the Sun; and the respectable orthodox Christian now thinks himself justified if he spends his Sundays in golf, baseball, or any other sport instead of attending Divine worship. Can a man with any sense of self-respect go to receive Holy Communion on Ash Wednesday or any Sunday if he feels that all the rites of the Sacrament are the same as those observed by the pagans in commemoration of their respective deities who were wrongly believed to have given their lives to save humanity?

Sacrament:
1. Literally, “a military oath” taken by the Roman soldiers not to desert their standard, turn their back on the enemy, or abandon their general. We also, in the sacrament of baptism, take a military oath “to fight manfully under the banner of Christ.” The early Christians used the word to signify “a sacred mystery,” and hence its application to the Baptism and Eucharist, and in the Roman Catholic Church to marriage, confirmation, etc.
2. The five sacraments are Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction. (See Thirty-nine Articles, Article xxxv.)
3. The seven sacraments are Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction.
4. The two sacraments of the Protestant Church are Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.
[E. Cobham Brewer 1810–1897. Dictionary of Phrase and Fable. 1898]

Even the very word Church has pagan roots – Church comes from the Anglo-Saxon root word “circe,” and stems from the Greek name of the goddess “Circe,” the daughter of “Helios,” the Roman Sun-god adopted from Greek mythology. Linked to this goddess in Celtic pagan worship is the name “Kirce.” From her name comes the word “kirch” which pertained to the building dedicated to pagan Celtic worship and rituals. The Greek word “kuriakon” was used for the building or “house of Kurios (Lord).”

The modern apologists in Christianity try to rearrange history so as to appeal to human intelligence e.g.

**”We know of an ablution in the ritual of Eleusis; the laurel-wreath oration of Demosthenes speaks of purificatory ablutions in the mystery of Sabazius; the cult of Attis had its taurobolium, and the mystery of Isis knew a sanctifying baptismal bath, as did the mysteries of Dionysus and of Mithras. Upon mature consideration modern scholarship has rejected the ideas that such rites exerted an influence on the baptismal doctrine of the New Testament,” [Hugo Rahner, The Christian Mystery and the Pagan Mysteries, section 3, in The Mysteries; Papers from the Eranos Yearbooks, edited by Joseph Campbell]

Whereas, Tertullian, the second century Christian author and theologian from Carthage, admits the Christian baptism same as in pre-Christian pagans:

**”[Non-Christians] ascribe to their idols the imbuing of waters with the self-same efficacy [of purification]. … For washing is the channel through which they are initiated into some sacred rites–of some notorious Isis or Mithras…Moreover, by carrying water around, and sprinkling it, they everywhere expiate country-seats, houses, temples, and whole cities: at all events, at the Apollinarian and Eleusinian games they are baptized; and they presume that the effect of their doing that is their regeneration and the remission of the penalties due to their perjuries….Among the ancients, again, whoever had defiled himself with murder, was wont to go in quest of purifying waters.” – i.e. Washing away sin! [Tertullian, On Baptism, Ch 5.]

Mysteriously, Mysteries in Christianity are no different than the pagans mysteries. Why?

**It was the common belief in Athens that whoever had been taught the Mysteries [at Eleusis] would, when he died, be deemed worthy of divine glory. Hence all were eager for initiation. [Scholiast on Aristophanes The Frogs, 158]

** It looks as if those also who established rites of initiation [into the mysteries] for us were no fools, but that there is a hidden meaning in their teaching when it says that whoever arrives uninitiated in Hades will lie in mud, but the purified and initiated when he arrives there will dwell with gods. [Plato, ‘Phaedo, 69 c]

**”The keys of hell and the guarantee of salvation [of Osiris followers]were in the hands of the goddess, and the initiation ceremony itself a kind of voluntary death and salvation through divine grace.” [Apuleius, Metamorphosis, Book 11, 21]

**”It is very hard not to see extensive and basic similarities between these [mystery] religions and the Christian Religion. But somehow Christian scholars have managed not to see it, and this, one must suspect, for dogmatic reasons….” Richard Reitzenstein and Wilhelm Bousset were two scholars who did manage to grasp the relevance of these ancient faiths for the study of early Christianity. Their conclusion was a simple and seemingly inevitable one: Once it reached Hellenistic soil, the story of Jesus attracted to itself a number of mythic motifs that were common to the syncretic religious mood of the era. Indeed, as people familiar with the other Mystery Religions came to embrace the Christian savior, it would have been practically impossible for them not to have clothed him in all the accoutrements of his fellow Kyrioi.” [Robert Price, Deconstructing Jesus, Chapter 3, 2000]

Justin Martyr, the early second century Christian apologist, was forced to admit that the so-called Christian rites had existed among the pagans centuries before Jesus. Justin was asked by the then Emperor of Rome to explain why he should embrace Christianity and give up his ancestors’ faith if the various articles of his own faith in the Mithraic Dispensation were the same as those in the new cult called after the name of Christ. Mithra, the Emperor thought, was the origin of Christ. Justin could not deny the fact.

**”When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter.” [Justin Martyr, First Apology, 21]

His explanation, however, is very interesting, as we read in his Apologia. He said that centuries before, Satan went to the higher regions in heaven and overheard angels rejoicing over the appearance of Jesus Christ in the days to come. Satan thus came to be acquainted with all the features of the story of the coming Christ, and he, being the arch-enemy of truth, tried, therefore, to confound it with falsehood. He visited numerous countries, from Persia to England, and all those that surrounded the birthplace of Jesus, and introduced cults each of which had the same story of its god as is now told of Jesus by the Church. Justin Martyr had to invent the reason behind the prevailing customs, rituals and beliefs of the pagans of the time by attributing it to the “advance planning” by the Devil:

**”The devils, accordingly, when they heard these prophetic words, said that Bacchus was the son of Jupiter, and …having been torn in pieces, he ascended into heaven.” [Justin Martyr, First Apology, 54]

**“And the devils, indeed, having heard this washing published by the prophet, instigated those who enter their temples, and are about to approach them with libations and burnt-offerings, also to sprinkle themselves; and they cause them [the pagans] also to wash themselves entirely, as they depart [from the sacrifice], before they enter into the shrines in which their images are set.” [Justin Martyr, First Apology, Ch 62]

Though the ingenious story of Justin could not convince the Emperor, it nevertheless explained the difficulties attaching to the new faith to its followers, and was accepted as the truth by Constantine for purely political reasons.

The simple religion of Jesus, which was no other than the religion of Moses with certain minor modifications, became completely Romanized to suit the tastes of the Gentiles. If these facts have now come to light and are fully established, the desertion of the Church by its former votaries in the West is but a natural sequence. Formal Christianity has collapsed. Its days are numbered. Its adherents have become divided into innumerable new sects Spiritualism, New Thought, Christian Science, and the like – each of whom has all but denied the teachings of the Church and has adopted beliefs which, generally speaking, are of Islamic origin.

Al-Araby must be aware of this pagan story. The Church asserts that the Mystery Cult in different forms of Paganism was a deception and that, the Lord of Christianity came to destroy it and uproot the falsehood from the world for ever. We Muslims do admit that Jesus, as a true Messenger of God, did come to destroy falsehood. He preached against it when he laid emphasis on obedience to the laws of God. His teachings were diametrically opposed to the pagan religion of the Sacrament, which dispensed with the Law and promised absolution from punishment for disobedience thereto of all who believed and participated in the Sacred Feasts. In fact, the chief feature of Paganism was participation in the Sacred Feasts, e.g.:

**”There was usually the meal of mystic foods – grains of all sorts at Eleusis, bread and water in the cult of Mithra, wine (Dionysus), milk and honey (Attis), raw bull’s flesh in the Orphic Dionysus-Zagreus cult.” [Paganism, in The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI]

**”The lectisternium [i.e. sacred meal] of Ceres will be on the next Ides, for the gods have couches; and that they may be able to lie on softer cushions, the pillows are shaken up when they have been pressed down.” [3d century AD, Against the Heathen , Book 7.32]

**”he was intercepted and killed,” and his murderers, “chopped his members up into pieces and…devoured them.” An event which his worshipers celebrate in “recurring sacred rites celebrated every two years,” in which, “They tear a live bull with their teeth, representing the cruel banquet [at which the God was eaten.]” [Firmicus Maternus, The Error of the Pagan Religions, Ch 6.2.] Firmicus Maternus was a Latin writer during reign of Constantine.

But Jesus demanded the fulfilment of the Law. The teachings of Jesus thus stood poles apart from Paganism, which summed up the religions of the Gentiles (non-Israeli people). Jesus really came to demolish it, but the coming generation of his followers, with the author of the Pauline literature at their head, who decidedly was not St. Paul but some Greek Father in the Church, succumbed to the wishes of the Gentiles, who hated the religion of the Law and its observance. Epicurean (happiness based upon materialism, e.g. involving an appreciation of fine food and drink) as many of the Gentiles were in all their ways, they could not abide by the strict laws of the Mosaic Dispensation, as Jesus exhorted his followers to do. They believed in a cult that cleansed them of all sin by simple belief. They followed a persuasion which gave them, as it were, a blank cheque on any bank of evil and indecency, while saving their skin from the punishment which would otherwise be incurred. They preferred to place all responsibility on the shoulders of another. Pagan ingenuity had grasped the situation and found the solution of the problem in the cult of mystery under which various virgins gave birth to gods who died on Good Fridays to relieve people from the burden of sin. Mithra, Apollo, Baal, Adonis, Horus, Osiris, Bacchus, Quetzacoatl, were the various incarnations of those virgin-born sun-gods. We read of Bacchus that sages approached Jupiter and solicited him to ward off the destruction that must fall on humanity in order to punish them for their sins. Jupiter promised to do so. He descended to the earth in a cloud which enveloped a virgin, who at once became pregnant of a god-child. The god-child was born on the 25th of December and received the name of Bacchus. Virgin birth was the pervasive theme of the day. Any discussion about religion could not proceed without a virgin birth:

**virgin birth from head of Zeus (aka Jupiter): “The devils…craftily feigned that Minerva was the daughter of Jupiter not by sexual union.” [Justin Martyr, First Apology, 64]

**virgin birth of Attis: “a daughter of the river Sangarius, they say, took of the fruit and laid it in her bosom, when it at once disappeared, but she was with child. A boy was born, and exposed, but was tended by a he-goat.” [Pausanias, Description of Greece 7.17.9-11]. Pausanias was 2nd century Greek traveler and geographer.

**virgin births of pagan Gods: “We [Christians] are not the only persons who have recourse to miraculous narratives of this kind [– of virgin birth of Jesus].” [Origen, Against Celsus 1, 37]. Origen was 2nd century Christian Alexandrian theologian.

Justin Martyr admits to the fact of virgin births before Christ whose virgin birth stands as the core doctrine of Christianity:

**virgin birth of Jesus: “He [– Jesus] was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you believe of Perseus”– son of Danae who was impregnated by Zeus [Justin Martyr, First Apology, 22]

When the new god, Bacchus, grew older he proclaimed that he had come to deliver humanity and redeem it from punishment through his blood. It was Bacchus [aka Dionysus], and not Jesus, who for the first time said that he was “the Alpha and the Omega of the world” and would give his life to regenerate the human race, of which he also said that he was the Redeemer and Deliverer. He died on Friday and rose again on Easter Sunday and ascended to heaven. There is only one point of difference between the pagan gods and Christ. While the other redeemers of humanity willingly went to suffer death for mankind, since they had come to earth for this very purpose, Jesus Christ wished to evade the cup which he had to drink. He did not want to be crucified and would have been absent from the scene at Calvary if he could have done so. But he was in the clutches of implacable foes and was forced to drink the cup to the dregs. He came to the Cross with a heart full of sorrow. As the Bible says : “Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death: tarry ye here and watch with me. And he went a little farther and fell on his face, and prayed, saying. O My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt” (Matthew 26:38-39). The italics [emphasis added] in the above show rather a forced consent than a willing one – a heart compelled to resign itself to fate, when no alternative is left, rather than a heart that welcomes the work which the Father has given him to finish. This alone is sufficient to falsify the supposed scheme of God to save the human race. As a matter of fact, no sooner had Jesus descended alive from the Cross and recovered than he left Judea for good.

Jesus Christ by “disappearing” at the very beginnings of his ministry when he was only thirty-three year of age could not have left behind the full spiritual and moral structure of a religion. No wonder, the burden was left on his followers to “fill in the blanks” of code, ethics and rituals to make a religion. Yes, they did it with their pagan beliefs and practices. They not only resurrected Jesus, but erected a new pagan creed not much different from the prevailing ones in the geography and cultures. Pagan mind attracts pagan beliefs, and mix that with strategic needs of Constantine, Christianity came to being. Soon thereafter, the altar priesthood transmuted into state power of papacy and full hierarchical superstructure of a religion with all its its trappings of supernaturals, brain washing under the threat of ostracizing and witch burnings got hold of not only the souls but also the bodies of its adherents. It was this symbiotic relationship of Chruch and State, that the next frontier of colonization and enslavement of the world went unchecked despite its amorality. Christianity persists in the midst of the masses not for its its truth, but the inherent needs of human mind that will lull into anything in the name of easy salvation from the unknown of the future which exists beyond horizon of life. Christianity is sold as an insurance without a policy behind it.

It is true that all the pagan deities were creatures of imagination, while Jesus was a real personality. But all we know of any man depends on the character which is his; otherwise all people, for practical purposes, are imaginary beings. It is a man’s character which gives him individuality. Millions and trillions of people come and go in each generation. They pass unnoticed, and no one remembers them after they have gone. They are taken as denizens of an imaginary world. But if they possess some distinctive character they are treated by the generations to come as actual men. Even persons created by the poetical imagination to personify the types of character have come to be regarded almost as real characters and receive more attention from us than do those who have actually existed. Ulysses, Macbeth, and Shylock, for instance, have become in a sense historic and have a greater claim to our notice than tens of thousands of Dicks, Toms, and Harrys of every time and clime. Character, then, is the factor which confers immortality on mortal men. As Jesus had been to, some extent clothed in the garb of mythology, his historical existence has been denied by many learned savants in the West. If we strip him of the garments filched from the pagan cupboard, he cannot claim to be an historical character. The same may be said of the Jesus of the Gospels, which are admittedly not genuine in origin. Muslims, however, are bound to accept him as a real entity because the Holy Qur’an speaks of him as a prophet; otherwise we see no reason why a Muslim should believe in his existence at all. Under these circumstances, we are bound to divest him of all pagan disguise and give him the character accorded to him by the Muslim scriptures. With any critical read, one cannot understand why we should revere Jesus as he is represented by the Church, when all that is told of him has been rightly traced to mythology.

The best that can be said of the matter is that the theory of Redemption, as taught by official Christianity, was very much to the taste of pagans, who would prefer to see their god carrying their sins and relieving them of the bother of being righteous. It is true that every man is an easygoing person. He wishes to be free from hardship and tries to get as much enjoyment out of life as possible without doing anything; while righteousness is uphill work. Man would not attempt it, as the Holy Qur’an says, if he could get the same result by going downhill (90:11). All dirty things are easily come by. It is not strange, therefore, if pagan ingenuity devised a scheme of redemption that helped a man to save his skin and dodge the hardship of righteousness. But God’s ways are unchangeable, and He has proposed a different method by which we are to achieve success and happiness in this life. It is not a soft bed for us to lie on, but a thorny path for us to tread, if we are to reach the goal. Every one of us must bear his own cross while no one bears the burden that is another’s. It is hard living that brings prosperity. This truth was revealed to us in the following mighty words of the Qur’an : “That no bearer of a burden shall bear the burden of another. And that man shall have nothing but what he strives for. And that his striving shall soon be seen. Then shall he be rewarded with the fullest reward” (53 . 3841). Again the Book says : “Whoever goes aright, for his own soul does he go aright; and whoever goes astray, to its detriment only does he go astray; nor can the bearer of a burden bear the burden of another” (17:15).

This statement is in accordance with the laws of Nature and strikes at the very root of the doctrine of Atonement which finds no parallel in the whole working of the Universe. This life of ours is admittedly of brief duration. If God has, been pleased to send hardships and trials as necessary concomitants to happiness and success, how could He allow happiness to be acquired by mere belief in salvation by the Blood of Christ, or by participation in the Sacrament?

When Al-Araby states, “Islam has to be known as more than a religion,” he must realize that his Christianity is not even a religion, but merely paganism in the garb of a religion. Next time if Al-Araby tries to lay exclusive claim to spirituality by uttering:

**“one God, in heaven, whose Son, born of a virgin, came to earth as a man, was baptized, performed miracles, established a holy meal for his followers, died, rose again on the third day for the salvation of mankind, remember the Pagan origin of each of these myths and rituals.”

All we will say to Al-Araby above is that his Christianity is nothing but a new car with old parts borrowed from pagan spirituality of the yore. We have heard it all before – Dionysus was identified with the lamb, and called King of Kings, Only Begotten Son, Savior, Redeemer, Sin bearer, Anointed One, the Alpha and Omega.

John Crossan brings to light the bigotry of the experts like Al-Araby:

**“Augustus came from a miraculous conception by the divine and human conjunction of [the God] Apollo and [his mother] Atia. How does the historian respond to that story? Are there any who take it literally?… That divergence raises an ethical problem for me. Either all such divine conceptions, from Alexander to Augusts and from the Christ to the Buddha, should be accepted literally and miraculously or all of them should be accepted metaphorically and theologically. It is not morally acceptable to say…our story is truth but yours is myth; ours is history but yours is a lie. It is even less morally acceptable to say that indirectly and covertly by manufacturing defensive or protective strategies that apply only to one’s own story.” [John Dominic Crossan, The Birth of Christianity, 1998, pg 28 – 29.]

Al-Araby will claim all the merit-less spirituality in the universe for his Christianity while denying it to others, Islam in particular, on the sole pretext – our story is truth but yours is myth; ours is history but yours is a lie.

As to what makes Islam an all encompassing religion, will be addressed by subsequent issues in this section of the documentary where it is trying to malign Islam, but all in vain.

References:
The body of above narrative is excerpted and adapted from – Islam and Christianity, by Khwaja Kamal-ud-din, p. 1-10.
All the **indented quotes are taken from various sections of – Pagan Origins of Christ Myth
Pauline Christianity – Wikipedia
Mithraic mysteries – Wikipedia
Dying-and-rising deity – Wikipedia
The Saviour-God and the Virgin-Mother – Pagan & Christian Creeds, Their Origin and Meanings – Edward Carpenter
The Mystery of the Pagan Origin of Christmas (Jesus was not born on December 25th, but a whole bunch of pagan Gods were) – Unexplained Mysteries of the World
How to be a “True Christian” – The Zephyr
The Myth and Ritual of Attis – Sir James Geroge Frazer
The Golden Bough – A Study in Magic and Religion – Sir James George Frazer
Dictionary of Phrase and Fable – E. Cobham Brewer
Easter Egg – Encyclopaedia Britannica
Easter Eggs – Dictionary of Phrase and Fable E. Cobham Brewer
Hot Cross Buns – Earth Witchery
Jesus Reincarnation Index – Near Death Experience
Jesus Christ in comparative mythology – Wikipedia
‘Jesus’ may be the name of a Pagan God – Yhvh.name
Some Pagan Items adopted by Christians – Seiyaku
Bassae – Wikipedia
Oracular Procedure – Wikipedia
Vestal Virgin – Wikipedia
Tonsure – Seiyaku
How the Godman is Made and Remade – From Apollo to Jesus Christ – Super-synthesis – Jesus Never Existed
Sun-Day Worship Terms – Assembly of True Israel
Sol Invictus – Wikipedia
Origins of our day name – Seiyaku
Solar deity – Wikipedia
Arch of Constantine – Wikipedia
Coins of Constantine – Wikipedia
Sacrament – Dictionary of Phrase and Fable E. Cobham Brewer
Tertullian – Wikipedia
Syncretism – Wikipedia
Kurios (Kyrios) – Wikipedia
Justin Martyr – Wikipedia
First Apology of Justin Martyr – Wikipedia
Solar Myths and Christian Festivals – Pagan & Christian Creeds, Their Origin and Meanings – Edward Carpenter
Lectisternium – Wikipedia
Julius Firmicus Maternus – Wikipedia
Gentiles – Wikipedia
Epicureanism – Wikipedia
Minerva – Wikipedia
Perseus – Wikipedia
Pausania (geographer) – Wikipedia
Origen – Wikipedia
Contra Celsum – Wikipedia
Dionysus – Wikipedia
John Dominic Crossan – Wikipedia

Issue 63 [@1:07:43]: Video clip of a TV broadcast is shown as prelude to the statement by Bat Ye’or:

CNN Anchor [Jim Clancy] – “Is what we are witnessing today is clash of civilizations? We ask that of a noted Palestinian scholar and professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University, Dr. Edward Said.”

Edward Said – “No, I don’t think so. I think the whole thesis is a bit of a false one. Because in the first place the civilizations are little packages that are completely detached from each other. They are all connected in one way or another. And, Western civilization has many elements of Islamic, Confucian, Latin American and others…”

Bat Ye’or, Author, Islam and Dhimmitude: “Where Civilizations Collide – The basis of and prophet of this new version of Islam as religion of peace and tolerance was Edward Said, who established in all universities and academia this Islamic version of peace. [Edward Said is shown without voice, continuing his argument above, essentially to imprint in the minds of the audience the face of Edward Said]. On this basis, the whole history of dhimmitude and jihad disappeared.”

Robert Spencer – “Edward Said who in his book Orientalism [Book cover of “Orientalism – Edward Said” is projected on the screen] posited that criticism of the Islamic world on the part of Westerners is racist and imperialist. It is spread in order to spread political points. [Photo of book projected, subtitled: Dr. Edward Said, Ph.D., 1935 – 2003]. To accustom Westerners, to the idea that Muslims are here to stay in the United States and that they must not be questioned in terms of their loyalty to the secular framework of the Western society, to the United States and Europe as well. That they must not be questioned in this despite Islam’s historical, political character because Islam is a religion of peace. And, this fiction has become so much entrenched in American public discourse as to be practically beyond question. Such, that anybody who does question it is immediately branded as racist, hatemonger, a bigot and this is a very effective tool in a country where racism is the cardinal sin above all to silence any effective debate of continuing attachment of Muslim immigrants to Shariah Law and their intentions towards secular systems that they now reside.”

Rebuttal 63: Islam is a religion of peace. Period! Anyone who thinks otherwise is grossly mistaken. A reader who has reached this far in the rebuttal of this documentary must have read enough of quotations from Quran, Sunnah, Hadith and history by now to judge for themselves that Islam literally and figuratively means peace within a person and the society, between individuals and nations, between races and cultures. Islam as a moral code brings peace between one’s soul and God by removing bigotry, rancor and hate. The purpose of Islam is to achieve peace:

89:27. (As for the person who has been blessed with a contented and peaceful mind He will say to him,) `O you soul at peace!

7:56. And do not create disorder in the land after the fair ordering thereof and call on Him with fear (of His displeasure) and with hope (of His mercy). Surely the mercy of Allâh is always close to the doers of good to others.[Nooruddin]

The current segment of the documentary, like rest of it, reeks of bigotry. An undated and non-contextualized interview of Edward Said is shown. Fundamental question is that while late Dr. Edward Said is making an argument, why is his argument cut short?

Audience can judge for themselves when Bat Ye’or states – “The basis of and prophet of this new version of Islam as religion of peace and tolerance was Edward Said, who established in all universities and academia this Islamic version of peace.” This one sentence gives away the whole facade of the documentary. Edward Said was an academic and intellectual, to dismay of Ye’or, a Jerusalem born and American raised. He was born to Protestant Christian parents, confirmed as Anglican and lived as a cosmopolitan secularist. His arguments for finding tolerance and peace in Islam are based upon analysis of a critical and fair mind which does not need label of a religion.

Before and now the documentary is taking a different tack of reverse psychology on its unwitting audience to evoke racial hatred against Muslims in the West in general and United States in particular . It tries to eject racial equality that West has taken centuries to achieve both in letter and spirit of its culture and its law and instead infuse a venomous distrust and doubts about Muslims in the minds. It also deliberately ignores the fact that a significant number of Muslims in America are native born and majority of them are non-Whites for whose rights Dr. Martin Luther King was martyred –

Reverse psychology is a technique involving the advocacy of a belief or behavior that is opposite to the one desired, with the expectation that this approach will encourage the subject of the persuasion to do what actually is desired: the opposite of what is suggested. This technique relies on the psychological phenomenon of reactance, in which a person has a negative emotional response in reaction to being persuaded, and thus chooses the option which is being advocated against.

Examples in Popular Culture – Classic examples of reverse psychology in popular culture include a large, bright red button with a sign next to it saying “do not push”, or a sign saying “jump at your own risk”, such as in the computer game Neverhood, where a large drain is accompanied by signs that say “Do not jump in!” and “You will die!”, although jumping in the pipe is the only way to achieve game over in the whole game without finishing it. [excerpt from Wikipedia]

As is obvious by the statements of its so called experts, the documentary also uses another trick and that is Pavlovian conditioning i.e. couple the terrorist acts in the world with Islam so much that next terrorist act automatically makes one think of Islam as the cause before any other reason could be found or even if the investigation proves otherwise –

Conditioning is usually done by pairing the two stimuli, as in Pavlov’s classic experiments. Pavlov presented dogs with a ringing bell (conditioned stimulus) followed by food (unconditioned stimulus). The food (unconditioned stimulus) elicited salivation (unconditioned response), and after repeated bell-food pairings the bell also caused the dogs to salivate (conditioned response). [Wikipedia]

Both the experts are lamenting, Ye’or for her invented history of dhimmitude and jihad disappearing in face of facts and logic and Spencer for why is it ineffective and not okay to cast Muslims in America through the lens of racial hate and prejudice. Whether it is through the efforts of late Dr. Edward Said or others, the fact is that:

34:48. Say: Surely my Lord casts the Truth, the great Knower of the unseen.
34:49. Say: The Truth has come, and falsehood neither originates, nor reproduces.

Robert Spencer, Bat Ye’or, Serge Trifkovic, Abdullah Al-Araby, Walid Shoebat and the producers of the documentary must be wondering as to why their deceit does not work in the long run. Answer is in Quran:

21:18. Indeed, We hurl the Truth against falsehood, so it knocks out its brains, and lo! it vanishes. And woe to you for what you describe! [Muhammad Ali, ed. Zahid Aziz]

This concludes the section of the documentary focused on “Deceit” (Issues 53 to the present Issue 63). While falsely trying to inject deceit attributed to Islam into the minds of the audience, the documentary itself has factually relied on deceit as its main weapon. Obviously they have taken a page out modus operandi of intelligence agencies – “By Way Of Deception, Thou Shalt Do War.” – Proverb 24:6, a translation by Victor Ostrosky. [Wikipedia]

References:

Edward Said – Wikipedia
Edward Said: Secular Protestant – Books & Culture, a Christian Review
Reverse Psychology – Wikipedia
Classical Conditioning – Wikipedia
‘By Way of Deception’ by Victor Ostrosky – Wikipedia
Holy Quran – Nooruddin
Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Zahid Aziz

According to the website www.moonsighting.com the declaration in court in Saudi Arabia that the new moon had been sighted there on Thursday evening (19th July) and thus the 1st of Ramadan would be on Friday 20th July is mistaken.

According to the website, it would have been impossible to see the new moon almost anywhere in the world (and certainly in Saudi Arabia) on 19th July. It says:

“Seen (Saudi Announcement): Mrs. Lubna Shawly (MCW member) from Jiddah reported: It is announced in the Saudi courts, according to the observation of the new moon (moon is sighted in areas of Sudair & Shagra), and that the first day of Ramadan for the year 1433 Hijrah will be on Friday the 20th of July 2012. Moonsighting.com opinion is that this is a mistaken claim of sighting.” (See link. Here scroll down to Saudi Arabia under Sighting reports)

The actual Saudi announcement is quoted as follows:

“The Supreme Court of Saudi Arabia held a meeting in Taif this evening on Thursday the twenty-ninth of Shaaban 1433 AH, for the new moon of Ramadan of 1433 AH. The new moon of Ramadan 1433 AH is proven in the Supreme Court this evening on Thursday the twenty-ninth of the month of Shaaban, corresponding to July 19, 2012, by the testimony of several witnesses, and as true that the Prophet, peace be upon him, he said: (Fast when you see it and stop fasting when you see it), so tomorrow, Friday, to July 20, 2012, is the 1st of Ramadan of 1433 AH.”

Issue 62 [@1:04:48]: Walid Shoebat, Author, Why I Left Jihad – “When I used to be work as translator at Loop College in Chicago the fund raising for Jihad movements for the PA, PLO at that times, we would do the translations for the announcements, or the flyers that we handout or put on the walls of the college. I remember the Arabic would be basically the facts. ‘Bring you friends, we are intending to raise funds to support our Jihad brothers in Lebanon who are fighting against Israel and what ever’ and then comes the English part. In the English part will be standard ‘We will be conducting Middle Eastern cultural party. You are welcome. We will be serving lamb and baklava.’ So the West does not understand as we get together as a group, our conversations are different. As soon as the Western would come into the scene then the whole conversation changes. It becomes parable to the Western mind. When I used to go to work, lets say during the Gulf War, used to go to work for an American company, everybody will be hovering around the TV set. As soon as there is a scud missile hitting Riyadh or something like that, everybody will be distraught, unhappy when the Scud lands in the American camp. And, I will be standing there amongst the American employees [and say] ‘Its too bad…that’s too bad, I am sorry there is loss of life.’ And, out of frustration from having to keep the truth of what I really felt, I would draw down the window [of the car] on the freeway when I am going home and scream as loud as I can ‘Allah-o-Akbar’– Allah is Great. Allah-o-Akbar. Because this is the chantation you do when the enemy is killed, when you win. So, if it was a victorious day for the Iraqis, when they landed a Scud missile, then it would be Allah-o-Akbar on the freeway and no body can hear me now. And when I went to my apartment, home, rest of the apartment were also Arabs from the Middle East. We would get together in my apartment, watch the Gulf War, and we would be praising Allah every time there was some incidence where the Americans got killed. But, it wasn’t the same face that we put on when we were in American environment. In American environment you play different scenario. You acted as you were on their side. So this whole facade, that is hidden from the West of how Muslim fundamentalists want to propagate Jihad in America, can act publicly.”

Rebuttal 62: Sorry Mr. Shoebat, your past does not represent Muslims in the world and neither you are the ‘insider’ to Muslims in America. You only confessed your own mind. If anyone thinks like you is sadly mistaken. With your track record in United States, some might even say that you are even damaging to Christianity.

Truth does not remain hidden for long. Thank you Mr. Shoebat for self-exposing the rancor that you hide, before which was for Israelis, subsequently for Americans who gave you the opportunity to live in freedom and finally for the Palestinians that you are from. You fully well knew that in the first Persian Gulf war it was an Arab country that was occupied by another Arab country. It were the Arab countries that lined up against the tyrant of Baghdad. But, you chose to root for that tyrant and not for a moment you had any remorse that it was the same tyrant who killed his own people, suppressed minority Shites, gassed Kurd civilians and in due course would pay cash rewards to the suicide bombers to blow up innocent citizens in Israel, that you claim that you once did yourself (Issue 39b). By above statement, you only told the world that you are not to be trusted, irrespective of whether you are a Palestinian or an American, Muslim or a Christian. Now it is America’s turn which is being duped by you [Wikipedia]. Once again, Mr. Shoebat thank you for giving us a case study and a living example of what bigotry means in your own person. Not for a moment you realized that there were Muslim-Americans who were fighting a tyranny, but you chose a tyrant over anything which is directly against the teaching of Islam that you claim you professed then. Should it be Islam or you who should be on trial in court of public opinion and in a moral court? It is hypocrites like Mr. Shoebat that Quran identifies from their attributes:

9:67. The hypocrites, men and women, are all alike. They enjoin evil and forbid good and withhold their hands [– from charity].

Interestingly, the attribute withhold their hands is obvious from this excerpt of Jerusalem Post – “And the Walid Shoebat Foundation’s working process is less than transparent, with Shoebat’s claim that it is registered as a charity in the state of Pennsylvania being denied by the Pennsylvania State Attorney’s Office”.

By his confession above, it logically seems that Mr. Shoebat found embedded in his own instincts “Taqqiya” and it cannot be excluded that it was his this ‘deceit’ which naturally gravitated him to the Taqqiya of Paul that he finally adopted – Romans 3 (New International Version): 5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? No wonder, he is now an expert on the documentary under discussion.

References:

Skeptics challenge life stories offered by high-profile Muslim converts to Christianity – Washington Post
Walid Shoebat – Criticism and Allegations of Fraud – Wikipedia
The Palestinian ‘terrorist’ turned Zionist – Jerusalem Post
Bible – New International Version – BibleGateway.com
Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Zahid Aziz

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

Consumer Guide to God

In my hand I hold the first copy of book:

Consumer Guide to God

A Muslim Perspective

In Light of The Qur’an

By: M. Ikram Jahangiri, M.D.

To get an idea of what author has written, please read the back cover of book given below. I will put my two cents in. Author has given about one thousand references. He extensively took help from Lahore Ahmadiyya Movment Literature. All the way from works of Maulana Noor ud Din to Dr. Zahid Aziz. The author has made it very easy for me to judge any claimant of Divine Appointment i.e. Mujadid. As I don’t expect to live by any stretch of imagination and wishes into 16th Islamic century; so in this century I will judge claimant of Divine Appointment or Mujadid of 15th Islamic century. Any Mujadid to prove his credentials has to write book better than this one. (Unless Ikram Jahangiri, himself decides to make claim of new Mujadid… Just kidding).

From the back cover:

Whether you live in East or West, this book will forever change how you think about Islam. Some may be shocked to realize that the core progressive values of the West are reflections of Qur’ânic edicts of justice, human rights, environmentalism, gender and racial equality, edicts now derogatorily known in the West as Shariah – the Islamic Law. Unfortunately, the rigid interpretation of Qur’ân has inadvertently turned its advocates into their own worst enemies as well as the enemies of others.

Some may be offended to know that Qur’ân supports Darwin’s theory of evolution and not that Adam was the first human. There is no incongruity between Qur’ân and science. The Devil is no more than the human himself; the devilish thoughts and satanic acts. Others may object that the Jews, Christians, Hin-dus, Buddhists, atheists all have equal rights with Muslims to qualify for the Qur’ânic heaven. Fatwas, as popularly known, have no basis in Qur’ân. Fatwa mongers and Fatwa followers are equally ridiculed. In Qur’ân there is no physical hell or heaven, much less seventy virgins. Jihad by sword is a corrupted concept. There is no validation of Veil. Deprivation of women’s freedom is a product of depraved and extremist culture, not Qur’ân. In Qur’ân there is no “Muslim God,” only the “God of Mankind.” If Muslims and non-Muslims view each other through the lens of Qur’ân, they might be surprised to see none but children of a ‘no lesser god’ on the other end. This book does not tweak the Qur’ân to make it palatable to a modernist, because Qur’ân itself is more modern than many of us think. There are no apologies in this book for Qur’ân. – Excerpt from the Preface.

The God that an author is writing about, a speaker is debating for, a preacher is proselytizing, that God in all such discourses must appear more intelligent than the advocates themselves; otherwise one cannot exclude the possibility that the God being discussed is an outcome of one’s own fancies, wishes, and formulations. The key to discussing God is to let God speak for Himself, as seen through His own words in His Books or through a living experience of Him by someone amongst us. This approach shifts the burden from man to God Himself. – M. Ikram Jahangiri.

Issue 61 [@1:04:35]: Slide projected with voice – Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 7, Bk. 67, Hadith 427 – The Prophet said “By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else that is better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.”

Rebuttal 61: Even though the above is a non-contextual excerpt of a Hadith, still it carries the sensibilities of an intelligent and honest mind, which is open to improvement of self and seeking better solutions with passage of time and availability of resources. A prophet is not a programmed robot with no human side to improve. There is no element of deceit in above words, unless it is forcibly skewed for a jaded and out of context “gold diggers” of this documentary.

The full Hadith is as follows:

Volume 7, Book 67, Number 427: Narrated Zahdam:

We were in the company of Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari and there were friendly relations between us and this tribe of Jarm. Abu Musa was presented with a dish containing chicken. Among the people there was sitting a red-faced man who did not come near the food. Abu Musa said (to him), “Come on (and eat), for I have seen Allah’s Apostle eating of it (i.e. chicken).” He said, “I have seen it eating something (dirty) and since then I have disliked it, and have taken an oath that I shall not eat it ‘ …

[Note: this was an apparent oath of the gentleman not to eat chicken based upon a fickle experience. He is thus corrected by Abu Musa by the following narrative]

…Abu Musa said, “Come on, I will tell you (or narrate to you). Once I went to Allah s Apostle with a group of Al-Ash’ariyin, and met him while he was angry, distributing some camels of Rakat. We asked for mounts but he took an oath that he would not give us any mounts, and added, ‘I have nothing to mount you on’ In the meantime some camels of booty were brought to Allah’s Apostle and he asked twice, ‘Where are Al-Ash’ariyin?” So he gave us five white camels with big humps. We stayed for a short while (after we had covered a little distance), and then I said to my companions, “Allah’s Apostle has forgotten his oath. By Allah, if we do not remind Allah’s Apostle of his oath, we will never be successful.” So we returned to the Prophet and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! We asked you for mounts, but you took an oath that you would not give us any mounts; we think that you have forgotten your oath.’ He said, ‘It is Allah Who has given you mounts. By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.’ ”

The context of above Hadith is fully explained by Muhammad Ali in his book on Hadiths – Fazl-ul-Bari under Hadith number 3133 [in urdu, p. 1238 – pdf link], where he contextualizes the events at the time of preparations for Ghazwa-e-Tabuk when the Prophet was asked but could not provide a ride for the volunteers who wanted to join the expedition that was destined for Tabuk about 800 miles north of Medina during sweltering summer heat. Initially the Prophet refused because of non-availability of beasts (camels or horses), but when they were available, he provided them to the volunteers who were seeking them. Thus the Hadith is true to its letter and spirit – “By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else better than that. then I do what is better and expiate my oath.’ Muhammad Ali draws attention to the following verses of Quran, 9:92 in particular to the context of the above Hadith:

9:90. And the defaulters [-hypocrites] from among the dwellers of the desert came that permission might be given to them, and they sat (at home) who lied to Allah and His Messenger. A painful punishment will afflict those of them who disbelieve.

9:91. No blame lies on the weak, nor on the sick, nor on those who can find nothing to spend, if they are sincere to Allah and His Messenger. There is no way (to blame) against the doers of good. And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful —

9:92. nor on those to whom, when they came to you that you should carry them, you said: I cannot find anything on which to carry you.

[Footnote] What they wanted in order to join the expedition, and what the Holy Prophet could not find for them, were beasts on which they should be carried, along with their provisions and necessaries. See also 19:27 footnote 1[appended below].

19:27 Then she came to her people with him, carrying him [-Jesus].

The conversation in v. 27–33 is alone sufficient to make it clear that this incident relates to a time when Jesus had grown up sufficiently to have been appointed a prophet and to have received Divine revelation. The Quran does not relate stories in all their details, and often omits a number of incidents which are not needed for its purpose. For instance, v. 11 relates only Zacharias’ receiving the joyful news of a son, while v. 12 asks that son to take hold of the Book with strength. Jesus could only say that he was made a prophet when he was actually entrusted with the mission of a prophet, and not before. Moreover, it is unreasonable to suppose that, as soon as Mary gave birth to the child, she took it to her people to make a show of it. The word carrying does not show that she was carrying him in her arms; it means that he was being carried on an animal. Compare 9:92, where some of the companions are spoken of as coming to the Prophet that he might carry them, and he is related as replying that he did not have that on which to carry them, i.e. animals. Compare Matthew 21:1–7 where the story is related of Jesus entering Jerusalem riding an ass, or an ass and a colt [Emphasis added].

They said: Mary, you have indeed brought a strange thing!

The reference in Mary’s bringing a strange thing may be to her having given birth to a son who claimed greater authority than the elders of Israel, with a deeper hint to the calumny against her, for which see 4:156. In his reply Jesus does not make a single reference to the circumstances of his birth. Hence the inference is quite reasonable that the question was directed against the mission of Jesus and not against the circumstances of his birth.

They [–Abu Musa and Al-Ash’ariyin mentioned in Hadith above] went back, their eyes overflowing with tears of grief that they could not find anything to spend.

9:93. The way (to blame) is only against those who ask permission of you, though they are rich. They have chosen to be with those who remained behind; and Allah has sealed their hearts, so they do not know.

The discussion so far tells us is that nothing vain should prevent an act of goodness. For example:

2:224. And do not make Allah by your oaths a hindrance to your doing good and keeping your duty and making peace between people.

[Footnote] This verse refers to the pre-Islamic Arab custom of ila’, a way of temporarily putting off the wife which was effected by an oath in Allah’s name not to have sexual relations with her. The result of this was that the husband considered himself free from all marital obligations. The first step to bring about a reform in the relations of husband and wife was that this practice was abolished. It is in reference to this that the taking of oaths against the doing of good to others is prohibited. The fulfilment of marital obligations is thus referred to as the doing of good and observance of duty and making peace between people. But the subject is generalized and the taking of all oaths to forbid oneself the doing of good or fulfilment of obligations is prohibited. See also 66:2 footnote.

And Allah is Hearing, Knowing.

2:225. Allah will not call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, but He will call you to account for what your hearts have earned.

[Footnote] By vain oaths are meant unintentional or thoughtless oaths in ordinary conversation, and by what the hearts have earned is meant an oath intentionally taken.

And Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing.

2:226. Those who swear that they will not have sexual relations with their wives should wait four months;

[Footnote] Ila’ signifies an oath by a man that he shall not approach his wife. In pre-Islamic times the Arabs used to take such oaths frequently, and as the period of suspension was not limited, the wife was compelled sometimes to pass her whole life having neither the position of a wife nor that of a divorced woman free to marry elsewhere. The Quran declares that if the husband does not reassert conjugal relations within four months, the wife shall be divorced. Cases in which husbands desert wives, having neither conjugal relations with them nor divorcing them, must be dealt with practically as amounting to Ila’, so that after four months the wife should be free if she wants a divorce.

then if they go back, Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

In another place, Quran challenges one’s vain oaths:

5:87. O you who believe, do not forbid the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, nor exceed the limits. Surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.

Muslims are told on the one hand not to follow the self-imposed restrictions of Christian monks and priests, and at the same time they are warned against depriving themselves of Divine blessings by falling into evil habits.

5:88. And eat of the lawful and good (things) that Allah has given you, and keep your duty to Allah, in Whom you believe.

5:89. Allah will not call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, but He will call you to account for the making of deliberate oaths; so its expiation

The oaths referred to are in relation to vows, etc., by which one forbids oneself what is otherwise lawful. The injunction at the end of this verse, keep your oaths, also shows that oaths cannot be violated generally, and therefore expiation is only allowed in the case of oaths by which a person deprives himself of some lawful thing or of an occasion of virtue, as in 2:226.

is the feeding of ten poor persons with the average (food) you feed your families with, or their clothing, or the freeing of a slave. But whoever does not find (means) should fast for three days. This is the expiation of your oaths when you swear. And keep your oaths. Thus does Allah make clear to you His messages that you may give thanks.

Now that the full context of Hadith has come to light which is far removed from the malice of insinuated deceit by the documentary, will the experts of the documentary have the moral courage to accept their wrong and correct themselves by stating – “By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else that is better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath”?

References:

Note: [text enclosed in square brackets above is not part of the original quoted sources]
Translation of Sahih Bukhari – Muhsin Khan
Fazlul Bari – Urdu Translation of Sahih Bukhari – Muhammad Ali,
Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Dr. Zahid Aziz.

Rizwan Jamil writes:

Dear Dr. Zahid!

I want to ask you a question regarding Jesus’s (PBUH) death. Can you please open a new thread with this topic?

Thanks!

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri

My two reasons for writing blog on him.

1-Nasir Ahmad Sultani on his website has his speech in which he mentioned my name in a negative sense. He also negatively mentioned names of Dr. Zahid Aziz, Dr. Noman Malik, Mrs. Samina Malik, Shahid Aziz, and Amir Aziz. Link is provided at the bottom of this blog.

2-I receive emails from his naïve followers promoting Nasir Ahmad Sultani claim of Mujjadid of 15th Islamic century, at the same time avoiding my probing questions about their “Mujjadid”.

Nasir Ahmad Sultani has been member of Qadiani Cult until last couple of years. On his website he has posted his photos graduating from Qadiani Murrabi (missionary) School in Rabwah and with other elders of Qadianis. He has also posted photos in which he has stethoscope resting around his neck. From photos he creates impression as if he is medical doctor such as M.B.B.S. (i.e. Physician of modern western evidence based medicine). He falsely gives impression that he can identify cardiac murmurs and arrhythmias with tubes hanging around his neck.

Professor Dr. Munir ud Din Ahmad, Ph.D is professor of Oriental Sciences, based in Hamburg Germany. He is former Qadiani. He was Waqaf-e-Zindghi, missionary to Germany and graduate of Qadiani Murrabi School in Rabwah. The same Murrabi School from which Nasir Ahmad Sultani is proud of graduating. Dr. Munir ud Din Ahmad has written his autobiography in Urdu language. Title of his book is ‘Dhaltay Syae’. In his book he has given details of life of student days and of culture of Qadiani Murrabi School and its Hostel of young male students. He has even given names of elders of today’s Qadianis. Picture he has sketched is of Qadiani Murrabis drenched in immorality. I only mentioned this detail here because Nasir Ahmad Sultani has made claim of divine appointment. Otherwise Allah SWT is Sattar and He covers weaknesses of his imperfect, sinner and weak servants.

In my curiosity to find out about the new claimant of “divine appointment” Nasir Ahmad Sultani, I inquired about any scholarly works on Islam he has published. I consider it a fair question, as I don’t live in his neighborhood, and on the other hand he is trying to reach people including myself across the world through modern means of communication. In reply his NAÏVE FOLLOWERS reply, “Did Holy Prophet Muhmmad SAWS wrote book before he made his claim of messenger-hood?” (Nasir Ahmad Sultani is lucky that he is in Sri Lanka seeking political asylum otherwise some Pakistani Mullah would have made him history for equating himself to Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS).

Following tradition of Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS, when it is demanded he should put his personal character for scrutiny, I get reply from Nasir Ahmad Sultani’s NAÏVE FOLLOWER, “your mind is preoccupied”.

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib had many opponents. The leader of their opponent was Maulvi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi of Alh-e-Hadith. He was to HMGA what Abu Jahl was to Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS. Muhammad Hussain Batalvi was arch enemy of HMGA, but even he testified the superb moral character of HMGA. Actually HMGA use to refer to him when presenting his character.

Now question for Nasir Ahmad Sultani and his NAÏVE FOLLOWERS:

Can any current PROMINENT Qadiani who has spent considerable numbers of years in RABWAH MURRABI SCHOOL HOSTEL with Nasir Ahmad Sultani testify on his character??? Can Nasir Ahmad Sultani refer to such a person???

Link to Nasir ahmad Sultani’s audio/video clip. Please listen at 12 minutes.

Zulqarnain: Was Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad the Mujaddid of the 14th and 15th Century Hijrah?

http://al-ahmadiyyat.com/official/video-gallery/

Issue 60 [@1:04:01]: Serge Trifkovic, Foreign Affairs Editor, Chronicles Magazine – “The spokesman for Islam in the Western world knows how to play the game. They know how to present their cause that is not only regarded acceptable by the societal mainstream, but also reasonable and one might say as just. They will appeal to democratic institutions and their human rights in the full knowledge that given the power to do so they will abolish those institutions and deny those rights to others.”

Rebuttal 60: It is quite shameful of Trifkovic to question patriotism of American Muslims (Issue 59). On the contrary, Muslims dwell as good and productive citizens and have a track record to prove both their patriotism and their good citizenship:

There are 8 million American Muslims
67% of American Muslims have a Bachelor’s degree or higher,
U.S. Average income is $42,158 per year (U.S. Census 2000)
66% of American Muslim House Hold’s (HH’s) earn over $50,000 / year
26% of American Muslim HH’s earn over $100,000 / year
1 in 10 Muslim HH’s has a doctor and 1 in 9 (approx) has an engineer.
See this link for more Muslim statistics: http://www.allied-media.com/AM/

“Gallup Poll: Most Muslim-Americans Loyal to US” (NewsMax – Tuesday, 02 Aug 2011)

With the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks approaching, 93 percent of Muslim Americans say they are loyal to the United States. The view of Muslim loyalty is shared by a majority of the major religious groups in the United States, a new poll examining Muslim attitudes has found.

Contrary to the efforts of the documentary, and sorry Mr. Trifkovic, the same survey found:

The poll, conducted by a Gallup-affiliated research group, found that 80 percent of Jews believed Muslim Americans were loyal, a view shared by 59 percent of Catholics and 56 percent of Protestants. It also found that Muslim and Jewish Americans had similar views on the Mideast and al-Qaeda.

Muslim Americans are also the least likely major religious group to say there is ever a justification for individuals or small groups to attack civilians. Roughly 1 in 10 Muslim Americans say such attacks are sometimes justified. “In every other major religious group except Mormons, the proportion of people who say such attacks are sometimes justified is at least twice that.”

“Jewish Americans are also among the least likely religious groups to believe that Muslim Americans sympathize with al-Qaida. Seventy percent of Jewish Americans say they do not believe Muslim Americans feel this way. The only religious group more certain that Muslim Americans do not sympathize with al-Qaida is Muslim Americans themselves, at 92%.”

With the above survey data and the decade since 9/11, it becomes obvious and using Trifkovics’s own words – “The spokesman for anti-Islam in the Western world knows how to play the game. They know how to present their cause that is not only regarded acceptable by the societal mainstream, but also reasonable and one might say as just. They will appeal to democratic institutions and their human rights in the full knowledge that given the power to do so they will abolish those institutions and deny those rights to others.” Of note is that it only needed a decade and addition of one word “anti” and the whole statement of Trifkovic fits himself fairly and squarely. He and his peers of the documentary saw the opportunity and tried to create another Japanese-American internment for American Muslims but failed.

References:

Muslim American Market – Allied Media Corp.
Gallup Poll: Most Muslim-Americans Loyal to US – NewsMax
Japanese American internment – Wikipedia