The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Muslim countries seek ban on blasphemy

Submitted by Ikram.

http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=ODQ3MDk2NzMz

Excerpt: “..reformists who reinterpret traditional Islamic texts have also become the target of blasphemy accusations.” … “Religions as such do not have rights _ it’s people who have rights,”

Personally, I believe Muhammad PBUH as a figure in history does not need any such laws. He did not need them during his lifetime or even now. Muhammad is not Islam, but he is a Muslim, though a very important one. For secularists and opponents of Islam, it is difficult to criticize a non-tangible Allah, but Muhammad as a human is an easy target whom they choose to vent upon. But such a criticism is a blessing for Islam as it opens up discussions about Muhammad, about Islam then and now, sets up Jesus of Bible for equal analyses and mythology of Christianity for review – all possible only under free speech.

In the end who benefits from such discussion under free speech? Only and only Islam and Muhammad. It is only Mullah mentality that is scared of blasphemy as they practice a life of polytheism where they worship their religion and religious relics whether human or non-human. Ideas and revival mean nothing to them.

Wikipedia: “The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History” – 1. Muhammad – The central human figure of Islam, regarded by Muslims as the messenger and last prophet of God. Active as a social reformer, diplomat, merchant, philosopher, orator, legislator, and military leader.

Of course Muhammad was just not a “Holy man” but also as a social reformer, diplomat, merchant, philosopher, orator, legislator, and military leader. Such an active role and his performance will generate criticism. Muslims should welcome any such criticism. Any discussion about him only strengthens Muhammad and Islam.

Islamic (?) Republic of Pakistan

Submitted by Ikram.

“MQM backs ANP proposal to change Pakistan name” from Islamic Republic
to People’s Republic.

www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?221523

I am for the change for the mere fact that for over sixty years, the
literal implementation of “Islamic Republic …” has been anything but
Islamic.

Evolution

“LA” has asked:

“I would like to know your movement’s view on Evolution.”

We believe that each person should be free to reach his own conclusion. How life originated and how human beings came into their present form does not affect the conduct of our lives in any way. There have been Muslim scholars from centuries ago who held that Adam was not the first man. The view that a human being in the present form was suddenly created cannot be conclusively established from the Quran. There are passages in the Quran on the basis of which you can argue that life evolved.

The Quran says (29:20): “Say: Travel in the earth then see how He makes the first creation, then Allah creates the latter creation.”

It would seem that Charles Darwin did just this. He travelled in the earth, trying to learn how the “first creation” and the “latter creation” were created.

– Zahid Aziz

Did Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad create dissension?

Submitted by Omar.

Excerpts taken from Maulana Muhammad Ali’s book The Promised Messiah (English Rendering by Sheikh Muhammad Tufail Sahib)

[All bold emphasis mine]

1. Assessing the truth of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s mission:

There are many people who are bent on opposing Mirza Ghulam Ahmad without thinking of, or understanding the true nature of his mission. They never take the time to ponder whether he was beneficial or not to the cause of Islam and Muslims in general. Remember well, that the question of good and bad is a question of actual facts and not one of religious beliefs and opinions. At the moment, I do not want to discuss what the claims of Hazrat Mirza are and whether they are in any way opposed to the beliefs of the Ahl-i Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah. This question can only be raised when there exists a doubt about it. When he has declared not only once, but scores of times that his beliefs are the same as the beliefs of the Ahl-i Sunnah, the question of discussing these beliefs does not arise. Thus the point at issue is only whether Hazrat Mirza has been harmful or beneficial to the cause of Islam and the Muslim world.

2. He did not create dissension among Muslims:

In what ways has he been harmful? The greatest charge attributed to him is that he has damaged the solidarity of Islam by creating a new sect. This is even asserted by intelligent Muslims, but they never take the trouble to look into the facts. Did unity among Muslims exist before him? The fact is that Muslims were fighting against one another over things of minor importance, thus sundering and disrupting the unity of Islam. The condition in India was such that cases of quarrels over the saying of Amin in a loud or low voice were brought before the High Court. Pronouncing one another as unbelievers (kafir) was the main occupation of the Muslim `ulama. Where was the unity of Islam which was damaged by Hazrat Mirza? Perhaps somebody can lay the charge that with the appearance of Hazrat Mirza on the scene, the differences among Muslims were further augmented. If he had, in fact, drawn the attention of his followers to the trivial matters over which Muslims were already fighting, then, this new sect or new Movement should undoubtedly be blamed for expanding the dissension among Muslims. But in spite of this, a storm of opposition was raised against the claims of Hazrat Mirza and pronouncements of heresy were issued against him and a lot of his time was wasted in clarifying his position. Still, he turned the greater part of the activities of his followers towards defending and propagating the message of Islam in India and abroad. He wished the ulama were patient with him for some time and see whether his mission was for the good of Islam or not, and if it damaged the interest of Islam, they would have been justified in their campaign against him, but no one really listened to him. In spite of all that, he produced valuable literature about Christianity and the Arya Samaj – and this was extensively used even by his opponents for the defence of Islam against the powerful onslaughts of the Christians and the Arya Samajists.

Another contemporary movement among the Muslims which came into existence at the same time was that of the Ahl-i Quran (People of the Quran). As this movement was not based on the Quranic verse, He sends down angels with revelation by His command on whom He pleases of His servants (16:2), therefore all its energy was spent on the minor internal problems in which Muslims were already deeply engrossed. If it is said that this movement of the Ahl-i Quran, in fact, increased the existing dissension among Muslims, it would be nearer to the truth. But a movement which was particularly made the target of attacks by the ulama of Islam and did their best to destroy it completely, was a movement which, in fact, became the source of strengthening the cause of Islam. Instead of entangling itself in internal skirmishes, it stood in defence of Islam against its external foes. To say that this Movement has enlarged the gulf of dissension among Muslims is to close one’s eyes to relevant facts. The day all Muslim sects unite against the foes of Islam and spend their time and energy in the defence and propagation of Islam, as Ahmadis have done, dissension in Islam will disappear. Hazrat Mirza revived the principle that if there are ninety-nine signs of disbelief (kufr) in a person and only one indication of Islam, that person should still be considered a Muslim. This has laid down a solid foundation for the unity of Islam. If this principle is accepted by Muslims, it will have far-reaching effects on them and will give back to them their lost power and glory.

Some people, by neglecting the distinction between sectarianism and difference of opinion, regard all differences of opinion as an attempt at creating disharmony and discord in Islam. The Quran says:

As for those who split up their religion and became sects, thou hast no concern with them (6:160).

The meaning of splitting up the unity of religion and becoming divided into sects is obvious, but some people have a wrong understanding of this verse. It does not and could not mean that Muslims should not differ with one another in any respect. It was, however, not surprising to find differences of opinion in a nation that was spread all over the world. The Holy Prophet had declared difference of opinion to be a mercy for his ummah, which shows that in difference is also hidden the secret of the progress of the ummah. Difference only comes into existence by the expression of an opinion which in turn helps to clarify and improve the intellectual and mental faculties of a person. Islam advocates unity, but unity in the principles of religion. In other matters in Islam, there is wide scope for differences. Becoming divided into sects and having differences of opinion are not one and the same thing. Sectarianism is a curse but difference of opinion is a blessing. The companions of the Holy Prophet themselves differed on certain questions although the Quran was revealed in their presence, and the words of the Holy Prophet reached their ears and they were direct recipients of spiritual blessings from him.

3. What is Sectarianism?:

The Kharijites [1] were the first who were responsible for the creation of sects in Islam. There have been reports in which it has clearly been mentioned about them that they shattered the solidarity of Muslims, not because they differed with the companions of the Holy Prophet on some matters, for difference existed among the companions also, but because it was they who started takfir (pronouncement of unbelief) among Muslims. At that time, Hazrat `Ali and Hazrat Mu’awiyah were engaged in a battle. The Kharijites sided with `Ali but they demanded that `Ali should declare Mu’awiyah and his collaborators kafirs (unbelievers) and outside the pale of Islam. Hazrat `Ali refused to do so and clearly said:

“They are also our brothers who have revolted against us; we do not declare them unbelievers or transgressors (fasiqs).

If some thought is given to the verses of the Quran on this point, it would be clear that Muslims have been forbidden from two things; these are, from becoming divided into sects and from splitting up the religion. Both of these are the result of takfir. Any group that declares the other to be kafir (perhaps that group is greater in number and calls itself the greatest group among Muslims), when it indulges in the takfir of the professors in the Kalimah (there is but One God and Muhammad is His Messenger), has indeed created divisions in the ranks of Islam and has destroyed the basis on which Muslims could unite. When the essence of religion is confined to a few problems in which one group differs with the other, and the principles of faith are completely neglected, this is how the religion is split. The result is that all one’s energy is wasted on matters of peripheral importance. The parties are so engaged in such trivial differences that nobody cares whether the foundation of faith itself is being destroyed. The basis of sectarianism is, therefore, the pronouncement of unbelief (takfir) against Muslims. The sad aspect of the story is that when people start condemning one another over minor differences, the strength of the nation becomes weak. Power which ought to have been used for the progress of Islam is frittered away in trying to decry one another.

When the Quran laid the great foundation of Islamic brotherhood and stated: Innamal mu’minuna ikhwatun (Verily the believers are brethren – 49:10), it did not overlook the possibility of the rise of honest differences among Muslims. At the same place it was pointed out that if two parties of the believers quarrel, make peace between them (49:9). Now, both the contending parties have been considered believers here. This is the lesson which Muslims have forgotten today. The tolerance which Muslims were expected to show towards the followers of other religions should have been observed to a greater extent among themselves. They ought to have learnt to respect the ideas of others and to tolerate differences of opinion among themselves. But their present condition is such that the moment a person differs from them on any point he is immediately declared to be an unbeliever and a heretic. To torture and molest him in all possible ways is regarded as a deed of great virtue. The main problem is not that among Muslims there are people who differ in their opinions, which is, however, one of the essential requisites for the progress of Islam, but that Muslims cannot tolerate honest difference of opinion. On the other hand, the companions of the Holy Prophet showed great broadmindedness regarding the diversity of views among themselves.

If, however, a people differ with other people on some matters and they prefer a different opinion, this cannot be called sectarianism. When on account of this difference, one brother Muslim is declared an unbeliever and is subjected to persecution, which is mistakenly thought to be a meritorious deed and a source of great reward (thawab), it is then that the evils of sectarianism take root in a society. A person is not guilty of sectarianism when, having complete faith in the Kalimah and the Quran as the Word of God, he considers some of the ideas or customs and habits of Muslims as being against the Quran and Hadith. If this is sectarianism, then the scope for the reformation of Muslims will be closed. The day when Muslims are delivered from the curse of takfir, the day when they cease making plans for destroying one another, their differences will indeed be a blessing in disguise.

[1] Literally means “those who went out.” Kharijites were members of the earliest of the religious sects of Islam which rose during the time of Hazrat `Ali, the fourth Khalifah. They were known for their fanaticism, extremist proclamations and terrorist actions. They branded everyone who disagreed with their point of view an infidel and outside the pale of Islam. (SMT)

Discussion between Ex Qadiani Akbar Ahmad Chaudhry and Qadiani Anwar Mirza on Iqra TV.

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

Akbar raises a few objections:

1- Claimant of Mujaddidiyat should NOT claim, rather people should call him. I guess his understanding is that if Governor of a province or state when gets appointed by King or president, he should NOT acknowledge it rather wait for people to send him mercy petitions and other documents for his signatures. What if a false person claims to be a Governor or his few friends start calling him governor… shouldn’t king or president take action against such con artist, and punish him? Is Akbar going to accept any such con artist as his governor?

2- He objects why HMGA was NOT informed Isaa AS has died when he was appointed Mujaddid. I wonder if he knows there are many other Mujjaddids before him who were not informed all their lives that Isaa AS has died.

3- He seems to have objection why HMGA made different claims and at different times. He does not realize that HMGA made only one claim of appointment i.e. Mujaddid of 14th Islamic century. Claim of messenger, just like Rasul Allah SAWS is a lie fabricated against him. Claim of Mahdi is not an appointment claim.

4- He objects why HMGA did not publish 50 volumes of Barahin-Ahmadiyya and only published 5 volumes. Akbar very conveniently forgets to mention HMGA published so much other material and books, he was involved in discussions etc and NEVER rested or wasted his time. He forgets to mention that how much of his time was wasted by his detractors and opponent Mullahs in India. Regarding money that was donated to him for Barahein-Ahmadiyya publication. All that money was used in publication of this book. And much more was used in preaching of Islam. Akbar hid the fact that when HMGA passed away his children and wife depended on Ahmadiyya Movement for their survival.
HMGA did NOT keep any money for himself or his family.

5- He hid the fact that HMGA books, many of them translated are available online on Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement websites. But he uses Qadianis website as punching bag.

6- He talks about his problems with Qadiani jamaat, but attacks HMGA. Just the way atheists who have left Christianity had problems with Christian church and doctrines and instead attack Jesus. He is happy leaving Qadiani jamaat, but is hiding the fact that he is NOT leaving qadiani belief of Isaa AS death. He knows if he makes mistake of telling his belief, he will kicked back by his “new” religion followers.

7- Just like any opponent of Rasul Allah SAWS who are unable to appreciate his mission, start making false allegations on his character, Akbar did the same with HMGA.

8- He stated the doctrines of Qadiani jamaat khalifa 2 and his brother and accused HMGA of making them. He accuses HMGA for prohibiting his movement people from praying behind other Muslims, whereas fact is that HMGA himself prayed behind other Muslims e.g. Jamia Mosque, Delhi. He accuses HMGA for prohibiting his movement people from marrying other Muslims, where as fact is that he attended marriage ceremonies and Nikah (marriage sermon) was conducted by Maulana Noor Ud Din when Ahmadi girl was married to non-Ahmadi Muslims, e.g. two sisters one got married to HMGA’s son Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and other to a non-Ahmadi.

I wish this Iqra TV program invites Dr. Zahid Aziz to get Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement point of view.
Here are links to 8 part videos of this program on you tube:

Part1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HDY3OZwgp0
Part2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnbuXwTCtCo
Part3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=du1ogVm_f_8
Part4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjko30ksgCY
Part5:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDDUsvgkd3k
Part6:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8nkg1sVaEs
Part7:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj7fizFUH6k
Part8:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHoDxnTh9cM

Accusations made by Shahid Kamal Ahmad in Iqra TV program

Rashid Jahangiri has informed us in a comment elsewhere on this blog that Shahid Kamal Ahmad in his appearance on Iqra TV accused Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib of “cursing” 1000 times in a book in Arabic, and Rashid asked: I will be thankful if Dr. Zahid Aziz or someone else can tell us context of these “1000 curses”.

It is the accuser who should provide details of his accusation. For example, the prosecution in a murder case cannot present the case by saying: “The accused has committed murder, but we don’t know who he murdered, when he committed the murder, where he did it and why he did it”!

Shahid Kamal Ahmad should show us the place where Hazrat Mirza sahib wrote “curse” a thousand times. We will then demand that he present just twenty lines of the preceding Urdu text and twelve lines of following Urdu text, and declare that according to his present beliefs as a Muslim the persons mentioned in that text are innocent and do not deserve curse.

Interview with ex-Qadiani on Iqra TV

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

A former Qadiani Shahid Kamal Ahmad, appeared as guest on IQRA TV, UK.

I would leave it to readers to watch and enjoy. There is much in this 1 hour 20 minutes show. I wrote a quick comment that I posted on Shahid Kamal Ahmad website that also hosts video of his interview:

http://thecult.info/blog/2009/11/04/shahid-kamal-on-good-morning-with-iqra/#comments

Shahid Kamal Ahmad:

You obviously chickened out when you got a hint that some one may get invited to refute your lies. You started giving your explanations and asserting that you are NOT here for debate.

Few points:

1-You purposely lied and hid the fact that many books and their translations of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (HMGA) sahib, are available online at official websites of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (LAM) Head Quarters (www.aaiil.org) and its branch websites (e.g.: www.ahmadiyya.org ; www.muslim.org). Instead of this you are basing your lies on websites of opponents of HMGA.

2- To support your lies against HMGA you took help of books not written by HMGA such as ‘Kalmatul-Fasal’ and ‘Tazkira (Tadkirah)’. And it seems fair to you to use such logic. If this is the case then you should accept claims of Jesus as WRITTEN IN CHRISTIAN GOSPELS by people who claim they are spreading words of Jesus. You should accept that (Nauzubilah) Jesus was “son of God”!

3- You repeatedly bunked, and tried to hoodwink ‘The issue of Jesus death’. You very cunningly figured if you openly and honestly state your belief regarding Death of Jesus, no matter how much you kiss-up to opponents of HMGA, you will be right away kicked out by the same HMGA opponents.

4- On issue of ‘Kalima-Shahada’ you did NOT tell us how you accepted Islam, by performing what ritual/ exercise? We know when a Christian, Jew or Hindu accepts Islam they only recite ‘Kalima-Shahada’.

5- It is clear you have no idea of Sufia (Mystics) terminology and what revered Sufia in Islam have written. And then you have audacity to question HMGA writings addressed to Sufia using Sufi terminology.

6- In your support of use of violence against Qadianis you gave JUSTIFICATION by referring to Jews who commit violence against Muslims. By this you are fulfilling the picture of ‘Ulama-e-Sue’ as portrayed by Rasul Allah SAWS. Briefly: Muslims will follow Jews in wrongdoing.

THANKS for at least telling the PARTIAL TRUTH that HMGA was NOT agent of British Rulers.

Shahid: In the end I must say, you are cunning enough to use Qadiani doctrine to attack HMGA.

Here is challenge for you and your host on Iqra TV:
Can you people invite Dr. Zahid Aziz, member of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (LAM), based in UK? He is creator and Webmaster of LAM—UK branch website.
I make a prediction: You people will never make this mistake.

Can Muslims copyright word ‘Allah’?

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

Can Muslims copyright word ‘Allah’?

Malaysia has banned non-Muslims from using the word ‘Allah’ in their texts, saying the word is Islamic and may upset Muslims.

The Roman Catholic Church is challenging the ‘Allah’ ban in court, saying it is unconstitutional and discriminates against those worshipping in Malay language.

Church officials say Allah is not exclusive to Islam but is an Arabic word that predates Islam.

Bibles in Arabic language use word ‘Allah’ for God.

Does anyone on this forum hope Muslims will develop tolerance?

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/world/18-15000-bibles-seized-in-malaysia-am-03

Evidence of Existence of God

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

Reading a write up ‘The Bible of Militant Atheism’ by Aasem Bakhshi, on Richard Dawkins book ‘The God Delusion’. Aasem Bakhshi writes in last paragraph:

“Regarding the kind of evidence that would convince him regarding the existence of God, Bertrand Russell once replied that if a voice from the sky would reveal to him each and every thing that is going to happen in next few hours and that would eventually happen also, he may consider the possibility of existence of God.”

HMGA also gave the argument to prove the existence of ‘Living God’ that Allah communicates with him and informs him about the future events. Based on divine communications he predicted future events both good and bad, of all kinds.

Complete article available on Pak Tea House blog:
http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2009/10/28/the-bible-of-militant-atheism/

Challenges of the Quran about itself

Submitted by Ikram.

 
The Quran has the academic and architectural strength to directly withstand any challenges to its integrity. This integrity has withstood test of time spanning fifteen centuries. Actually Quran itself uniquely puts forth arguments and challenges to any doubters. See for yourselves if Quran failed on any of such challenges:

Quran identifies its Source:

 10:37. This Qur’ân is not such as could have been devised (by anyone), besides Allâh. On the contrary (Allâh has revealed it as) a confirmation of all the previous Scriptures and is a clear and detailed explanation of the divine Law. It is wanting in nought, containing nothing doubtful, disturbing, harmful or destructive and there is no false charge in it. (It proceeds) from the Lord of the worlds.

Quran assures its Divine arrangement:

25:3. … We have arranged it in an excellent (form and order of) arrangement (and free of all contradictions) so that We may thereby lend strength to your heart.

 39:1. The orderly arrangement and authentic compilation of this wonderfully perfect Book is from Allâh, the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.

 41:2. The compilation and orderly arrangement (of this Qur’ân) proceeds from the Most Gracious, the Ever Merciful (God).

 75:17. The responsibility of its collection and its arrangement lies on Us.

Quran guarantees its Divine authenticity by challenging its readers as follows: 

 2:23. And if you have any doubt as to (the truthfulness of the Qur’ân) which We have revealed to Our servant from time to time, produce a single Sûrah (- Qur’ânic chapter) like any of (the chapters of) this, summoning (to your assistance) all your helpers (that you have) beside Allâh, if you are truthful (in your doubts),

4:82. Why do they not ponder over the Qur’ân? Had it been from anyone other than Allâh, they would surely have found a good deal of inconsistency therein.

 11:13. Do they say, `He has forged this (Qur’ân)?’ Say (to them in reply), `If you are truthful (in your objection then) bring ten forged chapters like it, calling upon whom you can (for your help) apart from Allâh.’

11:14. But if they do not respond to you, then know that this (Qur’ân) which has been revealed is (replete) with (that which is only within) Allâh’s knowledge and that there is no other, cannot be and will never be One worthy of worship save Him. Will you then be the submitting ones (after knowing all this)?

28:49. Say, `If (Moses and Muhammad are both fraudulent and) you speak the truth, then bring a Book from Allâh which is a better guide than these two (- the Torah and the Qur’ân), that I may follow it.’

 29:48. (Prophet!) you read no book, nor did you write one with your own hand before this (Qur’ân was revealed). (Had it been so,) those who declare (it) as false could then (have the cause to) entertain some doubts. [Note: Attention is drawn to the fact that Muhammad was illiterate]

Quran also gurantees its Divine everlasting protection from adulteration:

15:9. Verily, it was We, We Ourself Who have revealed this Reminder (- the Qur’ân); and it is We Who are, most certainly, its Guardian.

The Messenger had no interference in the Message:

 10:15. When Our clear verses are recited to them, those who fear not the meeting with Us, nor do they cherish any hope (for the same,) say, `Bring a Qur’ân other than this one or (at least) make some changes in it.’ Say (to them), `It is not for me to introduce changes in it of my own accord. I follow nothing but what is revealed to me. Truly if I disobey my Lord I fear the punishment of a great (dreadful) Day.’

 42:52. (Prophet!) just so (as We sent revelations to other Prophets), We revealed to you the Word by Our command. (Before this revelation) you did not know what the Divine Book was nor (which of) the faith (it teaches), but We made it (- Our revelation to you) a light, whereby We guide such of our servants as We will. And truly you are guiding (mankind) on to the straight and right path,

The Messenger is admonished against altering the Message no matter what: 

17:73. And they had spared nothing in causing you (the severest) affliction with the purpose to turn you away from the revelations given to you, that you might forge in Our name something different from that which We have revealed to you. In that case they would surely have taken you for a special friend.

17:74. And if We had not made you firm and steadfast, you might have inclined towards them a little.

17:75. In that case (if you had been one to forge a lie against Us) We would have made you taste multiple sufferings in this life and multiple sufferings in death, (and) then you would have found for yourself no helper against Us. (But you remained steadfast).

 69:44. Had he (- Muhammad) forged and attributed some saying to Us (and said, `This is what Allâh has revealed to me’).

69:45. We would have certainly seized him strongly by the right hand (and so deprived him of all his power),

69:46. And then surely We would have cut off his jugular vein;

69:47. Then none of you could have stopped (Us) from (punishing) him (and thus stood in Our way of dealing justly).

The Messenger is absolved of allegations of “forgery” of the Message:

 46:7. When Our clear Messages are recited to them, these disbelievers say with regard to the Truth when it comes to them, `This is an obvious sorcery.’

46:8. Do they say, `He himself has forged this (Qur’ân)?’ Say, `If I have forged it, you have no power to help me in anyway against Allâh, He knows what nonsensical talk you are indulging in. Sufficient is He for a witness between me and you. And He is the Great Protector, the Ever Merciful.’

 [The Holy Quran – translated by Allamah Nooruddin]