Islamic Life Forum

Pastor tells Christians "DON'T PRAY LIKE THE MUSLIMS"

Marriage (nikah) is a solemn and sacred social contract between bride and groom. This contract is a strong covenant (mithaqun ghalithun) as expressed in Quran 4:21. The marriage contract in Islam is not a sacrament. It is revocable.

Muslims don't say it's just a CONTRACT!

Marriage can be reviewed from two different perspectives:
1) A sentimental (or psychological) perspective
2) A legal (or societal) perspective

Form a sentimental (or psychological) perspective, marriage is described in Islam as follows:

"And among His Signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that ye may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): verily in that are Signs for those who reflect."
----- Qur'an, 30:21

"But if ye decide to take one wife in place of another, even if ye had given the latter a whole treasure for dower, Take not the least bit of it back: Would ye take it by slander and manifest wrong? And how could ye take it when ye have gone in unto each other, and they have taken from you most solemn pledge?"

----- Qur'an, 4:20-21

From a legal (or societal) perspective, marriage is described in Islam as follows:

"There is no blame on you if ye make an offer of betrothal or hold it in your hearts. Allah knows that ye cherish them in your hearts: But do not make a secret contract with them except in terms Honourable, nor resolve on marriage contract till the term prescribed is fulfilled. And know that Allah Knoweth what is in your hearts, and take heed of Him; and know that Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing."
----- Qur'an, 2:235

As you can see, Islam tends to cover all aspect of a marital life, both the psychological and legal aspects. Islam is not just about psychological and spiritual aspect of life rather it supervises the whole aspects of the life of a Muslim.

There is divorce concept in Islam and It's considered the last resort in case of mismatched spouse/Impossiblity of healthy relationship.

In the Quran, the Arabic word “uqdah” is used for marriage, which means “knot” or “tie”. A knot is used to secure a firm connection. knots are also used to provide aesthetic beauty, sturdiness and stability, in addition to securing connections. As all the members “tied” together in this lovely union grow and mature with time. (Source)

Marriage in Islam is (defined as) a source of tranquility, love and mercy for humans and a solid pledge from one given perspective and it is (defined as) a contract from another relevant perspective.
There is divorce in Islam because Islam tends to look at marriage from both perspectives.

There is no divorce in Hinduism because Hinduism tends not to look at marriage from a legal perspective.
And, divorce in Islam is defined as the last solution for an unsuccessful marriage in which life between the wife and husband cannot carry on.

And, if Islam were to look at marriage as a solemn pledge only, there would be no way to terminate an unsuccessful marital life and that would lead to increasing misery and enmity.

Islam always strikes a balance between two or more extremes. Islam is the middle path.

Muslim Civilization in India
by
S. M. Ikram
edited by
Ainslie T. Embree
New York: Columbia University Press, 1964
(presented here through the generous permission of Columbia University Press)

Chronology and Dynasties, 712-1526

First Phase

The Sultanate

I. The Impact of the Arabs

ISLAM
[[3]] ISLAM, the youngest of the three great Semitic religions, dates from the early years of the seventh century./1/ Its founder, the Prophet Muhammad, was born in 570 A.D. in Mecca, an important center on the caravan route along the western coast of Arabia. At the age of forty he saw visions and received revelations which, as embodied in the Quran, constitute the message and teachings of Islam. The tremendous vision of the majesty and power of God which came to Muhammad found expression in the central creed: "There is no God but God and Muhammad is his prophet." This uncompromising declaration of faith in the unity of God was a challenge to the polytheism that flourished in Arabia, especially in Mecca where the main temple, the Kaaba, housed more than three hundred idols. While the proclamation of God's oneness was originallythe main feature of Islam, other characteristics gradually developed, particularly an emphasis on the brotherhood of all believers and the equality of all men before God, irrespective of class, color, or race. Specific injunctions, such as the prohibition of the use of intoxicants, also became an essential feature of the Islamic way of life, helping to weld the believers in Islam into a cohesive, self-conscious social group. These beliefs and practices finally found vivid form in the "Five Pillars of Islam," an easily remembered summary of ritual and doctrine. These are: 1) profession of faith in the unity of God and the prophetic mission of Muhammad; 2) the observance of the five daily prayers; 3) the giving of alms; 4) fasting during the month of Ramadan; and 5) the making of a pilgrimage to Mecca. Each of these was open to interpretation and elaboration, but they provided, in their simplicity and.inclusiveness, a framework that proved capable of binding people of the most diverse races and of levels of cultural achievement into a brotherhood that built, with astonishing rapidity, a civilization that stretched from the Iberian peninsula to the islands of the Eastern Seas.

[[4]] Despite the special features it had from its birth and the others it acquired in the course of its history, Islam essentially claims to be a continuation of the earlier religions of western Asia, particularly Judaism and Christianity. According to the Quran, prophets were sent to all nations and social groups to show them the right path. Four of them, Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, find a frequent mention in the Quran. The ritual code of Islam is, indeed, largely based on that of Judaism as practiced in Arabia in Muhammad's time. There are, for example, ceremonial prayers, with Friday taking the place of the Saturday Sabbath; a month of fasting (Ramadan); festivals including the celebration of Old Testament events such as the sacrifice of Isaac (Ismail, in the Islamic version). There is the Judaic conception of "unclean meats," including the prohibition of pork. The references to Christianity and Christians in the Quran are friendly; Jesus is referred to as the spirit of God and many miracles are ascribed to him. But Islam firmly rejected belief in the Trinity as a reversion to polytheism.

Muhammad received a very poor response in his own birthplace. He and the few followers he was able to gather were persecuted, and in 622 he had to flee from Mecca to Medina. This migration, known as the Hijra, proved highly propitious, for from this time, Islam rapidly gained adherents. In Medina the Prophet was not only the founder of a new religion, but he was also the head of a city-state. Gradually Islam began spreading outside Medina, and before the Prophet died in 632, almost the entire peninsula of Arabia had adopted Islam.

Muhammad left no male heir. On his death claims were made on behalf of his son-in-law and cousin Ali, but senior members of the community elected as their leader or caliph, the Prophet's companion, Abu Bakr, who was one of the earliest converts to Islam. He successfully dealt with the local rebellions, and sent troops against the Byzantine and the Persian empires, with whom disputes had arisen during the last days of the Prophet. The two great empires had weakened themselves by centuries of mutual warfare, and the ill-equipped Arab armies were victorious. Abu Bakr died after only two years in office, and was succeeded by Umar (r. 634-644 ), under whose leadership [[5]] the Islamic community was transformed into a vast empire. Syria and Egypt in the west and Persia in the east were conquered, and an administrative basis was devised for the organization of Islamic territory. The sanctions for this governmental structure were the precepts of the Quran and the example of the Prophet, but Umar's administration reflects his own robust common sense and his knowledge of the experience of other rulers. After the conquest of Iran, for example, he invited a group of Iranian officials to Medina to explain its government under former rulers. His system of maintaining a bureau of official registers was derived from Iranian practice, as was the idea of jizya, the poll tax levied on non-Muslims. After ten years, Umar was succeeded by Usman (r. 644-656), who was followed by Ali (r. 656-661), the last of the four "Righteous Caliphs."

Owing to his relationship with the Prophet as well as to personal bravery, nobility of character, and intellectual and literary gifts, Caliph Ali occupies a special place in the history of Islam, but he was unable to control the tribal and personal quarrels of the Arabs. After his death, Muawiyah (r. 661-680), the first of the Umayyad caliphs, seized power and transferred the seat of caliphate from Medina to Damascus. In 680 occurred the tragedy of Karbala when Imam Husain, son of Ali and grandson of the Prophet, fell a martyr. Three years later the succession passed from Muawiyah's grandson to another branch of the Umayyad dynasty, which continued in power until 750. During this period the Muslim armies overran Asia Minor, conquered the north coast of Africa, occupied Spain (711), and were halted only in the heart of France at Tours (732) .In the east the Muslim empire was extended to Central Asia, and, as we shall see, it was during this period that a part of the Indian subcontinent was annexed. In the course of these conquests, the Arabs became subject to older civilizations. Damascus was located in the heart of Syria, where Greek and Syrian culture had flowered for ages, and the Umayyad capital displayed a cultural and social life quite different from that of puritanical Medina. As heirs to the Byzantine civilization, the Umayyads developed the postal service, introduced a new coinage, established a state archive in Damascus, and introduced other changes in the organization of government.

[[6]] Religious schisms in Islam began early and often paralleled political divisions. The two principal sects are Shia and Sunni. The former, more correctly known as Shiah-i-Ali (the partisans of Ali), hold that Ali should have succeeded the Prophet. The Sunnis, who make up the vast majority of the Muslim world, accept the order in which the succession of the "Righteous Caliphs" actually took place. The Shias were subdivided into two branches--the Ismailis, who played a more important role in the early history of Islam than they do today, and the main Shia group, whose creed is the state religion of Iran.

The Arab Conquest of Sind

It was against this background of rapid expansion that the first contacts between Islam and India took place. Since time immemorial spices and other articles from India and southeast Asia had been in great demand in Egypt and southern Europe, with the transit trade largely in the hands of Arabs, who brought merchandise from the Indian ports to Yemen in southern Arabia. The goods were then sent by land to the Syrian ports to be shipped again to Egypt and Europe. The rise of Islam did not, therefore, give rise to the connection with India, but it added a new dimension. Trade continued after the Arabs had embraced Islam, and the first major conflict between the Indian subcontinent and Muslim Arabia arose out of developments connected with Arab sailors plying their trade about the Indian Ocean. They sailed as far as Ceylon, and when some of them died on that island, the local ruler thought it expedient to send their widows and children to Arabia, with gifts and letters of goodwill for Hajjaj (661-714), the powerful viceroy of the eastern provinces of the Umayyad empire. Unfavorable winds drove the vessels carrying the gifts and the survivors close to the shores of Debul (an inland port near modern Karachi). Here pirates attacked them, plundered the gifts, and took the Muslim women and children as captives. Hajjaj, on learning of this, protested to Dahar, the ruler of Sind, and demanded the release of the prisoners and restoration of the booty, but he received only an evasive reply. The enraged Hajjaj, famous in Arab history as [[7]] much for his severity as for his administrative ability, persuaded Caliph Walid to authorize punitive measures against Dahar.

Two expeditions sent against Dahar ended in failure, but for the third, Hajjaj sent a hand-picked body of soldiers under the command of his son-in-law, Muhammad ibn Qasim. The Arab general, with six thousand horsemen, a camel corps of equal strength, and a baggage train of three thousand camels, marched against Debul by way of Shiraz and through Makran. He received reinforcements on the way and in the autumn of 711 appeared before Debul. Hajjaj, who had made very thorough preparations, sent the siege artillery by sea, including a huge balista, affectionately called al-'arus, "the bride," which was worked by five hundred men. Protected by strong stone fortifications, the Debul garrison offered stiff resistance, but ultimately the fort was captured and the Muslim flag was hoisted for the first time on the soil of the Indian subcontinent.

Making light of the fall of Debul as a mere commercial town, Dahar made plans to give battle before the strong fortress of Brahmanabad. A decisive encounter did not take place for several months, however, owing to the difficulties confronting the Arabs. Apart from the greater forces assembled by Dahar, an epidemic of scurvy broke out among the Arab troops, and their horses also suffered from sickness. Hajjaj sent reinforcements, but perhaps even more valuable was the assistance he rendered in dealing with the scurvy. His manner of transporting a large supply of vinegar in concentrated form illustrates the resourcefulness of the early Arabs. Cotton was soaked in thick concentrated vinegar and dried. This operation was repeated until the cotton could hold no more liquid; then the cotton was sent to Sind, where the vinegar was extracted by soaking the cotton in water. This supply of vinegar brought the scurvy under control, and in the extreme heat of June, 712, the Arabs crossed the river and faced Dahar's army. The battle was fought with great vigor on both sides, but the superior Arab generalship and the skill of the Arab archers gave them the victory. Dahar lost his life on the battlefield, and with his death the Hindu army lost heart and fled from the field. Muhammad captured Brahmanabad, and married Rani Ladi, Dahar's widow, thus becoming the master of Lower Sind.

[[8]] The Arab general spent some time in organizing the administration of the conquered area, then he started for Aror (near modern Sukkur), Dahar's capital, now held by one of his sons. After a brief siege the town surrendered, and soon Muhammad proceeded to complete the conquest of Upper Sind. He moved towards Punjab. Multan, the leading city, was well fortified, but a deserter brought information about a stream which supplied water to the city, and by diverting it the Arabs were able to force the garrison to surrender in 713. Muhammad was now master of the whole of Sind and part of the Punjab. After the occupation of Multan, he advanced to the borders of the kingdom of Kashmir. Threatened by this move, the raja of Kashmir sent an envoy to the Chinese emperor asking for help. He received no aid, but events at home stopped further Arab advance. Hajjaj, Muhammad ibn Qasim's father-in-law and the viceroy of the eastern provinces, died in 714, and in the following year the Caliph Walid, who had been his supporter, also died. The new caliph was Sulaiman, a bitter enemy of Hajjaj's family. The policy of extremism, partisanship, and violence which Hajjaj had followed now brought its nemesis. Death saved him from the new caliph's wrath, but his family had to pay the penalty. Sulaiman appointed a new governor, recalled Muhammad ibn Qasim, and handed him to an officer who had the young conqueror of Sind tortured to death in an Iraqi prison.

The comparative ease with which the Arabs defeated the Indian forces and occupied a large territory calls for explanation. It was due partly to the quality of their troops, the ability of the military commander, and the superiority of the Arab military technique. But the conciliatory policy which Muhammad ibn Qasirn adopted towards all those who submitted to the Arabs also facilitated his task, and the Arab conquest was noteworthy more for voluntary surrenders than for bloody battles. At Nirun, for example, the Buddhist priests welcomed the general, and at Sehwan the populace revolted against the Hindu governor and submitted to Muhammad ibn Qasim. Popular dissatisfaction with the former rulers, or at least indifference to their fate, seems in fact to have contnbuted substantially to Arab success. A large proportion of the population of Sind and Multan was Buddhist, but Chach, a Brahmin minister of the Buddhist king, had [[9]] usurped the throne in 622, and his dynasty was not popular with large sections of the people. Even the chiefs and officials were quick to offer allegiance to the Arabs. As R. C. Majumdar has remarked: "To the inexplicable want of strategy on the part of Dahar and the treachery of the Buddhists of the south, we must add the base betrayal of the chief officials and grandees of Sind to account for its ignominious end. All important chiefs and officials seem to have deserted his cause. This is partly accounted for by the superstitious idea prevailing among the people that according to the Hindu Sastras the country was destined to fall into the hands of the Muhammadans, and it was, therefore, useless to fight. But the attitude of chiefs was perhaps due also to personal feelings against the son of the usurper who had driven out the old royal family."/2/

Dahar's hold over southern Sind, largely Buddhist, was also very feeble, as this area had come under his rule only a short time before the Arab invasion. Chach (r.622-666) had tried to buttress his position by a policy of ruthless suppression of the dissident groups. He inflicted great humiliation on the Jats, who were forbidden to carry swords or wear fine garments or to ride on horseback with saddles, and they were commanded to walk about with their heads and feet bare, accompanied by dogs./3/ Muslims who were fighting his son won the sympathies of the oppressed classes, and perhaps the most important cause of the Arab success was the support of the Jats and the Meds. At an early stage they started enlisting under Muhammad ibn Qasim's banner, "which independent of its moral effect in dividing national sympathies, and relaxing the unanimity of defense against foreign aggression, must have been of incalculable benefit to him, in his disproportionate excess of cavalry, which could be of little service in a country intersected by rivers, swamps, and canals."/4/

Muhammad ibn Qasim was only seventeen when he was appointed to a hazardous military command in a distant and little-known territory. Apparently he was selected because of his kinship with the all-powerful [[10]] Hajjaj, but he had already been a successful governor of Shiraz ,and his efficiency in carrying out his assignment in Sind fully justified the choice. His great achievement was, of course, as a military commander and the way in which he and his troops overwhelmed bigger forces. He combined great courage and resourcefulness with moderation and statesmanship of a high order. He had a warm personality, ready to enjoy the humor of new and odd situations and to exchange jokes with his companions. With all this he was a disciplined soldier, as is evident from the manner in which he carried out Hajjaj's directions and later quietly, without demur, submitted to the orders of the new caliph in his last supreme act of self-renunciation. In emphasizing this side of Muhammad ibn Qasim's character it should be remembered that he was the leader of a punitive expedition. At Debul, where he had to blot out the memories of the defeat and massacre of the Arab forces sent earlier against Dahar, and later at Multan, where he was stubbornly resisted, he was harsh and ruthless, but such occasions were exceptional. Normally he was humane and considerate, and though no subordinate of Hajjaj could afford to show any weakness, Muhammad achieved his object more by negotiation and grant of liberal terms than by warfare. He made systematic efforts to seek out the officers of the old regime, showered honors and favors on them, and made them his collaborators in the task of administration.

Foremost among these were Sisakar, Raja Dahar's minister, and Kaksa, the raja's nephew. Sisakar won his way into Muhammad ibn Qasim's favor by restoring the widows and children of the Arabian sailors, whose capture by pirates had originally brought down Hajjaj's wrath on Dahar. Sisakar was made principal adviser in affairs relating to Lower Sind. Kaksa's position was even more important. "The minister Kaksa," according to an early historian, "was a learned man and a philosopher of Hind. When he came to transact business, Muhammad ibn Qasim used to make him sit before the throne and then consult him, and Kaksa took precedence in the army before all the nobles and commanders. He collected the revenue of the country and the treasury was placed under his seal. He assisted Muhammad ib Qasim in all his undertakings, and was addressed by the title of [[11]] mubarak mushir (prosperous counsellor)."/5/ The generosity shown by Muhammad to the leading Indian administrators was rewarded by their loyal cooperation.

Arab Administration

The Arab administration in Sind followed the general pattern adopted by the Arab conquerors in other countries. The normal rule was to employ local talent and make minimum changes in local practices. Caliph Umar, acknowledged as the chief creator of the Arab system of administration, had laid down the working principle that Arabs should not acquire landed property in conquered territories. Under his system the conquering general of a new territory became its governor, but "most of the subordinate officers were allowed to retain their posts." Available evidence about Sind shows that these injunctions were observed. The Arabs established themselves in large towns, which were also military cantonments, and provided the military garrisons, but civil administration was left largely in the hands of the local chiefs, only a few of whom had accepted Islam.

The administrative arrangements which Muhammad ibn Qasim made with the non-Muslims after his victory over Dahar are often referred to as "the Brahmanabad settlement." The basic principle was to treat the Hindus as "the people of the book," and to confer on them the status of the zimmis (the protected). In some respects the arrangements were even more liberal than those granted to "the people of the book" by the later schools of Islamic law. For example, according to later opinion the zimmis could not repair their places of worship, although existing ones were allowed to stand. The question of repairing a damaged temple came up before Muhammad, who referred the matter to Hajjaj. The latter, having consulted the 'ulama of Damascus, not only granted the permission asked for, but declared that so long as non-Muslims paid their dues to the state they were free to live in whatever manner they liked. "It appears," Hajjaj wrote, "that the chief inhabitants of Brahmanabad had petitioned to be allowed to repair the temple of Budh and pursue their religion. As they have [[12]] made submission, and have agreed to pay taxes to the Khalifa, nothing more can properly be required from them. They have been taken under our protection, and we cannot in any way stretch out our hands upon their lives or property. Permission is given them to worship their gods. Nobody must be forbidden and prevented from following his own religion. They may live in their houses in whatever manner they like."/6/ According to one early Muslim historian, the Arab conqueror countenanced even the privileged position of the Brahmans, not only in religious matters, but also in the administrative sphere. "Muhammad ibn Qasim maintained their dignity and passed orders confirming their pre-eminence. They were protected against opposition and violence." Even the 3 percent share of government revenue which they had received during the ascendancy of the Brahman rulers of Sind, was conceded to them. In his arrangements for the collection of taxes, Muhammad ibn Qasim also made an attempt to provide some safeguards against oppression, by appointing "people from among the villagers and the chief citizens to collect the fixed taxes from the cities and the villages so that there might be the feeling of strength and protection."/7/

When the Abbasids overthrew the Umayyads in 750 they sent their own officers to Sind. The Abbasid governor, Hisham, who came to Sind in 757, carried out successful raids against Gujarat and Kashmir, but no permanent additions to Arab dominion were made. Later, through preoccupations at home, Arab control over Sind weakened, with the process of disintegration being accelerated by tribal conflicts among local Arabs. One governor went so far as to revolt against Caliph al-Mamun. The rebellion was put down, but Musa (son of Yahya the Barmakid, the famous wazir of Harun-al-Rashid), who was placed in charge of the affairs of Sind, nominated as his successor on his death in 836 his son Amran. The caliph recognized the appointment, but the beginning of the hereditary succession to governorship meant a weakening of the hold of Baghdad. An energetic ruler, Amran dealt firmly with the disturbances of the Jats and the Meds, but internecine quarrels among the Arabs flared up and he lost his life [[13]]

*INDIA IN 900*

[14] after a brief reign. In 854 the Hibbari family became hereditary rulers of Sind, with Mansura as their capital. In course of time, Multan became independent and the Hindus reestablished themselves in Rohri.

The severance of contacts with Baghdad made Sind and Multan a happy hunting ground for the emissaries of the rivals of the Abbasids, the Ismaili rulers of Cairo. Their first missionary came to Sind in 883 and started secret propaganda in favor of the Ismaili caliph. After the ground had been prepared, military aid was obtained from Cairo, and through a coup d'etat Multan was captured in 977. Ismaili doctrines were now adopted as the official religion, and the khutba was read in the name of the Egyptian ruler. The Ismailis destroyed the old historic temple of Multan, which Muhammad ibn Qasim had left in charge of the Hindus, and built a mosque on its site. Mansura remained with the Hibbari family, at least until 985, but at a later date this also became a small Ismaili stronghold. The Ismailis suffered a setback with the rise of Mahmud of Ghazni, who in 1005 compelled the ruler of Multan to recant his Ismaili beliefs and some twenty years later conquered Mansura on his return from Somnath. The Ismaili creed regained strength as the Ghaznavids weakened, but in 1175 Sultan Muhammad Ghuri captured Multan and appointed an orthodox Sunni as governor. The area was incorporated in the Sunni sultanate first of Ghazni, and later of Delhi.

Intellectual Achievements

During the Umayyad and the early Abbasid period, when the Arabs were at the height of their political power, they were also active in the intellectual field, making every effort to acquire knowledge from all sources. Sind became the link through which the fruits of Indian learning were transmitted to the Arabs, and by them made available to the rest of the civilized world. Indo-Arab intellectual collaboration was at its height during two distinct periods. During the reign (753-774) of Mansur, embassies from Sind to Baghdad included scholars who brought important books with them./8/ The second fruitful period [[15]] was the reign (780-808) of Harun-al-Rashid, when the Barmakid family, which provided wazirs to the Abbasid caliphs for half a century, was at the zenith of its power. Arab bibliographers especially mention Harun's wazir, Yahya the Barmakid, Yahya's son Musa, and grandson Amran (both of whom governed Sind for some time) for their interest in India and Indian sciences. Besides sending scholars to India to study medicine and pharmacology, they brought Hindu scholars to Baghdad, made them chief physicians of their hospitals, and commissioned them to translate into Arabic, Sanskrit books on such subjects as medicine, pharmacology, toxicology, philosophy, and astrology.

The earliest recorded Indo-Arab intellectual contact came in 771, when a Hindu astronomer and mathematician reached Baghdad, bringing with him a Sanskrit work (Brahma Siddhanta by Brahma-gupta) which he translated into Arabic with the help of an Arab mathematician. Titles of three other works on astronomy translated from Sanskrit have been preserved by Arab bibliographers, but Siddhanta, which came to be known in Arabic as "Sindhind," had the greatest influence on the development of Arab astronomy. In mathematics the most important contribution of the subcontinent to Arabic learning was the introduction of what are known in the West as "Arabic numerals," but which Arabs themselves call "Indian numerals" (al-ruqum-al-Hindiyyah).

Indian medicine received even greater attention; the titles of at least fifteen works in Sanskrit which were translated into Arabic have been preserved, including books by Sushruta and Caraka, the foremost authorities in Hindu medicine. One of the translated books was on veterinary science, and another dealt with snakes and their poisons. None of these translations are now known to exist, except a rendering of a book on poisons, which was originally translated into Persian for Khalid-al-Barmaki, the Abbasid wazir, and later was translated into Arabic. Indian doctors enjoyed great prestige at Baghdad, and although their names, like the titles of their works, have been mutilated beyond recognition in Arab bibliographies, their number was very great. One of these men, Manka, was specially sent for when Harun-al-Rashid fell ill and could not be cured by Baghdad doctors. [[16]] Manka's treatment was successful, and not only was he richly rewarded by the grateful caliph, but he was entrusted with the translation of medical books from Sanskrit. Another Indian physician was called in when a cousin of the caliph suffered a paralytic stroke and was given up for lost by the Greek court physician. Many Indian medicines, some of them in their original names such as atrifal, which is the Hindi tri-phal (a combination of three fruits), found their way into Arab pharmacopoeia.

Astrology and palmistry also received considerable attention at Baghdad, and titles of a large number of books translated from Sanskrit on these subjects have been preserved. Other books which were translated were on logic, alchemy, magic, ethics, statecraft, and the art of war, but literary works gained the greatest popularity. Some of the stories of the Arabian Nights' Entertainments are attributed to Indian origin, and Arabic translations of the Panchtantra, popularly known as the story of Kalila and Dimna, have become famous in various Arabic and Persian versions. The games of chess and chausar were also brought from India and transmitted by Arabs to other parts of the world.

Sind also made a contribution in spheres other than science and leaming. While the debt of the Sufis, the Islamic mystics, to Indian religion in general is not certain, the links of Sind with Islamic Sufism are fairly definite. The great early Sufi, Bayazid of Bistam, had a Sindhi as his spiritual teacher. "I leamed," he said, "the science of annihilation (ilm-i-fana) and unity (tauhid) from Abu Ali (of Sind) and Abu Ali leamed the lessons of Islamic unity from me."/9/ The close association of Sind with Sufism is maintained to this day, and one of the most marked features of Sind is the dominant place which Sufism occupies in her literary and religious life.

Our knowledge of India's impact on Arab cultural life is based on contemporary Arab sources, but it is far from complete. No title of any Sanskrit book on music translated at Baghdad is available, but it is known that the music of the subcontinent influenced Arab music. That it was appreciated in the Abbasid capital is indicated by the [[17]] famous Arab author Jahiz (fl. 869), who wrote in his account of the people of the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent that "Their music is pleasing. One of their musical instruments is known as Kankalah, which is played with a string stretched on a pumpkin." This would seem to be a reference to an Indian instrument, the kingar, which is made with two gourds. Another indication of widespread knowledge of Indian music is a reference by an Arabic author from Andalusia to an Indian book on tunes and melodies./10/ It has even been suggested that many of the technical terms for Arab music were borrowed from Persia and India and that Indian music itself has incorporated certain Perso-Arab airs, such as Yeman and Hijj from Hijaz and Zanuglah, corrupted into Jangla./11/

No connected history of Sind and Multan after the recall of Muhammad ibn Qasim is available, but works of Arab travelers and geographers enable us to fill the gap. In particular Masudi, who visited what is now West Pakistan in 915-916, has left a brilliant account of the conditions in the Indus valley, from Waihind in the north to Debul in the south. Ibn Haukul, another traveler, visited the area some years later. Both agree that the principal Arab colonies were at Mansura, Multan, Debul, and Nirun, all of which had large Friday mosques. Non-Muslims formed the bulk of the population, and were in a preponderant majority at Debul and Alor. The relations between the Arabs and the non-Muslirns were good. Unlike the historians of the sultanate period, the Arab travelers refer to the non-Muslims as zimmis and not as kafirs (infidels). Soon after the conquest of Sind and Multan, the killing of cows was banned in the area. The reason may have been a simple desire to preserve the cattle wealth, but regard for Hindu sentiments may also have been partly responsible for this step. Some Hindu chiefs showed a sympathetic interest in Islam, for in 886 a Hindu raja commissioned an Arab linguist from Mansura to translate the Quran into the local language./12/ Another indication of the integration of the population into the general [[18]] life of the ruling class was the use of Sindhi troops in Arab armies. Contemporary records mention their presence in areas as distant as the frontiers of the Byzantine empire./13/

Arab rulers adopted local practices to a much greater extent than the Ghaznavids did later at Lahore, or the Turks and the Afghans at Delhi. According to Masudi, the ruler of Mansura had eighty war elephants and occasionally rode in a chariot drawn by elephants. The Arabs of Mansura generally dressed like the people of Iraq, but the dress of the ruler was similar to that of the Hindu rajas, and, like them, he wore earrings and kept his hair long.

After Muhammad ibn Qasim there were no large-scale Arab immigrations, and Arab influence gradually diminished; but Sind and Multan remained in contact with the Arab countries, particularly Iraq and Egypt. At the time of Masudi's visit Arabic and Sindhi were spoken in Sind, but Iranian influences were also strong, particularly after the rise of the Dailamites, when the use of Persian became more prevalent, especially in Multan.

Arab rule produced men of note in Sind and Multan, some of whom achieved fame and distinction in Damascus and Baghdad. One of them, Abu Maashar Sindhi (fl.787), an authority on the life of the Prophet, was so eminent that when he died in Baghdad the reigning caliph led the prayers at his funeral. A number of other scholars and poets connected with Sind are also mentioned in Arabic anthologies. Some of them were from the immigrant families, but many were of Sindhi origin and included descendants of captives taken as slaves during the Arab conquest or the later wars. The most notable Arabic poet of Sindhi origin was Abul Ata Sindhi, who was taken to Syria as a captive during his childhood, and earned his manumission with a qasida or ode. In spite of his command of literary Arabic, his pronunciation of Arabic words bore such traces of his origin that he had to engage a ravi to recite his verses. He wrote forceful qasidas in praise of the Umayyad rulers and poignant elegies on their downfall.

Life in the Arab dominion of Sind and Multan was simple, but agriculture and commerce were highly developed. Masudi mentions a large number of hamlets in the principalities of Multan and Mansura, [[19]] and apparently the whole country was well cultivated. There was active commerce between Sind and other parts of the Muslim world, with caravans going to Khurasan, most commonly by the route of Kabul and Bamian. There were also communications with Zabulistan and Sijistan through Ghazni and Qandahar. Sindhi Hindus, who were excellent accountants and traders, had a major share in this commerce, and Alor is mentioned as a great commercial center. The prosperity of the area may be judged by the fact that Sind and Multan contributed eleven and a half million dirhams to Abbasid revenue, while the total revenue from the Kabul area in cash and cattle was less than two and a quarter million dirhams./14/

Results of Arab Rule

Time, man, and natural calamities have dealt harshly with the traces of Arab rule in Sind. In 893 Debul was visited by a terrible earthquake which practically destroyed the whole city; the number of deaths was estimated at 150,000. A similar calamity affected Brahmanabad at a later date, but more permanent causes of damage were the floods and the changes in the course of the Indus. The cumulative result is that not one of the Arab cities has survived, and their very sites are uncertain.

It is not surprising, therefore, that historians attach little importance to Arab rule in Sind; yet though the visible traces of Arab ascendancy have been obliterated, its invisible effects are many and far-reaching. Most of them, of course, relate to the former province of Sind. The script adopted for the Sindhi language is Arabic, not the Perso-Arabic script used for other Muslim languages of the subcontinent, and it contains a large proportion of Arabic words, mutilated or intact. Several leading Sindhi families are of Arab origin, and many more, although indigenous, have changed their genealogical tables to claim Arab ancestry. Until recently the social pattern in Sind was largely tribal, the place of the Arab shaikh being taken by the Sindhi wadera (the word itself is a literal translation of the Arabic counterpart). Such Arab virtues as hospitality have always distinguished [[20]] Sind, and the standard of Arabic scholarship has also remained high. Even the landscape, before the recent construction of two barrages in Upper and Lower Sind, contained much to remind one of Arabia--the desert, the pastoral scene, many large groves of date-palm trees, and the strings of camels.

In two important spheres the impact of the Arabs--as we have already seen--was felt far beyond Sind and Multan. In the political field, the arrangements made by Muhammad ibn Qasim with the non-Muslims provided the basis for later Muslim policy in the subcontinent. By the time Muslim rule was established at Lahore and Delhi, Islamic law had been codified and contained stringent provisions regarding idol-worshipers. The fact that those provisions were not followed and the Hindus were treated as "people of the book" was largely due to the fact that they had been given this status by Muhammad ibn Qasim, and that for centuries this liberal practice had been built up in Sind and Multan.

The second important consequence of the Arab conquest of Sind--the cultural and intellectual contacts--came to an end when Baghdad lost political control over the area. Arabic literature henceforth looked elsewhere than to India for inspiration, and Sanskrit works were no longer translated by Hindu scholars in Baghdad.

Although Arab conquest had been confined to the southern part of what is now West Pakistan, peaceful contacts were far more extensive. Arab sailors and traders plied their trade along the coast, and soon after the rise of Islam we find colonies of Muslim Arabs at a number of major ports such as Cambay, Chaul, and Honawar. Muslims had reached Ceylon even earlier, and the Arab invasion of Sind was, as we have seen, a measure of reprisal for the plunder and imprisonment of Muslim widows and orphans returning from Ceylon. Hajjaj, who organized the expedition to Sind, was also indirectly responsible for the establishment of a large colony of Muslim Arabs in the South. When he became the viceroy of Iraq, many political enemies fled his jurisdiction, seeking refuge on the southern coast of the subcontinent. They form the nucleus of the important Nawayat community found on the Konkan coast of Bombay and in Tinnevelly [[21]] district of Madras. Others settled along the Bay of Bengal, where the presence of Muslims is traceable back to the eighth century.

The largest Arab coastal settlements, however, were in Malabar, where Muslims now form a substantial part of the population. One result of the Arab settlement was the conversion of a local ruler to Islam, an event which undoubtedly helped the position of the Muslim community. Another influence of the arrival of Muslims may possibly be seen in the great religious movements in South India in the ninth century. It has been suggested, although without very clear proof, that the religious ferment of the period may have owed something to Muslim ideas.

These Muslim colonies on the coast are of interest also as they provided the base from which missionaries, traders, and sailors went to the Far East and spread Islam in Malaya and Indonesia. The movement to the East was not only a result of the Arab share in the spice trade of Southeast Asia, but also a continuation of traditional Indian relations with the countries further east. Southeast Asia has since ancient times been greatly influenced by Indian religion, literature, and art, and with the spread of Islam to the key points of contact, Muslim influence replaced that of Brahmanism and Buddhism. Bali remains Hindu to this day, but Malaya, Java, and Sumatra are predominantly Muslim, and owe their present religious and literary tradition largely to the influences emanating from the Muslim colonies on the coastline of the subcontinent. Emigrants who brought about this transformation in Southeast Asia included Arab and Persian sailors and traders, but the role of Muslims from Gujarat, Malabar, Coromandel, and Bengal was not less important.

N O T E S

/1/ "Islam" is used for the religion, "Muslim" for a member of the religious community.
/2/ R. C. Majumdar, "The Arab Invasion of India," Journal of Indian History, Vol. X (1931), supplement.
/3/ H. M. Elliot and John Dowson, The History of India as Told by Its Own Historians (London, 1867-1877), I, 151.
/4/ Elliot and Dowson, I, 435.
/5/ Elliot and Dowson, I, 203.
/6/ Elliot and Dowson, I, 185-86.
/7/ Elliot and Dowson. I. 183-87.
/8/ E. C. Sachau, Alberuni's India (London, 1914), I, xxxi.
/9/ Jami, Nafahat al-uns (Bombay, 1872), p. 60.
/10/ S. S. Nadwi, Arab wa Hind ke ta'alluqat (Allahabad, 1950), pp. 127, 157-58.
/11/ S. A. Halim in Journal of the Asiatic Society of Pakistan, vol. I (1956).
/12/ A. Z. Nadvi, Tarikh-i-Sind (Karachi, 1947), p. 196.
/13/ Elliot and Dowson, I, 465.
/14/ Elliot and Dowson, I, 471-72.

What is ‘SHARIAH’?

Well Shariah is the Islamic Law. It is the religious legal system that governs the political,social,economical, and moral duties of faithful Muslims.The sources of Islam on which all beliefs, principles and rulings are based are represented by the two Revelations: the Qur’an and Sunnah. This is what is implied by Islam being a divinely-revealed religion: its pillars are based on infallible texts that were sent down from heaven, which are represented in the verses of the Holy Qur’an and the texts of the saheeh Prophetic Sunnah. From these two sources the scholars derived other principles on which rulings may be based. Some scholars called them the sources of sharee’ah or the sources of Islamic legislation. They are: ijmaa’ (scholarly consensus) and qiyaas (analogy). Imam al-Shaafa’i (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: No one has any right whatsoever to say that something is halaal or haraam except on the basis of knowledge, and the basis of knowledge is a text in the Qur’aan or Sunnah, or ijmaa’ (scholarly consensus) or qiyaas (analogy).

But, Unfortunately the term Shariah gets people excited. And as soon as the term Shariah is mentioned People’s imagination goes to hands and heads getting chopped off. Thanks to Media!

Time for Education

Out of the 6236 verses of the Quran, less than 9% are about law or legal issues.When analysing a typical work of Islamic “law”, we can see that 65% of it is not even “law,” instead it is personal custom and devotion.If we took the 35% of Islamic legal compendiums dealing with contracts, family law, and state power as a derived from the Quran, that would be only 2.45% of the Quran. Only 5% of those works deals with issues of state power, which if one claimed was being drawn from the Quran directly would account for only 0.35% of the verses of the Quran.

and,

So don’t fall into propaganda. Learn and educate yourself by directly going to Islamic Sources and not to any Polemical and Orientalists works.

Addendum: These charts were created after analyzing the number of verses on law, approximated by most classical scholars to be 500 in number, then comparing those on a granular basis to the overall number of verse 6236. The percentages for the categories used, other than law and related topics, are approximations due to the overlap in topics. The categories themselves are taken from Ibn Ashour’s introduction to his al-Tahrir wal-Tanweer, an extensive exegesis of the Quran. The categories used in the second slide are found in almost every standard work of Islamic law (fiqh) and the percentages here are approximations based on chapter length and topical coverage in those works as a whole.

Source: https://izhaarulhaqq.wordpress.com//

Dr. Laurence Brown
A graduate from two Ivy League universities with sub-specialty training in ophthalmology, Dr. Brown served as a respected ophthalmologist in the U.S. Air Force for a period of eight years. His term of service was distinguished by earning the position of Chief of Ophthalmology, both at Lakenheath Air Force Base in England and at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida (the largest military base in the free world). Dr. Laurence Brown received his BA from Cornell University, his MD from Brown University Medical School, and his ophthalmology residency training at George Washington University Hospital in Washington, DC.

-----
O''Reilly said (about the atheist Steven Hawkings):

If he [Steven hawkings] wants to explain how (the earth got here, why the sun comes up and goes down without interruption, why the tide goes in out and out, no miscommunications whatsoever) if he is willing to explain how all that happens, we're ready to recieve him.

Its just as much of a stretch to be an atheist as it is to believe in God, because there is no explanation as to how the planet got here. And Steven Hawkings doesn't have it.

Quote:

An unforunately recently-turned atheist (from muslim) friend of mine was talking to me about circumcision and how it's against human rights and causes unnecessary deaths etc.

"Circumcision of newborn boys (I.e., within the first month of life) brings numerous health benefits, including:

1 – Protection against local infection in the penis, which may result from the presence of the foreskin, causing tightening of the foreskin, which may lead to retention of urine or infections of the glans (tip) of the penis – which require circumcision in order to treat these problems. In chronic cases, the child may be exposed to numerous diseases in the future, the most serious of which is cancer of the penis.
2 – Infections of the urethra. Many studies have proven that uncircumcised boys are more exposed to infection of the urethra. In some studies the rate was 39 times more among uncircumcised boys. In other studies the rate was ten times more. Other studies showed that 95% of children who suffered from infections of the urethra were uncircumcised, whereas the rate among circumcised children did not exceed 5%.
In children, infection of the urethra is serious in some cases. In the study by Wisewell on 88 children who suffered infections of the urethra, in 36 % of them, the same bacteria was found in the blood also. Three of them contracted meningitis, and two suffered renal failure. Two others died as a result of the spread of the micro-organisms throughout the body.
3 – Protection against cancer of the penis: the studies agree that cancer of the penis is almost non-existent among circumcised men, whereas the rate among uncircumcised men is not insignificant. In the US the rate of penile cancer among circumcised men is zero, whilst among uncircumcised men it is 2.2 in every 100,000 of the uncircumcised population. As most of the inhabitants of the US are circumcised, the cases of this cancer there are between 750 and 1000 per year. If the population were not circumcised, the number of cases would reach 3000. In countries where boys are not circumcised, such as China, Uganda and Puerto Rico, penile cancer represents between 12-22 % of all cancers found in men; this is a very high percentage.
4 – Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Researchers found that the STDs which are transmitted via sexual contact (usually because of fornication/adultery and homosexuality) spread more among those who are not circumcised, especially herpes, soft chancres, syphilis, candida, gonorrhea and genital warts.
There are numerous modern studies which confirm that circumcision reduces the possibility of contracting AIDS when compared to their uncircumcised counterparts. But that does not rule out the possibility of a circumcised man contracting AIDS as the result of sexual contact with a person who has AIDS. Circumcision is not a protection against it, and there is no real way of protecting oneself against the many sexually transmitted diseases apart from avoiding fornication/adultery, promiscuity, homosexuality and other repugnant practices. (From this we can see the wisdom of Islamic sharee'ah in forbidding fornication/adultery and homosexuality).
5 – Protection of wives against cervical cancer. Researchers have noted that the wives of circumcised men have less risk of getting cervical cancer than the wives of uncircumcised men.
Health Benefits taken from: al-Khitaan, p. 76, by Dr. Muhammad al-Baar.

Circumcision 'does not curb sex'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7174929.stm

Look also
Why Circumcision?

Why Circumcision? [6122] -Customs and Symbols - Understanding Islam
Male Circumcision in Islam
CIRCUMCISION: An Evidence-Based Appraisal
Circumcision
Circumcision

why created circumcised?

This post explain this issue:
�� - �� - ��

Quote:

ولذلك :
ولما كان شرع الله وفطرته للناس لا يأتيان إلا بخير :
فقد جاءت سنن الفطرة التي أمر بها الله أنبياءه يبلغونها للناس : كانت لا تقف على
حدود نص الآيات .. وإنما كانت موافقة لكل خير ٍ:
شرعا ًوخلقا ًوطبا ًودينا ً!!!..

Google Translate

Quote:

وأما قوله تعالى: لَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنْسَانَ فِي أَحْسَنِ تَقْوِيمٍ {التين: 4} فمعناه ـ كما قال البغوي في تفسيره : أي أعدل قامة وأحسن صورة، وذلك أنه خلق كل حيوان منكبًا على وجهه إلا الإنسان خلقه مديد القامة، يتناول مأكوله بيده، مُزَينَّا بالعقل والتمييز. اهـ.
وقال السعدي: أي تام الخلق، متناسب الأعضاء، منتصب القامة، لم يفقد مما يحتاج إليه ظاهرًا أو باطنًا شيئًا اهـ.
وهناك قول آخر ذكره الطبري فقال: وقال آخرون: بل معنى ذلك: لقد خلقنا الإنسان، فبلغنا به استواء شبابه وجلده وقوّته، وهو أحسن ما يكون، وأعدل ما يكون وأقومه. اهـ.
فأي تناقض بين هذا وبين شريعة الإسلام السمحة في إزالة ما يشوه الخلقة ويضر الإنسان، وهو ما يعرف بسنن الفطرة، فقد قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: الفطرة خمس: الختان والاستحداد وقص الشارب وتقليم الأظفار ونتف الآباط. متفق عليه

For sunnah rejectors, Read:

The Authority of Sunnah by Mufti Taqi Usmani (http://www.defending-islam.com/page238.html)
The Fallacies of Anti Hadith Arguments By Shah Shahidullah Faridi (http://www.defending-islam.com/page236.html)
http://www.defending-islam.com/page415.html
http://www.answering-christianity.co..._quranists.htm
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16801824/Status-of-the-Sunnah-in-Islaam-Answering-Quranists

http://answeringsubmission.wordpress.com/
The Sect that splitted up .. Hadith Rejectors
Some arguments by hadith rejectors/critiques

Circumcision should be offered 'like vaccines' to the parents of baby boys, new study

The health benefits of male circumcision 'outweigh the risks 100 to one'
Half of uncircumcised men develop a health problem as a result, it is claimed
It would be 'unethical' not to offer it to the parents of all baby boys, the researchers state

By Daily Mail Reporter; April 2014

Circumcision should be offered to babies the same way that vaccinations are, an academic has claimed.

The health benefits of male circumcision far outweigh the risks by more than 100 to one, according to Professor Brian Morris.

His study found that over their lifetime, half of uncircumcised men will contract an adverse medical condition caused by their foreskin.

Parents of boys should be offered circumcision for their sons just as they are offered vaccines, a study has claimed

The joint Australian and American research team said their findings add considerable weight to the latest American Academy of Paediatrics policy that supports education and access for infant male circumcision.

Circumcision rates for babies in the U.S. have fallen from a high of 83 per cent in the 1960s to 77 per cent today.

Study leader Brian Morris, Professor Emeritus in the School of Medical Sciences at the University of Sydney, who worked with colleagues in Florida and Minnesota, said: ‘There seemed to be two major reasons for the fall.
‘One is a result of demographic changes, with the rise in the Hispanic population.

‘Hispanic families tend to be less familiar with the custom, making them less likely to circumcise their baby boys.

‘The other is the current absence of Medicaid coverage for the poor in 18 U.S. states. In those states, circumcision is 24 per cent lower.’

He added: ‘The new findings now show that infant circumcision should be regarded as equivalent to childhood vaccination and that as such it would be unethical not to routinely offer parents circumcision for their baby boy.

‘Delay puts the child's health at risk and will usually mean it will never happen.’

He said in infancy, the strongest immediate benefit is protection against urinary tract infections (UTIs) that can damage the kidneys.

Professor Morris and co-investigator Dr Tom Wiswell, of the Centre for Neonatal Care in Orlando, Florida, showed last year that over the lifetime, UTIs affect one in three uncircumcised males.

Professor Morris, with Dr John Krieger, of the Department of Urology at the University of Washington in Seattle, showed that there is no adverse effect of circumcision on sexual function, sensitivity, or pleasure.
This helped dispel one myth perpetuated by opponents of the procedure.

Prof Morris added: ‘Taken together, the new findings should send a strong message to medical practitioners, professional bodies, educators, policy makers, governments, and insurers to promote this safe, simple procedure, best done in infancy under local anaesthesia and to increase access and third party coverage, especially for poor families, who tend to suffer most from foreskin-related diseases.

‘Infant circumcision has, moreover, been shown to be cost saving.’

The study was published in the journal Mayo Clinic Proceedings.

http://islamicnafahat.wordpress.com/...oys-new-study/

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)s polygamy has been an attack from Anti-Islamic Christian as well as Atheist/Secularist for a long time dating back to the Crusades. However it is not the purpose of this paper to give the reasons why Prophet Muhammad was polygamous. Rather it is the purpose of this paper is to note that polygamy had already been established in the Bible, and Prophet Jesus, as will be seen had come from Prophets Abraham and David who were polygamous. In fact there are 40 polygamists in the Bible! Both the Old and New Testaments say nothing about forbidding polygamy and in fact the Old Testament even allows it and sets laws regarding it. The following is a list of Prophets, Kings of Israel and Judges who all were polygamous in the Bible.

Prophet Abraham had three wives, Sarah, Hagar and Keturah and had several concubines (Genesis 16:1-4, 25:1 and 25:6). Prophet Abrahams brother, Nahor, had both a wife and concubine. (Genesis 22:20-24). Prophet Jacob had two wives, Rachel and Leah and used their two female slaves as concubines (Genesis 29:21-30:22, 31:17). Esau, the brother of Prophet Jacob was polygamous, having at least three wives (Genesis 26:34; 28:6-9). Eliphaz had two wives in Genesis 36:11-12. Prophet Moses had two wives, Zipporah and an unnamed Ethopian woman (Exodus 2:15-16, 21, 18:1-6, Numbers 12:1).

Ashur, from the tribe of Judah had two wives (1 Chronicles 4:5). Shaharaim, from the lineage of Benjamin who was a son of Prophet Jacob, had two wives (1 Chronicles 8:8). Even the so-called Mosaic Law of Judaism set rules for a polygamous marriages (Exodus 21:10, Deuteronomy 21:15). Prophet Moses also had set instructions to his men about their wives implying the children of Israel were polygamous (Exodus 19:15). Gideon, a judge in Israel had multiple wives and at least one concubine (Judges 8:30-31). Other Judges appear to be polygamous as Jair the Gileadite had 30 sons (Judges 10:3-4), Ibzan of Bethlehem had 30 sons and 30 daughters because of his multiple marriages (Judges 12:8-9) and Abdon had 40 sons (Judges 12:13-14). Elkanah, the Bibles father of Prophet Samuel, had two wives (1 Samuel 1:1-2).

Polygamy was also practiced with kings of Israel, Prophets and other leaders. King Saul had multiple wives which were later given to Prophet David (II Samuel 12:7-8). Prophet David had 8 wives and 10 concubines (1 Samuel 25:39-44, II Samuel 5:13-16 and 1 Chronicles 3:1-9 and 14:3). Prophet Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:1-3). Benhadad, a king of Syria had several wives in 1 Kings 20:3. Heman had many wives by implication of the number of sons he had in (1 Chronicles 25:4). Rehoboam, the son of Prophet Solomon and a King of Judah, had 18 wives and 60 concubines (II Chronicles 11:18-21). Abijah had 14 wives (II Chronicles 13:21). Jehoiada had two wives (II Chronicles 24:3). Jehoram, another king of Judah, had multiple wives (II Chronicles 24:1-3). King Ahab also had multiple wives (1 Kings 20:1-7). Jehoiachin, King of Judah, had multiple wives (II Kings 24:15). King Zedekiah of Judah also had many wives (Jeremiah 38:14-24). Hosea had two wives (Hosea 1:3, 3:1).Belshazzar, a king of Babylon had many wives and concubines (Daniel 5:2). Ahasuerus was polygamous because of the women in his royal house in Esther 1:9.

Further in the Bible, polygamy is regonized by various people and even God in Israel. For example God is offended when Israelites take forgien wives in Ezra 9:2. God Prophetically has many wives in Ezekiel 23, Jeremiah 3, Ezekiel 23:4, Jeremiah 3:6-14, Jeremiah 31:31-34. Further Prophet Ezra reconizes polygamous marriages with his people in Ezra 10:2-3,10-11. Nehemiah rebukes the men for marrying their "strange wives" in Nehemiah 13:25-27. Also as seen before and as read in John 5:46-47, Jesus upheld the so-called Mosaic law, and by doing so he santionced polygamy and concubinage since those things have already been established in Exodus 21:10, Deuteronomy 21:15. Moreover in 1 Timothy 3:2, a Bishop can have only wife however it seems okay that a layman can have more than one, implying the anonymous author of 1 Timothy implies it is okay for polygamy. Titus 1:6 also states a bishop only is required one wife, stating nothing about laymen (common men). So this also implies that polygamy is allowed, as the passages says nothing forbidding laymen to have several wives. As said earlier Prophet Jesus also came from Prophets Abraham and David (Matthew 1:1). If Polygamy had been so offensive to God, why would he allow Jesus to come from two polygamists? More importanantly Prophet Jesus never spoke out against polygamy in the entire New Testament. So one can see that the Bible has no rescritions or criticisms over polygamous marriages.

Many Biblical figures have been polygamous, including important figures in Judaism and Christianity such as Prophets Abraham and David. Further nowhere in the Bible is it forbidden to be polygamous. In Judaism, there was a continuation of polygamy throughout Israel as Josephus in the first century witnessed this and wrote about it, along with Justin Martyr an early Christian apologetic in the 2nd century. Additonally the Talmud allowed a man to have up to 4 wives and for a king up to 18 wives.

What about Matthew 19:3-9? Jesus is not speaking about polygamy. Rather, He is only answering a question about divorce. Indeed, the entire passage is about divorce, not polygamy.

In early Christian churches polygamy was practiced as well as bishops and such were able to have more than one wife is desired. An Early Church father, Augustine, the bishop of Hippo, supported polygamy in his writings and even today polygamy is practiced in two Christian dominations of Africa: the Legion of Mary Church and the African Orthodox Autonomous Church South of the Sahara. Martin Luther admitted that there was no scriptural prohibition against polygamy in the New Testament. Finally this author leaves the reader with a quote from Father Hillman. As Father Hillman states:

Nowhere in the New Testament is there any explicit commandment that marriage should be monogamous or any explicit commandment forbidding polygamy. [1]

Don't Ignore the Old Testament

It is commonly said that Jesus Jesus was the lamb to clear away the Old Testament and it's rules. Well, that's not true. It fact The New Testament tells readers to obey the Old Testament! We can find this fact all over the New Testament:

For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) Clearly the Old Testament is to be abided by until the end of human existence itself. None other then Jesus said so.

All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever. "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets Jesus says "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

Furthermore The author of 2 Timothy has this to say: "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

And finally Jesus says: Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law" (John 7:19) and For the law was given by Moses,..." (John 1:17).

So we already see that there were 40 polygamists in the Old Testament. Moreover as we've seen there is no limit as to how many wives a man can marry in the so-called Mosaic Law.

What about Paul?

Paul did not say, "It is better for a single person to marry than to burn." Moreover, Paul did not say "it is better to commit adultery than to burn" which is what would occur if a woman were to be taken by more than her one and only living husband according to the laws of the Torah which he knew so well. He wrote the letter in which this was found to the all the Christians at Corinth which included all of the men in Corinth, not just the single men. In most cases, there is nothing lacking in the first wives of men that have a need for additional wives.

Moreover according to one Christian website there seems to be a command in the New Testament that allows a man to have more than one wife:

"There absolutely is an example in the Bible, where God actually does command a situation of polygamy ---in the New Testament, even.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 & 27-28. In 1 Corinthians 7, the Apostle Paul differentiates when he is making his own "recommendation" (in verses 6, 12, and 25) and when he is expressing the "commandment of the Lord" (verses 10-11). Indeed, in verses 10-11, Paul clarifies that the instruction in those two verses is the "commandment of the Lord". (It should therefore also be noted that the other areas in which he clarifies as being only his "recommendation" can NOT be used to otherwise and incorrectly assert that God Himself is creating some sin or doctrine. After all, Paul's ultimate "recommendation" therein is celibacy!)

With that realized, it is clear for readers of the Bible that Paul makes it emphatically clear that verses 10-11 are different. Namely, verses 10-11, in the exact way in which thay are actually written, are the "commandment of God"."And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife." 1 Corinthians 7:10-11.

Paul further specifies that that above "commandment of the Lord" was only addressed to believers-married-to-believers. In the next verses (i.e, 12-16), he clarifies that he is subsequently addressing believers-married-to-unbelievers, and that that subsequent instuction is not the Lord's words, but his own again.

Verses 10-11 show that, if a believer WIFE leaves her believer HUSBAND, the believer WIFE is commanded of God to either: remain unmarried, or be reconciled back to her husband believer HUSBAND is commanded of God to: not put away any wife, and to let any departed wife return back to him

The key point is that the HUSBAND is NOT given the same commandments of instruction. Only the WIFE is commanded to remain unmarried, but the HUSBAND is not given that commandment. He is commanded of God to let her be married to him, either way!

Accordingly, the HUSBAND is of course, still free to marry another wife. That fact is further proved by the later verses of 27-28d.

"Art thou bound unto a wife?seek not to be loosed.Art thou loosed from a wife?seek not a wife.But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned;and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned." 1 Corinthians 7:27-28.

The Greek text of verse 27 is clearly only addressing married men --whether or not the wife has departed.

As such, the married man whose wife is still with him does not sin when he marries another wife (who is not another's wife). And likewise, the married man, whose wife has departed from him, he also does not sin when he marries another wife (who is not another's wife).

And herein comes the "commandment of the Lord", of polygamy, as in the following situation.A believer WIFE departs from her believer HUSBAND. She is commanded of God to remain unmarried, per verses 10-11. Her HUSBAND, however, then subsequently marries another wife (who is not another man's wife). The HUSBAND and the new wife have not sinned, per verses 27-28. The departed WIFE then seeks to be reconciled back to her HUSBAND.In that situation, verses 10-11 show the following instruction as the "commandment of the Lord". The HUSBAND is commanded of God to let the departed wife be reconciled back to him. AND.... he is commanded of God to not put away a wife, including the new wife.As such, verses 10-11 show that it is an outright "commandment of the Lord" of polygamy for the family in that situation.1 Corinthians 7:10-11 is indeed a Commandment of God --- in the New Testament --- that, when a previously-departed believer wife returns, her believer husband and his new (believer) wife (from verse 27c-28d) MUST let the previous wife be reconciled to her husband.

There truly IS a "commandment of the Lord" for a situation of polygamy to be found in the Bible ---and it's in the New Testament Scriptures, as well!" (Source)

So we can see there is NO injunction in the Bible for the husband to have one wife.

Polygamy in Islam

Before I begin we must examine Arabia. In Pre-Islamic Arabia, many men were polygamous. All Shaykhs (The leader of a tribe or clan) in Arabia had mutliple wives and/or multiple concubines. [2] Polygamy was widely practiced among Arabs of Pre-Islamic Arabia and Jews not only of Israel, but among the Jews of Arabia was well.

The Quran accepts polygamy and allows a man to have up to four wives. However, although the Quran, like the Bible, allows polygamy, it puts rescritions on it, something the Bible failed to do. As a matter of fact the Quran is the only Religious book in the world that says its best to marry only one woman, and not four. Having up to four wives is an option however if a man cant maintain justice between these four then he has to marry only one, this way men will be prevented from doing injustice.Of quick note, polygamy is quite rare in the Muslim world very few Muslim men have more than one wife. The following two Quranic verse demonstrates that monogamy (marrying only one woman) is preferred and not polygamy.

If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (Quran 4:3)

Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire: But turn not away (from a woman) altogether, so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding, and practise self-restraint, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (Quran 4:129)

The last verse you are never able to be fair and just between women, even of it is your ardent desire proves that polygamy is something that not every man can do. It would be very hard for a man to divide his time between wives if he is polygamous, and as I have stated before, polygamy in modern times, really doesnt work. It might have worked during Prophets Abraham to Prophet Solomons time (2166-1991 to 930 BCE) during the early days of Christianity (as will be seen) from the 1st to the 7th centuries and during the rise of Islam during Prophet Muhammads ministry in Arabia (late 5th century to the 6th century) however it just doesnt work in modern times.Mnay men in Pre-Islamic Arabia had many wives however when Islam came it put a limit to how many wives a man can marry. This is why the Quran tells Muslims to marry only one woman and that a man just cant be fair and just between more than just one woman. Clearly polygamy is discouraged in Islam and monogamy is preferred unless a man has strong reasons for marrying more than one woman (economic reasons, etc.)

Notes and Bibliography

[1] Hillman, Eugene: Polygamy Reconsidered: African Plural Marriage and the Christian Churches,. Orbis Books, 1975 pg. 140.
[2] Aslan, Reza: No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam, Random House, 2006 pg.62-64.

Twenty evidence of the fact that atheism is the worst doctrine on earth .. !!
1 - Atheism violates the first law of Newton.
The first law of Newton says that "an object at rest will stay at rest and an object in steady motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an external force (static or dynamic)." So there must be an external force that made the Big Bang to happen at that very moment and forced the universe to begin at that very moment.

2 - Atheism violates the first law of thermodynamics.
Law of Conservation of energy or what is known as the first law of thermodynamics says ((matter/energy cannot be created nor can it be destroyed.)) If we contemplate in this law, we come to conclusion that the universe cannot exist. According to this law, the universe does not exist or it's present in the presence of the Creator.

3 - Atheism violates the second law of thermodynamics.
The second law of thermodynamic says that the universe is now heading towards thermal death when the temperature of all organisms and particles becomes equal. So the universe as scientists say is heading toward disintegration, towards demolition, towards cooling and towards thermal death “thermal death of universe”, while atheism says that the universe is moving towards complexity and towards building a struggle to develop. So scholars consider the second law of thermodynamic to carry the end of Darwinism and selective evolution. And these are laws, not theories.. so the science on the side while atheism and Darwinism are completely on the other side.

4 - Atheism is contrary to the Code of Ethics.
The original definition of morality: - Morals are those that come against self-interest .. against matter .. against reason
Moral obligation is a restriction of the human being and as Nietzsche said long ago: - The lack of power in human being is because of his ethical commitment.
So morals are not profitable practically .. there must be a value for ethics and this value is not of this world .. a value that is not measured by abstract materialistic standards and not subject to natural laws .. ethical behavior, sacrifice, supreme ideals, asceticism and altruism are the inherent morality either are meaningless or has a meaning in the presence of God...

5 - Atheism does not find an explanation to the law of pairs.
Sheikh Nadeem Aljssr said in his book Almate'a (the story of faith): - “Before that, I did not know the secret of the wisdom of the repeated mentioning of the two sexes, male and female in the Qur'an (And of everything We have created pairs that you may be mindful) ADH-DHARIYAT-49 .. (And that He created pairs, the male and the female) AN-NAJM 45. Until I read from the contemporary philosopher Henri Bergson and realized that the repeated mentioning of the pairs is not intended for gratitude, but also meant something greater which is to alert that pairing is in plants, animals and even particles and which is a great evidence of the purpose and the denial of the chance, Darwinism, randomness and senseless.

6 - Material atheism is in contradiction with the immaterial self.
If a human being committed a crime and insisted that he did it unconsciously, each lawyer seeks to prove there was no intent, but from the material perspective, the crime took place and ended up on the reality and the offender is also admitting that he’s the perpetrator, but the law interferes to know the purpose, intent and self-condition during the commission of the crime and whether the crime took place unconsciously or not .. Here, we put self in position higher then facts and higher then abstract materialistic reality.. In reality, we do not really judge what happened in the world, but to judge what has occurred within the self .. This reflects the contradiction in principles between man and the world.

7 – Atheism is contrary to the laws of human rights.
Human rights is metaphysical pure issue and your saying that human beings are equal this is possible only if the human is a creature of God, so equality between human beings is exclusively ethical, not a natural, materialistic or mental fact, since people from the materialistic, natural or mental perspective are undoubtedly unequal and based only on religion, the weak can claim equality.
Those who are weak and poor in money, health and mind and excluded from the tables of the celebrations in the world, those who do not have anything to show or to prove about except through religion only, by which they demonstrate that they are equal or even better to God than the healthy, and this is where lies the frequent proof of the value of religion in equality.

8 - Atheism violates the privacy of all, since it does not recognize the sanctity and holiness.
No value to bunch of virtues that have been established by religions in the last tens of thousands of years. As Dr. Missiri says: - the atheist sees the ground as an exploited matter and his purpose is to achieve maximum satisfaction of it or as the thinker John Locke says: - If all hopes of human is limited to this world and if we enjoy life here in this world, it is not surprising nor illogical to look for happiness, even at the expense of parents and children.
So the ideas of impurity, holiness, chastity and purity are ideas derived from another world have nothing to do with the materialistic, Darwinian, imperative, cold world... If we were really the sons of this world, it will not seem to us as it has something dirty or sacred...

9 – Atheism is contrary to the law of cause and effect.
Of nothing comes nothing... there is no effect without a cause .. this common sense is erected in the mind because it is higher than the law and on it stands the modern science and goals’ purpose. Descartes says: “I exist so who made me exist and who created me? I have not created myself. It has to be my Creator." This Creator must exist and does not lack a creator and He should be named with all the attributes of perfection (Or were they created without there being anything, or are they the creators?) Tour 35 .. and it does not occur to us to deny this common sense because of the pretext that the mental delusion of the sequence of reasons to no end and it is mentally false or because of the pretext of our ignorance but it is the cause and the law of causality that is not based on observation as atheists claims since our senses just shows the pictures of the disjointed and sequenced phenomena and does not show us the relationship with the causality, so how can we know this relationship only if the mind has innate organized laws - the talk of Descartes – which with it, the human being can realize the sense of and then make new constructed judgments that does not depend on the senses

10 - Atheism contradicts the law of intent and care.
All assets on the ground fits to the human existence and operates accordingly to him, so it is not surprising to say that everything around us is subjected to our requirements of day and night, four seasons, space, surrounding air molecules and how all that situated to the human nature and his needs, and it is not unrealistic to the fact that we say that this harmony in the universe is designed specifically for the production of the human race and as our brother Majdi says: "By washing your hands, thousands of bacteria die, since Man is the fixed component in the world history , his spirit value and moral values will remain unchanged, so the human being was and will remain as human being from thousand years ago born by the past to thousand years later born by the future, neither his nature nor his intent will change."

11 – Atheism is contrary to teleology.
Science is in constant progress ... all scientists’ researches based on the existence of laws governing the world and controlling the matter .. the purpose of science in every search is to find the law governing this case since the science is teleological and therefore it is in constant progress .. and without the science adoption already of a law that governs all things for this progress, the science would not progress one step .. and here lies the contradiction in principle between messy atheism and teleological science.. and it is not imaginable that everything around us is governed by the law of teleology and the human is the only being responsible in this case.

12 - Atheism contradicts the law of consistency previous to consolidation.
Says Leibniz “the atoms are moving with God's will and work ability that shows how they relate to each other, However, they are not really related, but the power of God to make each atom goes in motion that harmonizes the motion of other atoms, so what seems to us of this harmony is the impact of the law of “consistency previous consolidation” since the matter does not discern the laws applied on it. And there is no rational must to oblige the water to boil at one hundred degrees Celsius or its molecules to diverge with boiling, and as Hume says: - a science that explains that with former interpretations is very immature science since it does not do more than adopting the situation but without giving any reasons. And it’s unavoidable but to admit of the law of “consistency previous consolidation”

13 – Atheism violates the principle of the famous Barclay.
Says Hume: - no evidence obliges us to believe that there is something If our senses missed it and no evidence compels us to believe that the thing we saw today and then we left and we go back to see it in the second day is the same thing we saw on the first day, since we do not know about the outside world except of we what have in our mind from sensory perceptions, and the mind obliges that there must be a holistic mind that absorbs all things and be a witness by it, and as God says (Is it not sufficient as regards your Lord that He is a witness over all things? ) FUSSILAT - 53

14 - Atheism is the founder of most criminal doctrines on the Earth.
Se Gore says: - The Darwinism doctrine is one of the despicable doctrines that are not supported except by the worst tendencies and contemptible feelings, since its father is infidelity and its mother is dirtiness.
Nazism was formed only on the discrimination of races and ethnicitie.
Mao Zedong the atheist thug said: - All the lower animals will be executed and all who stood against the revolution is an evolutionary error, and said in a December 9, 1958 «mass graves provide a good fertilizer for the land». As a result, 50 million people was killed in China.
Atheist Guevara said: - "To send men to the firing squad, the juridical validation is not necessary. We must learn how to kill queues of people in a shorter time!!!"
The criminal atheist Lenin said: - No mercy for the enemies of the nation, but kill, hang and confiscate.
Marx said: - "We have no pity for you, and we do not ask for your sympathy, when the day will come, we are in practice: conscientious savages."
and Marx justify this criminal terrible approach, saying: - "When people accuse us of cruelty, we wonder how they forgotten the basics of Marxism?"
As a result, 250 million people was killed in one century by horrible Darwinian atheism and this is probably more dead people, more than all the wars from Adam to this day.

15 - Atheism is against art and life.
The existence of another world along with the natural world is the primary source of every religion and art .. and If there was only one world, the art would be impossible
Atheism will never understand the essence of art and nature .. If there is no spirit of man so why we are keen to have the spirit of art?
When the science deals with the man, it looks at it as what is dead and what is not personal, while when an art deals with man, it looks at what is humane and teleological, since art is on a natural collision with the world and with all its sciences, that the silent rebellion and if there is absolutely no support to man with no room for his spirit and his self, then the art is not an area for him and the poets and tragedy writers deludes us and write nonsense that does not make sense
Art in nature and its recognizing of the existence of another world is carrieing revolutionary meanings of blasphemy of materialistic world... and that was understood by the famous French painter de Buffet when he said: - (the essence of art is uncomfortable and useless, it’s against society and the threat of it). Therefore, the essence of works of art are fully and vaguely obscure, it’s a continuous rebellion on the reality. It is repeated confession of the existence of another world that we do not belong to and we will go to it one day .. confession of human suffering on the ground and its inability to achieve the paradise that lies within his dreams and to search for it .. Art is simply is the fruit of the relationship between the spirit and the truth.
So when you contemplate on deep painting.. When you read a great novel .. the human being feels a strange sense that is mysterious with transcendence and holiness and entering the world of eternity .. Art is exactly as religion, both are recognizing the existence of another world, but art is not a religion but an expression of religion. Art is the illegitimate son of the truth... while religion is the legitimate son of the truth ..

16 - Atheism represents abnormality in the history of civilization.
Atheism is nothing more than an intellectual abnormalities and mental pollution in the history of nations and civilizations, Will Durant says in his book (The Story of Civilization): - There may be cities without walls without armies, without plants but there is no city without a temple
And The author of the book (why we say that God exists) says : - (and there one who said that man is guided to God with revelation or without revelation, but with the revelation, it was better and thorough, and some argued that all the worships are revelation from God, but it might be an old revelation that was stained with myths from magicians and fortune-tellers, so the primitive nations sidetracked in their ignorance and God was sending Messengers to purify these beliefs from sidetracking). And Schmidt and Lang -two of the researchers of the assets of religions- say that the origin of all religions in purpose is the Oneness and the diversity came in the later stages, and it have been discovered that inheritance of Indian American and Indigenous residents of the North America are similar in many decrees to monotheistic religions particularly in terms of punishment and reward and here where lies the argument on people, where they are equal in reason and requesting guidance .. and humans differ in religion, but they agree in what God wants them to do.
Sheikh Nadeem Aljssr said in his masterpiece, the story of Faith, p. 35: - It’s more likely that many philosophy of the ancients in Egypt, China and India are the remnants of forgotten history, so the owners of these philosophies were stacked among the philosophers and they might be prophets or prophets’ subordinates.
That’s why atheism is abnormal approach that appears in temporary image and quickly disappears and if it‘s beneficial to people, it would’ve stayed on the earth.

17 - Big Bang and the fall of the myth of the stable static universe.
In 1989, NASA had lunched the satellite (Cuba) for the detection of cosmic radiation resulted from the Big Bang and compiling information on the radiation and this satellite was able in only 8 minutes just to give a complete picture of the radiation and it is proven that the universe is made and this is what knocked off the atheists in critical embarrassment.
A. S. EDDINGTON says: "Philosophically, the notion of an abrupt beginning to the present order of Nature is repugnant to me"
And DENNIS SCIAMA said that he did not defended the steady-state theory, not because he deemed it valid, but because he wished that it were valid. SCIAMA goes on to say that as evidences began to pile up, he had to admit that the game was over and that the steady-state theory had to be dismissed.. And that he must leave aside the theory of the stable universe
and his colleague GEORGE ABEL said that he has no choice but to accept the Big Bang theory.
This prompted the atheist philosopher of the twenty century ANTHONY FLEW to say his famous aphorism: - "Notoriously, confession is good for the soul. I will therefore begin by confessing that the atheist has to be embarrassed by the contemporary cosmological consensus." .. because the science has proven the idea that were defended by religious books.

18 - What is the mystery behind the bias of modern science towards the Qur'an?
Gustave Le Bon says "Islam is religion of the most appropriate for scientific discovery", and that’s the reason of the frequent convert to Islam in the scientific community of doctors, researchers and professors.
The wonderful Alija Izetbegovic Say: - Aristotle has wrote three scientific books (in physics in the heavens .. .. in the earth) These three books do not exist today with one sentence that is scientifically valid .. three books from a scientific perspective is equal to zero to ten, while the Qur'an as Maurice Bucaille says in his famous book (the Qur'an, Bible and the Torah in the perspective of modern science): - The truth is I did not find any verse from the Qur'an that is contrary to one scientific fact but the Qur'an already passed the modern science and corrected many of the scientific theories that were prevalent in his day, for example the idea that groundwater was formed through a deep gorge at the bottom of the continents moved underground water from the oceans to the depths of the earth did the Qur'an ratify this scientific myth which was prevalent in that times or said (Do you not see that Allah sends down water from the cloud, then makes it go along in the earth in springs - Zumar 21) ... .. The source of groundwater is made up of springs, rain and not from Aristotle gap in the depth of the continent ........ And so on

19 - Atheism does not give an explanation for anything.
Atheism is not a solution but a confession of a failure in finding a solution and this is the beginning of atheism and the end of it ..
The famous atheist Richard Dawkins says in his book delusion: - (Atheists are like bunch of cats, every cat in different direction..) Every atheist is an independent church and as a Sheikh Moqbel Bin Hadi says (If ten people of falsehood meet, they separate in eleven ideas) so you do not find two atheist with the same idea combined and this is the misfortune of atheism and its ravages, it is the undisciplined doctrine that does not have a clear explanation of any issue, does not have a value of just a fun game mentality, as said by Dr. Ahmed Okasha .. Atheism in itself is merely a superficial naive idea that is very lazy on a very deep and serious issue ... Atheism is messy, nihilistic and skeptical. As one of the old brothers says: - (since the science is in continuous progress and since there are laws and fixed facts, the function of science is to look for those laws and facts, therefore, there no existence of Atheism or the messy Agnosticism.)

20 – The return of scientific world to God
The physicist (Frederick Bermham) author of History of Science (Science historian) Says: (at present, the scientific community deems the idea of God's creation of the universe a more respectable idea than ever before for hundreds of years).
Michael Behe says: I am compelled to accept the existence of God since the result of all these cumulative efforts to examine the cell. ie: to examine life at the molecular level is a loud shout to the clear sharp design ...
And I evidenced that by the return of hundreds of scientists and thinkers in the past few years to God and acknowledged that the cause of atheism is psychological rather than mental

The famous astronomer (Fred Hoyle) says in his book (mathematics of evolution) page 130: - (in fact, how the very clear scientific theory says that life is collected by a clever mind, however, the person marvels and wonders, why it’s not accepted widely as an intuitive ... but most likely it’s psychological reasons rather than scientific.)
and as Imam Hussein may Allah be pleased with him when he said (God, an eye has blinded that doesn’t see you)

To sum up, Sheikh Ghazali was right when he said: - We are imagining a mule building the pyramids, but we do not imagine what is assumed by atheists when they deny the divinity .. and as has been said in the Islamic history: - "The ox knows its master, the donkey knows its owner, but this one does not know ..." or, as the Bible in the Psalms of David the Prophet says : ”The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. 14-1 .. or as our Lord said in the Qur'an (And certainly We have created for hell many of the jinn and the men; they have hearts with which they do not understand, and they have eyes with which they do not see, and they have ears with which they do not hear; they are as cattle, nay, they are in worse errors; these are the heedless ones) AL-ARAF 179

Islamic Life Forum

Tuesday, 9 May 2023

Pastor tells Christians "DON'T PRAY LIKE THE MUSLIMS"

Pastor tells Christians "DON'T PRAY LIKE THE MUSLIMS"

Thursday, 18 June 2020

"Everything is dependent on God". By Hamza Andreas

Why is Allah Testing us so Hard with The COVID-19 ?

Monday, 27 May 2019

Concept of God in Islam – Answering doubts & Questions -Abdullah al Andalusi

The true cause of doubts about religion and God -Abdullah al Andalusi

Sunday, 14 January 2018

Is marriage in Islam "just a contract" ?!

Tuesday, 5 December 2017

Muslim Civilization in India - S. M. Ikram -The Impact of the Arabs

Intellectual Achievements

Tuesday, 7 February 2017

SHARIAH-The Islamic Law

Thursday, 5 January 2017

Muslim Destroys Atheism in few seconds

Why muslims are circumcised ?

why created circumcised?

Circumcision should be offered 'like vaccines' to the parents of baby boys, new study

Wednesday, 21 December 2016

Polygamy in Christianity !

Don't Ignore the Old Testament

What about Paul?

Polygamy in Islam

Notes and Bibliography

Further Reading

Friday, 25 March 2016

Twenty evidence of the fact that atheism is the worst doctrine on earth .. !!