Hi Fellow Human,

You said “
That’s not correct; terrorists mislead themselves into wrongful understanding of some old scholars interpretation of hadith. Those interpretations were written in the context and time of the crusades. Few facts you need to know:
1. Hadith was collected 2 centuries after the death of the prophet.
2. Hadith follows a science of narration (authenticity). Muslims take and study 3-5% of the hadith. These hadiths are inline with the teachings of the Quran.
3. Most hadith quoted by missionaries is either of questionable authenticity or directly contradicts the Quran.”

How is it relevant that Hadith were collected/written, in the time of the crusades? So was the Quran. I understand that hadith follows the science of narration, but what is important is which hadith are followed. You suggest that the problem with terrorists is that they use old scholars interpretations of the hadith, yet there is no doubt that there is a significant revival underway which embraces these hadith.

More importantly do you deny that a large percentage of your communities across the world believe that Bin Laden and his ilk are hero’s fighting the just fight against a western world bent on destruction of Islam? Or that there is just as much support in England’s Muslim Communities for the attackers of 7/7? It is undeniable that large sections of the Muslim community overseas react with violence to ANY criticism of their prophet. Just look at the reaction to the Belgian cartoons. These people are stuck in the middle ages by a religion which allows no room for independent/rational thought let alone criticism. Those things a Muslim can do and those he/she can’t were decided in the Dark Ages, the Quran itself commands that these are absolutes and are not open to interpretation.

I'm not sure where you derive your 3-5% figure from Fellow-Human.

For example, the most revered Hadith (Sunni) were collected by Imam Bukhari. His collection has just over 7000 Hadith stories. However, during his compilation Imam Bukhari rejected over 600,000 Hadith stories as being fakes, fabricated or downright lies. This means that the Islamic 'history' examined by this famous scholar has a reliability factor of about 2%. Or to put it another way, about 98% of early Islamic 'history' is BS.

For those interested, a good Hadith search engine can be found here;

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/searchhadith.html

Note that the Hadith compiled by Bukhari and Muslim are both Sahih. That is, they are completely 'reliable'. I should also mention that some of the stories are completely hilarious

Hi Paul,

- “How is it relevant that Hadith were collected/written, in the time of the crusades? So was the Quran” “I understand that hadith follows the science of narration, but what is important is which hadith are followed”

The Quran was written in the time of the prophet, the hadith was collected 1-2 centuries later. As for which hadith have a look at www.fethullahgulen.org

-“there is no doubt that there is a significant revival underway which embraces these hadith”

Unfortunately yes, there are efforts by a number of Islamists (& missionary organizations) to revive this ideology each have his own purpose.

-“do you deny that a large percentage of your communities across the world believe that Bin Laden is..”

The more accurate comment is that a percentage of Muslims were in denial that Bin Laden could have been behind 9/11 because it was so barbaric to attribute to a Muslim. I think over the years many people starting seeing the truth.

-“It is undeniable that large sections of the Muslim community overseas react with violence to ANY criticism of their prophet. Just look at the reaction to the cartoons”

The ‘lynch mob’ reaction that appeared 4 months later was politically motivated by 2-3 thousands at best. It was also in a very ‘political’ locations (ie Lebanon, Syria, etc..). Most Muslims didn’t react and the majority of those who reacted did a peaceful protest (Europe, US, Canada, etc..).

-“the Quran itself commands that these are absolutes and are not open to interpretation”
That’s incorrect. History refutes this argument as Islamic enlightenment came 2-3 centuries from the beginning of Islam, while in other cases it took close to 12 centuries. If you read the Quran you will notice an invitation to think every few verses which is quiet unique.
www.free-minds.org is a good place to start. I agree since the enlightenment got squashed by the Mongols it never recovered.

TR,

There was a lot of work and criticism done to al Bukhari and other sources of hadith. Here is a sample report (sorry its 45 pages).

http://www.mostmerciful.com/hadith-book1.pdf

Peace,

Thanks for the link Fellow-Human. I'll have a good read later.

In the meantime I couldn't help but notice in todays SMH (p11) that al-Zawahiri has recently stated that Britain will face fresh terrorist attacks because of Rushdie's knighthood.

I'm totally amazed that in the 21st century anyone still takes the crime of blasphemy seriously. Surely human society is over such fatuous and barbarous notions.

So, to al-Zawahiri and to anyone out there who remotely thinks like him - the fact of the matter is that the 'Prophet' Mohammed was nothing more than a small-minded tribal warlord from a Arabian backwater who enjoyed decapitating Jews, banging 9 year old girls, and was bonkers enough to believe that he was talking to a real live angel called Gabriel.

Of all the religious figures in history (both fictious and real) Mohammed would have to be the most beastial and grotesque of them all. And that is the truth of the matter.

TR,

Zawahiri and many others like him were subject to arts of torture, mental and physical abuse for decades in Egyptian jails. Most terrorists who turned into psychopathic murderers shared these horrible experiences. I don’t think he got anything to do with Islamic faith.

As for the rest of your comment on Islam and its prophet (pbuh), I will agree to disagree. Read my comments above to Benjamin re Lamartine and Carlyle. Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) was subject to the most organised character assassination campaigns known to man.

The example of ‘decapitating’ Jews is another mythology piece.
Every Muslim knows the incident you refer to was related to 'war time treason' and not religious persecution.
a) Only 1 of 3 Jewish tribes committed act of treason.
b) In addition, the prophet asked the accused to choose their own judge (the judge was a Jewish ally).

Why listen to me? read the truth from Jews who converted to Islam:
http://www.jews-for-allah.org/jewish-mythson-islam/muhammad_900_jews_notkilled.htm

I find you puzzling, you have good deep insights sometimes and others you overlook investigating an important topic like the above.

Peace,

Hi Fellow Human,

”The ‘lynch mob’ reaction .....was politically motivated by 2-3 thousands at best..in .. very ‘political’ locations….. “

2-3000, I don’t think so. Violence erupted across the Muslim world, particularly in Muslim countries. Danish and other western interests were attacked in Palestine, Yemen, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Jordan, Malaysia and many others. Your so called ‘political locations’ are those places closest to having Islamic law.

Your emphasis on the hadith being collected hundreds of years after the death of Mohammed seems to suggest that therefore the hadith can be ignored by Muslims. This is not a mainstream view in Islam at all.
Are you suggesting that the Whabists/terrorists etc rely only on the Hadith that are not accepted.

"The blood of a Muslim may not be legally spilt other than in one of three [instances] : the married person who commits adultery; a life for a life; and one who forsakes his religion and abandons the community."

Is this hadith not mutawatir? Because it seems to give Muslims permission to kill Ali Hirsi Hasaan or Salman Rushdie.

In any case, what is more important is how Muslims apply their beliefs in the real world. In those unfortunate places where sharia exists do you suggest that they are mistaken in their application of Islamic law? It was the ayatollah who issued Salman Rushdie’s fatwa, not some minority dissidents. Support, or at least tolerance, of Al Qaeda is widespread in most Muslim countries, Even in the west, where a hand has been extended to Muslim immigrants, there is significant support. 55% of Muslim youth in Britain felt that 7/7 was justified. Why do these people who hate the west insist on staying here.

That’s a rhetorical question.. They stay because they can say what they want without fear of death/torture/imprisonment which they face in the Muslim countries they claim to love. There is free money, free housing and health care, education, and for the really brave among them, WORK. Yet they support groups who wish to return to the dark ages.