Books and Documents

Islam and Sectarianism


  • Quran 2:11 is applicable to Muslims as well as non-Muslims since it mentions that Muslims should not make mischief on earth.  As it does not restrict itself to only Muslims, it should include also non-Muslims as well.  Or in other wards, Muslims are told not to make mischief to Muslims as well as non-Muslims. By zuma - 4/27/2017 12:51:59 AM

  • Quran 2:220 demands Muslims to deal justly and instead of deceitfully. The following is the extract: (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #220)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘In (to) this worldly life and in the Hereafter. And they ask you concerning orphans. Say: "THE BEST THING IS TO WORK HONESTLY IN THEIR PROPERTY, and if you mix your affairs with theirs, then they are your brothers. And Allah knows him who means mischief (e.g. to swallow their property) from him who means good (e.g. to save their property). And if Allah had wished, He could have put you into difficulties. Truly, Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise."’ The phrase, The best thing is to work honestly, in Quran 2:220 demands Muslims to be just and to work honestly instead of deceitfully. As Muslims are told to work honestly, could they tell lie or could they deceive non-Muslims for their benefit? By zuma - 4/26/2017 9:48:38 PM

  • Quran 2:204-205 support the same that Allah dislikes Muslims to make mischief on the earth. The following are the extracts: (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #204)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘And of mankind there is he whose speech may please you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم), in this worldly life, and he calls Allah to witness as to that which is in his heart, yet he is the most quarrelsome of the opponents.’

    The phrase, he whose speech may please you (O Muhammad, in Quran 2:204 is inevitably refers to a genuine Muslim. The subsequent phrase, he calls Allah to witness, in Quran 2:204 implies he should have faith in Allah, or else, he would not ask Allah to be his witness. What did this Muslim do in Quran 2:205? (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #205)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘And when he turns away (from you "O Muhammad "صلى الله عليه وسلم"), his effort in the land is to make mischief therein and to destroy the crops and the cattle, and Allah likes not mischief.’ This Muslim has been told in Quran 2:205 to make mischief in destroying crops and cattle.

    The phrase, Allah likes not mischief, in Quran 2:205 implies Allah does not like Muslims to make mischief on the earth. Thus, Allah forbids Muslims to create havoc among non-Muslims by destroying their crops and cattle.

    By zuma - 4/26/2017 9:33:28 PM

  • Does Allah loves the just? Allah certainly loves the just. Or else, Allah would not mention the phrase, Make not mischief on the earth, in Quran 2:11. The phrase, Make not mischief on the earth, in Quran 2:11 forbids Muslims to do vandalism; to fight against Governments by making mischief against them; and etc. By zuma - 4/26/2017 9:07:03 PM

  • Dear Muhammd Yunus, You have mentioned in your comment about Allah does not forbid Muslims to be virtuous and just to those Muslims who did not fight with them over religion, nor drove them from their homelands.  The suitable quranic verse that would tie with this teaching is Quran 2:11.  The following is the extract for anlaysis:

    (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #11)-Mohsin Khan translation:

    And when it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "We are only peace-makers." 

     As the phrase, make not mischief on the earth, is mentioned in Quran 2:11, it forbids Muslims to make mischief on the earth so as to be rude or to be unkind to those Muslims who did not fight with them over religion.  This phrase also forbids Muslims to make mischief on the earth so as to be rude to drive Muslims out of their homelands.  As Quran 2:11 is the inspiration from Allah, it indirectly implies that Allah does not forbid Muslims to be virtuous and just to those Muslims who did not fight with them over religion, nor drove them from their homelands since by doing that, they simply create mischief on the earth and that is unacceptable from Quranic point of view as stated clearly in Quran 2:11.

    By zuma - 4/26/2017 9:02:50 PM

  • The word, fight, in the books of Hadith would have no implication in this present days due to contemporary non-Muslims are not hostile as those in the past.  Many of the non-Muslims would like to live harmony with Muslims.  Even if there would be peace treaty between Muslims and non-Muslims, non-Muslims do not behave as those pagans in the past to break peace treaty to the extent to kill all seventy Muslims as shown in the history.  With that, we could round up with the conclusion that the word, fight, in the books of Haidth does not have any value in this contemporary world.

    By zuma - 4/26/2017 1:33:36 AM

  • From all my previous comments, it would conclude that the word, fight, in the books of Hadith should not be interpreted as aggressive fighting but defensive fighting. The books of Hadith as mentioned earlier that some of the non-Muslims were violent in the past. They fought even with the existence of peace treaty by killing seventy Muslims. As some non-Muslims were violent against Muslims, Allah would turn up to have no choice to direct the attention of Muhammad for the battle against non-Muslims. And that was the reason why we could see battle here and there as mentioned in the books of Hadith. By zuma - 4/25/2017 10:49:41 PM

  • If the word, fight, in the books of Hadith were meant for aggressive fighting instead of defensive fighting, there should not be any reason why Muhammad should send seventy Muslims to pagans for peace treaty.

    The reason is simply that Muslims should fight whenever they met Muslims instead of meeting them for peace treaty if the word, fight, in the Books of Hadith should be interpreted as aggressive fighting. (Book #16, Hadith #116)-Sahin Bukhari: '..."The Prophet sent about seventy men (who knew the Quran by heart) towards the pagans (of Najd) who were less than they in number and there was a peace treaty between them and Allah's Apostles (but the Pagans broke the treaty and killed the seventy men). So Allah's Apostle recited Qunut for a period of one month asking Allah to punish them."

    For instance, if the word, fight, in the books of Hadith is meant for aggressive fighting, there is no reason why seventy men were killed by pagans. Instead, pagans should be killed by seventy men. As seventy Muslims were killed by pagans during their peace treaty as mentioned in book #16, Hadith 116, Sahin Bukhari, it implies the word, fight, in the books of Hadith should not be interpreted as aggressive fighting. (Book #63, Hadith #210)-Sahin Bukhari: 'Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: The pagans were of two kinds as regards their relationship to the Prophet and the Believers.

    Some of them were those with whom the Prophet was at war and used to fight against, and they used to fight him; the others were those with whom the Prophet made a treaty, and neither did the Prophet fight them, nor did they fight him...' As the phrase, the others were those with whom the Prophet made a treaty, is mentioned in book #63, Hadith #210, Sahin Bukhari, with the phrase, neither did the Prophet fight them, it implies that the word, fight in the book of hadith could not be interpreted as aggressive fighting. Or else, the Prophet would still continue to kill wherever they had found pagans whether they were in peace treaty on the condition if the word, fight in the book of hadith should be interpreted as aggressive fighting.

    Thus, the word, fight, in the book of Hadith should no way be interpreted as aggressive fighting. But defensive fighting, i.e. Muslims should not fight if non-Muslims cease in fighting or have peace treaty with them. (Book #2, Hadith #17)-Sahin Bukhari: 'Narrated 'Ubada bin As-Samit: who took part in the battle of Badr and was a Naqib (a person heading a group of six persons), on the night of Al-'Aqaba pledge: Allah's Apostle said while a group of his companions were around him, "Swear allegiance to me for: 1. Not to join anything in worship along with Allah. 2. Not to steal. 3. Not to commit illegal sexual intercourse. 4. Not to kill your children. 5. Not to accuse an innocent person (to spread such an accusation among people)...'

    The phrase, not to steal, as mentioned in book 2, Hadith 17, Sahin Bukhari, forbids Muslims to steal. If the word, fight, in the Books of Hadith should be interpreted as aggressive fighting, they should steal pagans’ money or assets. As the books of Hadith forbids Muslims to steal, stealing from pagans is not permissible. Besides, not to accuse an innocent person, is mentioned in book 2, Hadith 17, Sahin Bukhari, implies accusing innocent non-Muslims is not permissible. As accusing innocent non-Muslims is not permissible, how could the word, fight, in the books of Hadith be meant for evil too? (Book #60, Hadith #251)-Sahin Bukhari: '...'Have you killed an innocent soul who has killed nobody?

    Surely you have done an illegal thing!...' As the phrase, Have killed an innocent soul, is mentioned in the Book 60, Hadith 251, Sahih Bukhari, it implies that killing innocent non-Muslims is not permissible. If the word, fight, in the books of Hadith is meant for aggressive fighting, killing innocent non-Muslims should not be meant for illegal act since Muslims should locate wherever innocent non-Muslims are and kill them. As killing innocent non-Muslims is to be treated as illegal act in the book 60, Hadith 251, Sahin Bukhari, the word, fight, in the books of Hadith should not be interpreted as aggressive fighting but defensive fighting. The reason is simply that Muslims should not fight with innocent non-Muslims or non-Muslims who do no evil.

    By zuma - 4/25/2017 10:41:12 PM

  • Dear Muhammd Yunus,
    You have mentioned Muslims might use Sira to refute the claim.  However, the books of Hadith do expose the violence of non-Muslims in the past:
    (Book #16, Hadith #116)-Sahin Bukhari:
    '..."The Prophet sent about seventy men (who knew the Quran by heart) towards the pagans (of Najd) who were less than they in number and there was a peace treaty between them and Allah's Apostles (BUT THE PAGANS BROKE THE TREATY AND KILLED SEVENTY MEN). So Allah's Apostle recited Qunut for a period of one month asking Allah to punish them."
    As the phrase, the Pagans...killed the seventy men, is mentioned in book #16, Hadith 116 with the phrase, the Prophet sent about seventy men, it implies that non-Muslims were violent to the extent that they refused to accept peace treaty to the extent that they killed those Muslims who were sent by Mohammad.
    The same is mentioned in (Book #58, Hadith #194)-Sahin Bukhari:
    '...the PAGANS OF MECCA SAID, "But WE HAVE SLAIN SUCH LIFE AS ALLAH HAS MADE SACRED, and we have invoked other gods along with Allah, and we have also committed fornication.'...'
    As the phrase, pagans of mecca said, is mentioned in the book #58, Hadith #194, with the phrase, we have slain such life as Allah has made sacred, it implies that non-Muslims in the past were violent and did not want to respect those Muslims who were made sacred by Allah. By zuma - 4/25/2017 9:36:24 PM

  • Dear Zuma, You can add the following verses to those quoted in your last comment to demonstrate the defensive character of the Prophet's mission: "God does not forbid you to be virtuous and just to those who did not fight you over religion, nor drove you from your homelands. Indeed, God loves the just (8)God only forbids you to befriend those who fought against you over religion, and expelled you from your homelands, and backed (others) in your expulsion; and whoever befriends them – it is they who are unjust” (60:9). “O People! We have created you as male and female, and made you into races and communities (lit., ‘tribes) for you to get to know each other. The noblest among you near God are those of you who are the most heedful (morally upright). Indeed, God is All-Knowing and Informed” (49:13). "As the Muslims began to enter Mecca), the most fanatic among the Meccans harbored intense animosity – the fiery passion of the days of Ignorance, when God sent divine peace upon His Messenger and on the believers, and imposed on them the Word of restraint (taqwa), as they were entitled to it and worthy of it (48:26). I appreciate your efforts and invite you to read the article referenced in my initial comment to you. By muhammd yunus - 4/25/2017 4:02:49 AM

  •  Dear Zuma!

     I fully agree with your comments and your concluding statement that instruction to "fight, in Quran could not be applicable to modern days due to non-Muslims do not have hatred against Muslims and many of them like to live harmony with them."

    The problem is, may people will quote the Sira to refute your claims.

    All I did in my last comment was to quote the Qur’an to prove that fighting in the concluding phase of the Qur’an was enjoined to avoid the collapse of the Muslim community after the death of the Prophet that God knew was imminent.

    Your views only echo the following commentary appearing in concluding part [under Fighting] of my article referenced below - supported by indisputable Qur’anic allusions:

    “...all those verses that relate to defending against the pagans were specific to the era. Recorded in full light of history they also attest to the defensive character of the Prophetic mission, the agony and trauma that he and his followers lived in on a day to day, and at times moment to moment basis fearing annihilation at hands of their attackers, and under the ominous shadow of the conspiracies of the hypocrites of Medina and the native Jewish tribes who eagerly awaited their destruction.”


    Challenging, and Shed of Its Literary Glory in Translation, the Qur'an Offers Clear Clues to Exploring Its Core Commandments - Now Obscured, Corrupted and Distorted By Secondary Theological Sources


    By muhammd yunus - 4/25/2017 3:44:18 AM

  • The following are the extracted quranic verses to support non-Muslims were violence when Muhammad was on earth:

    1.        (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #190)-Mohshin Khan translation:

    ‘And fight in the Way of Allah THOSE WHO FIGHT YOU,…’

    The phrase, those who fight you, in Quran 2:190 implies Muslims were under the attack of non-Muslims.

    2. (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #191)- Mohsin Khan translation:

    ‘….And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-Al-Haram (the sanctuary at Makkah), UNLESS THEY (FIRST) FIGHT YOU THERE. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.’

    The phrase, unless they (first) fight you there, in Quran 2:191 implies hostile Muslims fought with Muslims first even though they kept distance with them.

    3.        (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #217) – Mohsin Khan translation:

    ‘…THEY WILL NEVER CEASE FIGHTING YOU UNTIL THEY TURN YOU BACK FROM YOUR RELIGION (Islamic Monotheism) if they can. And whosoever of you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever." 

    The phrase, they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion, as mentioned in Quran 2:217 implies non-Muslims fought with Muslims and intended them to be non-Muslims.

    4.       (سورة آل عمران, Aal-i-Imraan, Chapter #3, Verse #111)-Mohsin Khan translation:

    ‘…IF THEY FIGHT AGAINST YOU, they will show you their backs,…’

    The phrase, if they fight against you, as mentioned in Quran 3:111 implies hostile Muslims were against Muslims for aggressive fighting when Muhammad was on earth.

    5.       (سورة آل عمران, Aal-i-Imraan, Chapter #3, Verse #156) – Mohsin Khan translation:

    ‘O you who believe! BE NOT LIKE THOSE WHO DISBELIEVE (hypocrites) and who say to their brethren when they travel through the earth or GO TO FIGHT…’

    As the phrase, be not like those who disbelieve, is mentioned in Quran 3:156 with the phrase, go to fight, it implies that non-Muslims in the past were fierce and liked to fight.

    6.       (سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #76)-Mohsin Khan translation:

    ‘Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allah, and THOSE WHO DISBELIEVE, FIGHT IN THE CAUSE OF  Taghut (SATAN). So fight you against the friends of Shaitan (Satan). Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Shaitan (Satan).’

    As the phrase, those who disbelieve, is mention in Quran 4:76 with the phrase, fight in the cause of Satan, it implies that non-Muslims in the past were directed by Satan to fight with Muslims.

    From the above analyses, we could discover easily that non-Muslims in the past were violent and hostile and not easily to deal with.  Non-Muslims even fought with Muslims in Makkah as mentioned in Quran 2:191.  That caused Allah to have no choice but to give inspiration to Muhammad so as to fight defensively against non-Muslims.  Or else, Muslims might be wiped out from history even Allah did call Muslims to fight in the cause of Allah.

    History is history.  It has no implication to this modern world due to non-Muslims in this contemporary world would like to live peacefully with them and they are not hostile as those in the past.  That is the reason why the word, fight, in Quran has no implication in this modern world.

    By zuma - 4/24/2017 10:49:04 PM

  • Dear Muhammd Yunus,  You have quoted the past history on how Muslims were surrounded by hostile Muslims due to their hatred upon Muslims.  This history should be considered as history and has no implication for the application to this contemporary world due to non-Muslims in this contemporary world would not attack Muslims intentionally.  Or in other words, non-Muslims in this contemporary world do not show their hostility against Muslims.  The absence of hostility among non-Muslims against Muslims causes fighting among them to reduce even to nought.  The absence of fighting among non-Muslims and Muslims in this contemporary world implies defensive fighting is not necessary since modern non-Muslims do not fight with Muslims and most of them prefer to live harmony with them.   Besides, the absence of hostility among non-Muslims and Muslims in this contemporary world implies the word, fight, as mentioned in the Book of Quran would not have any value at all in this contemporary world since modern non-Muslims do not fight with them in the first place.  Muslims could live in harmony with non-Muslims since Quran 2:11 mentions that Muslims are peace-makers instead of trouble-makers on this earth.

    The word, fight, in Quran was necessary in the past due to non-Muslims were the first to trigger off their battle with Muslims.  If Allah did not inspire Muhammad to trigger off defensive battle against hostile non-Muslims, the entire Muslims might have been wiped out from history.  The reason is simply that Muslims might have been killed one by one if they did not respond in fighting defensively when they were under the attack from non-Muslims.  If Muslims did not fight defensively when non-Muslims fought with them, all Muslims might be killed under the hands of non-Muslims in the past.  With that very reason, Allah had no choice in the past to give inspiration to Muhammad to direct all the Muslims’ attention to fight so as there will be Muslim survivors in the future.  Thus, the word, fight, in Quran could not be applicable to modern days due to non-Muslims do not have hatred against Muslims and many of them like to live harmony with them.

    By zuma - 4/24/2017 10:01:45 PM

  • Dear Zuma!
    I appreciate your explanation of verses 9:5 and 9:29 by cross referencing other verses of the Qur'an. The existential character of 9:5 as an directive against those Arab tribes who repeatedly broke peace treaty becomes clear if

    one reads the opening verses of Sura Tauba  in thematic order as attempted below]:

    "Whenever they (the hostile Arabs) came upon the Muslims, they defied the peace treaty (of Hudaybiyah) and disregarded even blood ties (9:10). They pleased the Muslims with their mouths, but there was hatred in their hearts (9:8). The revelation authorizes the Muslims to kill such archetypes of defiance (kufr) who broke their oaths (treaty obligations) after pledging them, and defamed their religion (9:12) and who had done all they could to drive the Messenger away (from Mecca) and were the first to attack (9:13). It assures them that God will help them against their enemies, bring disgrace upon them and soothe the bosoms of those who believe (9:14).Finally, on the day of the Great hajj (631), the revelation gives an ultimatum of four months to the hostile pagans who were repeatedly breaking their treaty obligations (9:1-3). It commands the Muslims to kill them wherever they come upon them, capture them,besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every conceivable place (take all possible measures as advisable in warfare) after the expiry of the treaty period (9:5) unless they repented, kept up prayer and gave the Zakat (9:5, 9:11). However, the pagans who were honoring their treaty of peace and not helping anyone against the Muslims were to be given time until the treaty term expired (9:4). At the same time, those pagans who sought protection were to be given protection, until they heard the word of God and then to be delivered to a place of security (i.e. their tribal homelands) (so that they were not harmed by any other victimized Muslim) (9:6).

    Extracted from:



    As for the fuller explanation of 9:29, please read this article:

    The benevolent impact of Jizyah on the vanquished in early Islam – a review of observations by some of the greatest scholars of Enlightenment and this era.

    : http://newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/the-benevolent-impact-of-jizyah-on-the-vanquished-in-early-islam--a-review-of-observations-by-some-of-the-greatest-scholars-of-enlightenment-and-this-era/d/104248 By muhammd yunus - 4/24/2017 8:38:38 AM

  • Muslims must be wise enough to handle the interpretation of the word, fight, in Quran. No doubt Quran was the inspiration from Allah, one has to analyse the critical situation that Muslims would have confronted with when Allah deliver the message to them.

    Muslims at that time might have good intention to want many non-Muslims to become Muslims. The persistent preaching of Quran from Muslims might hurt the feeling of non-Muslims and that caused many Muslims to be under the attack by non-Muslims.

    With that great emotional move among non-Muslims and their hatred against Muslims, these caused Allah to have no choice to deliver message to call Muslims to fight. However, the fight was just defensive fighting instead of aggressive fighting.

    Allah did not intend to have aggressive fighting between Muslims and non-Muslims. Or else, Allah would not inspire Prophet Mohammad to write Quran 4:90. As the word, fight, in Quran throughout is meant purely for defensive fighting, it should not be used to be interpreted aggressive fighting for terrorism. Allah does not have any intention to promote Muslims to fight against non-Muslims. Or else, Allah would not inspire Muhammad to deliver the verse, Quran 5:32.

    The same is supported in Quran 2:11 as follows: (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #11)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘And when it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "We are only peace-makers." If one would interpret the fight that has been found anywhere in Quran to be aggressive fighting, i.e. Muslims fight those non-Muslims who do not fight, it would certainly have contradiction with Quran 2:11 since Muslims would turn up to be destroyers of the earth instead of peace-makers. If one would interpret the fight that has been found anywhere in Quran to be defensive fighting, i.e. Muslims should cease in fighting to those non-Muslims who do not fight with them or seek peace treaty with them, it would have no contradiction with Quran 2:11 since Muslims are peace-makers and do not make mischief on the earth. Just that Muslims in the past had no choice to fight since non-Muslims first fought with them and that caused Allah to call them to fight in Quran. Instead, Allah did not desire Muslims to fight but to have peace as mentioned in Quran 2:11.

    From the above analyses, it would come to the conclusion that Allah did not intend Muslims to fight with non-Muslims. Some part of the Quran mentions the word, fight, or, slain, or, slaughter, or etc. due to Muslims were attacked by non-Muslims and that caused Allah had no choice to give inspiration to Muhammad to fight for defence. Indeed, Allah was good and merciful and did not intend this to happen. It was non-Muslims to trigger off the battle first to cause Allah to have no choice to deliver the cruel word, fight. Instead, Allah preferred, peace, as spelt out in Quran 2:11. History was history and it would have no implication for any terrorism in nowadays.

    By zuma - 4/24/2017 12:36:46 AM

  • Vishnu Prasad, let’s me explain why Quran 9:5 as well as Quran 9:29 should not be misinterpreted as aggressive violence against non-Muslims. Before explaining it, we have to look into the background of Muslims in the past. In history, there were conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims due to the preaching of quran to them.

    The intention of Muslims to preach to Muslims was good. However, non-Muslims were not happy with their preaching and that caused conflict among them. The existence of conflict caused Muslims to play defensive role against Muslims and that was why Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 appeared. Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 do not intend to promote aggressive fighting. Instead, it demanded Muslims to fight only if non-Muslims were too much against them. If you would interpret Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 to be as Quran promotes Muslims to fight with non-Muslims, it would certainly contradict Quran 4:90 that mentions that Muslims had to withdraw their fight against non-Mulims if they ceased their fighting against them.

    The reason is Muslims should continue in fighting when non-Muslims ceased in fighting on the condition if Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 should be interpreted as Muslims should fight whenever they met non-Muslims. (سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #90)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘…So if they withdraw from you, and fight not against you, and offer you peace, then Allah has opened no way for you against them.’ However, if you would interpret Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 in such a way that Allah had no choice in the past to demand Muslims to fight because non-Muslims were first to trigger off their battle with them.

    The fight in Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 should refer to defensive fighting instead of aggressive. Muslims were in the history confronted with aggressive fighters, i.e. non-Muslims, and caused Allah to have no choice to deliver such verses to Muslims. This interpretation would turn up not to have contradiction with Quran 4:90. Besides, if you insist to interpret Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 to be aggressive fighting against non-Muslims even if they do not fight with them, the interpretation would turn up to have contradiction with Quran 4:90 and Quran 9:1 with Muslims should not fight with non-Muslims if there is peace treaty.

    The following is the extract: (سورة التوبة, At-Tawba, Chapter #9, Verse #1)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘Freedom from (all) obligations (is declared) from Allah and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) to those of the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah), with whom you made a treaty.’ (سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #90)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘Except those who join a group, between you and whom there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with their breasts restraining from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. Had Allah willed, indeed He would have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So if they withdraw from you, and fight not against you, and offer you peace, then Allah has opened no way for you against them.’

    If you would interpret Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 to be as defensive fighting in which at the time when Allah inspired Muhammad to write this verse that time Muslims were under-attacked by non-Muslims and that caused Allah to have no choice to quote this verse to direct Muslims’ attention to defend their religion, the interpretation would turn up not to have contradiction with Quran 4:90 and Quran 9:1 in the sense that Allah did not desire Muslims to fight aggressively against non-Muslims since Allah demanded peace treaty between Muslims and non-Muslims.

    Besides, if you would interpret Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 to be as encouraging Muslims to fight against non-Muslim, it would turn up to have contradiction with Quran 5:32 due to Quran 5:32 forbids Muslims to kill any mankind.

    However, if you would interpret Quran 9:5 and Quran 9:29 to be as defensive fighting, there is no contradiction among Quran 9:5, Quran 9:29 and Quran 5:32 since Allah did not demand Muslims to kill non-Muslims unless non-Muslims fought against Muslims. The phrase, not in retaliation of murder, in Quran 5:32 refers to innocent people. Or in other words, Quran 5:32 forbids Muslims to kill innocent non-Muslims too. (سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #32)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear proofs, evidence, and signs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and exceeding beyond the limits set by Allah by committing the major sins) in the land!’

    From the above analyses, these would come to the conclusion that the word, fight, in Quran should be interpreted as defensive fighting instead of aggressive fighting. Muslims only fight if non-Muslims fight with them. If non-Muslims do not fight with them, they should withdraw their fighting (Quran 4:90). If non-Muslims would like to have peace treaty with them, Muslims should cease their fighting with them.

    By zuma - 4/24/2017 12:12:53 AM

  • Vishnu Prasad, You have quoted Quran 9:5 as well as Quran 9:29 to draw attention on Islamic teaching to direct Muslims to fight against those who believe not in Allah.  At a glance, your interpretation seems to sound logically.  At a closer look and thorough examination of all other quranic verses, you would like the interpretation is rather absurd without logic.

    By zuma - 4/23/2017 11:12:14 PM

  • First of all i would like to extend my sincere thanks to you for creating such a good platform for the discussion and burning issue relayed to Islam. I am not so much knowledgeable person to comment on your write-up. As an ordinary reader of your write-ups what I found is that you are a little bit rude and impolite. I think the absence of the  words like 'Mollah' 'Wahhabi' will make your write-ups more beautiful.
    And I ask you pardon if my words are tantamount to something that goes against your ... 
    By SAMI AHNMED - 4/23/2017 7:59:52 AM

  • Bhat we are Muslims that is final don't try to separate us from each other By Tanveer Ul Islam - 3/2/2017 11:48:40 PM

  • Mr. Sudhir Bharti: You know nothing about a believer of Islam. It's ridiculous that you claim to understand Makki and Madani Surah. You can't understand a single Kalmah of Quran as your intentions are negative and destructive. Last month an RSS minded police officer had disclosed that all the fake encounters were plannings of evil minded that made Mr Modi reach to Delhi. Likewise, Godhra train fire was lit was Sanghis to polarise the Hindus with an eye on forthcoming elections in 2002.  By Raihan Nezami - 2/26/2017 10:49:45 AM

  • Mr Sudhir Bharti: Recently a great number of Hindus are arrested in MP who are linked with ISIS. Furthermore, the RSS, ABVP, RAM SENA. DURGA VAHINI and associates
    are trading in hatred in various temples of learning to earn vote and support for their creators.  
    By Raihan Nezami - 2/26/2017 8:45:09 AM

  • I have read quran and know the difference between makki sura and madani sura. I know what it says about unbelievers. In terms of islam believer in not a person who believes in the supreme power and is at liberty to establish link with him in his desire...See More By Sudhir Bharti - 2/26/2017 8:01:22 AM

  • Unbelievers see the world with their eyes as they are not blinded by a mere belief. Peace and tranquility among its followers is the basic sign of a Dharma. Muslims through out the world are deprived of it. Thanks to its theory of Taqfirism and self proclaimed soldiery of Allmighty which they call Allah. By Sudhir Bharti - 2/26/2017 8:00:56 AM

  • @Naeem you deliberately skipped mentioning the valor of those brave men who burnt unarmed and unsuspecting Hindus in train compartment at Godhara. It had triggered all unpleasant incidents. I know it does not suit you.

    By Sudhir Bharti - 2/26/2017 8:00:36 AM

  • Non believers should be dealt politly and humbly bro ....u dont see what media says and what a muslim does....see islam as what is written By Tasaduq Hussain Dar - 2/26/2017 7:59:59 AM

  • And message me if u have any doubt abt islam Sudhir Bharti and do tag me when u comment By Tasaduq Hussain Dar - 2/26/2017 7:57:18 AM

  • @Naeem Ahmed, you have turned blind eye towards Supreme Court which said RSS was not involved. Either you are ignorant or lying blatant. By Sudhir Bharti - 2/26/2017 7:33:32 AM

  • Sura al Qafiroon. Mr Dr. What does it read? What is prescribed for a Qafir in quran by Allah? What treatment should be done with those who discard Islam? Please explain it to kafirs. Let us know how peaceful Islam is. Practical proof is visible through out the world. Where ever Islam reached it brought bloodshed and destruction. By Sudhir Bharti - 2/26/2017 7:23:43 AM

  • Tariq Fateh ...lol...
    Ask him the meaning of vajid...i bet he won't know.
    He has been kicked out by 4 countries.
    By Ishfaq Pir - 2/26/2017 7:20:52 AM

  • @Sudhir Bharti, Your are totally lying. How many RSS workers are arrested with Bomb and other material, they have killed Mahatma Gandhi. With goverment support they are set freed and evidence against them removed. By Naeem Ahmed - 2/26/2017 7:20:02 AM

  • Debating with unbelievers is useless , Allah says he guides those whom he wills . Quran and Hadiths are there in the world and they are enough  By Tabrez Ali - 2/26/2017 7:18:51 AM

  • Salafism is the root cause of terrorism. By Mammad Koya Kp - 2/25/2017 2:51:33 AM

  • @New Age Islam You can't change Radical mind. By Sudheer Sha - 2/25/2017 2:43:23 AM

  • @Rajesh khanna first solve your own hindu radical problems then see others.... By Md Shamim Siddiqui - 2/25/2017 2:42:40 AM

  • @Imran Khan Whataboutism won't solve radical islam's problems ,  By Rajesh Khanna - 2/25/2017 2:42:18 AM

  • I think you are lonely voice in Islamic world. There is nothing wrong in any religion but priest of religion in connivance with Politicians made it worse . Religion came in to existence for liberation of men but instead it made people slave by suppressing free thinking. By Indrajeet Singh - 2/25/2017 2:41:13 AM

  • Y #New_age_Islam Islam is same only #Muslims have changed....
    ....#New_age_Muslims could be the right name for the group
    By Lone Suhail - 2/25/2017 2:39:23 AM

  • Time to retrospect. Your voice will be drowned in others cacophony. By Vasant Kumar Nair - 2/25/2017 2:33:53 AM

  • Ulemas r enemy of Islam. They preserve their own interests. People think law made by ulemas r unchangeable and paralled them to Quran. By this actually they r doing shirk. By Rouf Molla - 2/25/2017 2:33:11 AM

  • Mr Sultan Shahin,
    I admire your brave effort as an eye opener for the Islamic orthodox,being driven by selfish politicians and Mulla's.
    Sir,your effort should reach the lowest rank in the Islamic society which are badly extorted,and the elite islamists like to keep them backward for personal gain.
    Hence you think a method that your mission may reach the downyrroden poor ,who ate deprived of social media.
    By U.p. Ojha - 2/25/2017 2:06:15 AM

  • open heart surgery - patient being operated by a nurse - who doesn't kno the [ H ] of heart ---- this is the case of ISIS or so calld other bogus jihad groups,,,,,,,,And the case is same with this idiot -so calld sultan shahin, ,,,,,,, islam needs no reformation, but indeed u need.....so read the quran. ....u wll find islam has been reformed 1438 years ago.......

    By Tanve Tanveer - 2/25/2017 1:43:02 AM

  • A very thought provoking aarticle,nice to see very good conversation between different kinds of people.

    By Ajay Sharma - 2/25/2017 1:32:14 AM

  • I have time and again challenged this person that is the author.. to show where is it .. the sects.. killing innocent people.. in Quran..
    he is a paid writer to malign Islam and just to further divide Islam.. if not he or his admirers show something that is wrong from Quran..first then give lectures....

    By Mastan Shaik - 2/25/2017 1:31:26 AM

  • @Vishnu,.its the Wahabi interpretation of the verses. Wahabism teaches sectarian fanaticism, intolerance and killings of non-believerd.

    By Akhtar Imam - 2/25/2017 1:30:48 AM

  • 'People of the book' refers to Christians

    By Vishnu Prasad S - 2/25/2017 1:28:54 AM

  • Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

    By Vishnu Prasad S - 2/25/2017 1:28:26 AM

  • @Mohd Yunus Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the #idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."

    By Vishnu Prasad S - 2/25/2017 1:27:43 AM

  • Dear Vihnu Prasad ji please quote Qur'anic verses with full detail I will tell you that what is it for and what was context because some verses are contextual .

    By Mohd Yunus - 2/25/2017 1:26:59 AM

  • Sir.. you said extremism is found in all sects of Islam. We cant blame #Wahabbism alone. I had gone through some of the 'verses' frm #Quran. Now im jst pointing one of the #theology frm quran. ' Christians, vedic followers, non followers of islam r truth-less peoples. If Allah want 'those' peoples can be coverted into goodness, but Allah will never ever do this. You need to always keeps distance frm 'those' peoples, because 'they' r truth-less peoples'.

    By Vishnu Prasad S - 2/25/2017 1:23:40 AM

  • Radicals have to strive hard to save these misguided group of people by bringing them on the right direction

    By Ashok Bharti - 2/25/2017 1:18:45 AM

  • Perhaps u r going to malign real islam....revise ur thoughts and behold ur pen. Allah forbid it may lead u to astray .....come up with real facts dont b moved by impulses of the moment....

    By Shariq Ali - 2/25/2017 1:18:14 AM

  • What did you say have any positive proof or just Allah has given tounge,What like say or write.Several statement come from renowned Alims verbally and written. When you will change your mindset only then you will be able to see.

    By Abu Basim Khan - 2/25/2017 1:17:39 AM

  • Wahabis are promoting this ideology.

    By Dar Tauseef Dar - 2/25/2017 1:16:52 AM

  • Extremisam is possible in every religion due to so many factors - Religion must controlled-guided by knowledgeable - intelectuals - spritualist. All religious leaders will be respected when they are humanitarian. We appeal all religious heads to condemn masscare - extremisam. All friends we need inculcate more thought process - equitable distibution - equitable opportunity along with knowledge management. Exploitation - emotions will be balanced thru education - knowledge sharing. some freinds try to ask about manuvadi. what manuvadi we are looking the above philosphy in every religion. let us not to criticise and work for peace - development. If strong human life any body feed first we work and Kashmir or pakistan relatives pl awake and see the experience in syria - iraq . As u see Afganistan progressing but some forces disturbing. wish share share and get results - forward. OH GOD BLESS ALL OF US FOR PEACE - DEVELOPMENT.

    By Kolipaka Sudeep Kumar - 2/25/2017 1:13:25 AM

  • Yes.. u also said the #Quranic verses were corrupted during war-times. Is that is the problem with Islam nd quran now??

    By Vishnu Prasad S - 2/25/2017 1:12:21 AM

  •  One has to hear Goenkaji's talks on extremism and why Vipassana must be maintained in its pristine purity so that any sectarianism must not be entertained. I moot any interested in addressing extremism explore more of Goenkaji and Vipassana ... I will see what I can add relevantly with time.

    By Deepa Natarajan - 2/25/2017 1:11:50 AM

  • Jihad is the peak of ISLAM.
    Khalid bin Waleed was known as sword of ALLAH
    Wht does it imply?
    We r proud if v r called terrorists n fundamentalists bcoz v terrify the anti social elements n follow the fundamentals of ISLAM.
    We also denounce the INDIAN RAW BACKED TTP HANDLED SUICIDE BLAST,but wht z unfortunate is that u r presenting ur view from wrong context.
    Wht u refer to i know is Hafiz Saaeed,Hazrat Moulana Masood Azhar sahab and mullahs like them
    Let me clarify u that these terrorists r not the products of any madrassa run by these previliged Mullahs.These r exclusively Indian sponsored.If they terrorists had been orthodox muslim products,then they could not have carried out blasts in busy places thereby killed number of Muslim Ummah becoz ISLAM COMPLETELY DENOUNCES INNOCENT KILLINGS.So to point at the esteemed Mullahs,u r just trying to ridicule ISLAM.It is bcoz f them Muslims hv security.Our Mullahs always defended never offended.They could have carried out blasts mainly in Non Muslim States,but never did so,had they been Terrorists.The terrorists in world r sponsored by the three big TERRORISTS OF ERA,i.e.,INDIA AMERICA AND ISREAL.Moreover name of ur page is itself contradictory.
    Never again point ur finger towards our Mullahs,otherwise we KASHMIRIS will cut ur finger.

    By Ishfaq Pir - 2/25/2017 1:10:33 AM

  • You are sick stop using word islam with your poor thoughts. 
    Read and understand Islam first .

    By Suzeen Ozil - 2/25/2017 1:09:56 AM

  • Kat mullah ..

    By Jayaraman Subri - 2/25/2017 1:03:28 AM

  • Yeh wahabi/salafi/Ahley hadees yeh sab ek hain yeh log yahoodi k liye kaam kr rahey hain...

    By Mirza Amir Abrar Baig - 2/25/2017 1:02:56 AM

  • Moses(PBUH) ordered the killing of people who started calf-worshipping in his absence.

    By Mohammad Arif - 2/25/2017 1:01:48 AM

  • @Mohammad Arif ..
    What do you say ..??

    By Jayaraman Subri - 2/25/2017 1:01:17 AM

  •  Jamia Malia has delivered a blunt headed two legged living creature

    By Rouf Molla - 2/25/2017 1:00:37 AM

  • You should not stay outside jail. U bloody bucher shame for not only islam but also for human species

    By Rouf Molla - 2/25/2017 1:00:17 AM

  • @Arif Mohammad Go to Pakistan

    By Rouf Molla - 2/25/2017 12:59:46 AM

  • @ Rouf Molla If Pakistan calls itself Islamic republic, it should be on its priority to prohibit shirk, instead it promoted it. Hence, somebody else corrected it.

    By Mohammad Arif - 2/25/2017 12:59:16 AM

  • Mohammad arif's statement is condemnable and punishable. He is openly supporting ISIS

    By Rouf Molla - 2/25/2017 12:55:34 AM

  • Doctors don't help from "ghaib". And yes, it would be, if the doctor is dead.

    By Mohammad Arif - 2/25/2017 12:54:28 AM

  • @Mohammad Arif is consulting doctors for cure of diseases also worshipping and Shirk? 

    By Shehnaz Naikk - 2/25/2017 12:53:15 AM

  • >> So,does your Qur'an say only muslims committing Shirk should…
    What's "muslim committig shirk"? The one who commits shirk is NOT a muslim.

    By Mohammad Arif - 2/25/2017 12:52:31 AM

  • @Mohammad Arif So,does your Qur'an say only muslims committing Shirk should be killed or non-muslims committing shirk also should be killed? 

    By Shehnaz Naikk - 2/25/2017 12:51:12 AM

  • >> Who have given right to kill innocent people. 
    Allah. He has prescribed death penalty for those who spread fitnah. If openly doing shirk and institutionalising it, is not fitnah, what is it? 
    >>U r not judge. If they r heretic Allah will punish them hereafter
    What I'm saying is not my personal opinion/judgement. Allah says in Quran:"Judge among you by Allah's word"
    That's what I'm doing.
    By Mohammad Arif - 2/25/2017 12:50:31 AM

  • @Arif Mohammad So u r happy about d blast .... SHAME,u r ddoing d most heinous crime right now,may u also meet d same end.

    By Sonia Sharma - 2/25/2017 12:46:46 AM

  • @Arif Mohammad Who have given right to kill innocent people. U r not judge. If they r heretic Allah will punish them hereafter

    By Rouf Molla - 2/25/2017 12:43:48 AM

  • I wondered how people justify killing of human just because of differences in methods of of worship.

    By Atul Shukla - 2/25/2017 12:34:39 AM

  • >> Only a demented idiot will subscribe to the killing of grave visitors.
    Not visitors, worshippers. Prophet also visited graves but he did not ask for a job or for a child from baba.

    By Mohammad Arif - 2/25/2017 12:32:49 AM

  • Only a demented idiot will subscribe to the killing of grave visitors. Who the hell are u to dub them Mushrik..Really half knowledge is dangerous. A section of fanatics among Muslims are the root cause of this demonisation of Muslims among the civilized soul's.

    By Akhtar Imam - 2/25/2017 12:25:22 AM

  • Abbas Abdi Mohammad Arif I disagree with you I too do not subscribe to their ways but at the same time I respect their way of observing their faith and certenly not kllling them , You Mohammad Asif are a potential of violence I hope the law enforcement are monitoring you hopefully they will do the need full...

    By Syed Arif - 2/25/2017 12:23:57 AM

  • >> So are you saying the killings was right....?
    Yes. People danced there. The crowd there was because of women. And women because of superstition.
    People kiss black stone because prophet did it. Qalandar XYZ is not a prophet. Also Muslims just kiss it, they do not worship it or demand things from it. While people visit Qalandar for jobs, babies, cure from ailements, which is equivalent to worshipping.
    How can a dead man inside grave help us. He himself must be in need of help.

    By Mohammad Arif - 2/25/2017 12:18:30 AM

  • @Muhammad Arif So are you saying the killings was right....?

    By Syed Arif Abbas Abdi - 2/25/2017 12:16:45 AM

  • @Mohammad Arif Stone kissers calling grave kissers mushriks while both sail in the same boat.

    By Shahid Ali Khan - 2/25/2017 12:11:17 AM

  • Are you heard in the Islamic world? Hope the Muslims will understand what you are saying!!! God bless all of us with peace, love and happiness!

    By Bhuvaneswar Chilukuri - 2/25/2017 12:10:00 AM

  •  Muslims are only the follower of Allah and any kind of Shirk is not allowed in Islam if any one doing then he will be no more Muslim and he must leave the identity of Muslim so that other could not get confused; those who are creating violence or terrorising people in the name of religion or nationalism or other ism ;they never be religious.

    By Mohd Yunus - 2/25/2017 12:06:43 AM

  • @Mohd Yunus You are not any body to judge a person..May be these Shrine visitors are better than you in hundred ways.you should try to better yourself than criticizing others.

    By Shehnaz Naikk - 2/25/2017 12:04:53 AM

  • What r u trying 2 say yunus...jab sab uparwala decide krta h to apko kisi ko musalman kehne ya na kehne ka hak kisne dia...aur waise b ap jaise padhe likhe logon k support se hi bhram felta hai...

    By DrRahul Kumar - 2/25/2017 12:01:54 AM

  •  If they r practicing in there own way then what d prblm

    By DrRahul Kumar - 2/25/2017 12:01:17 AM

  • @Shehnaz Naikk Of course I am not a perfect Muslim and I m trying my best to follow absolutely Islam but I don't deny the the basic of Islam ;these people are doing absolutely wrong as per Islam .It is very clear that Islam does not allow any kinds of violence and terrorism; no one have right to give punishment except Allah .

    By Mohd Yunus - 2/25/2017 12:00:27 AM

  • @ Mohd YunusDo u follow the Islam completely?Are you yourself a perfect muslim?The fact is that nobody is a perfect muslim.if somebody is committing shirk,let god deal with them.

    By Shehnaz Naikk - 2/24/2017 11:55:18 PM

  • @Miss Sonia you are requested to use terms appropriately we know that what is demonic faith and in which religion demons are mentioned but I don't wan to discuss more;the Muslims have reservation that in the name of Muslims don't terrorise people and also don't do anything against Islam; at the same time every one either Hindu or Muslim or any one else have right to chose his /her own religion and pray accordingly but there is some rules and regulation of religion which are compulsory to follow if not he or she free to leave religious identity.

    By Mohd Yunus - 2/24/2017 11:53:57 PM

  • @Mohd Yunus In a way u support d act n d hatred behind .... d 1 who has reservations for any faith tht doesn't support violence n is loving is actually a extremist ,a terrorist mentality ,in a way most muslims do that,thts y Islam has emerged as a demonic faith rather than a humane faith.

    By Sonia Sharma - 2/24/2017 11:52:04 PM

  • @Mohd yunus Why not? They r also worshipers of Allah in their own way.

    By Ajoy Dutta - 2/24/2017 11:47:32 PM

  • Islamic problem is that Koran explicitly supports Wahabi ideology - there is nothing in Koran that supports Sufi culture.

    So to eliminate Wahabi ideology one will need to change Koran. Can muslims do this?  By Raman - 2/24/2017 11:47:03 PM

  • @Atul No ;never no one have right to kill any one they all ate creature of Allah they have their own life cycle which is set by Allah; They can go where ever they want but they should not level themselves as Muslim.

    By Mohd Yunus - 2/24/2017 11:46:18 PM

  • @Mohd Yunus.. since sufism is not true Islam we should kill all of them.. who goes majar n.. other places

    By Atul Shukla - 2/24/2017 11:41:25 PM

  • Problem with muslims and their Ulema is that they have never read the Quran.
    They are divided I to sects ready to murder each other .
    Their enemies just have to watch while they slaughter each other.
    This is Allah's Azab on them soon they will realize

    By Shahid Ali Khan - 2/24/2017 11:39:43 PM

  • @Abu Basim Khan  So what? U have no right to kill them in the name of Islam. Let them live with their belief. They r not harmiing u.

    By Ajoy Dutta - 2/24/2017 11:31:47 PM

  • You know that Shahin self agree and write New Islam and he is follower of new Islam like Akbar Deene Ilahi.Sultan Shain don't follow of Qur'an and authentic Hadees Islam.The Islam of Allah and Prophet Mohammad. He is second Tarik Fatha.

    By Abu Basim Khan - 2/24/2017 11:31:01 PM

  • @Sultan Lone you want to say the non muslim if killed in a mosque only would be an example of Islamic terrorism? Do not talk right and left. Recall incident of 1990 when on the valley calls were given from mosque asking Hindus to vacate Kashmir leaving behind their women. No muslim organization came forward to save them. What happens with Hindus in Pakistan? Their women are kidnapped, forcibly converted and married to muslims. You did not say anything whether a non muslim has a right to preach his religion in a muslim country or not. Whether a muslim is allowed to covert his faith or not. Afjal Guru is not a case of bigotry. He mounted an armed assault on unarmed persons. Thanks for suggesting me to go to a mosque and to read quran. For your information I have read quran and I find my religious books are far superior. I am a daily reader of Gita and try to follow it in my life. I invite you to go through it, read commentary on it by OSHO. You will get peace which ever alluded muslims.

    By Sudhir Bharti - 2/24/2017 11:29:42 PM

  • @Sudhir Bharti Please cite examples where nonmuslims have been killed in mosques for not believing in Islam under legal system. I don't subscribe to terrorists acts. Yes one who spreads fitna that means a conflict which leads to war or fighting is to be killed. Every country has this law. Under this law Afzal Guru was hanged. Allah says your job is to convey message not to force it. I will request you to visit Masjid read Quran yourself. It is in simple language. Don't listen to anybody.

    By M Sultan Lone - 2/24/2017 11:22:48 PM

  • @Sultan Lone Islam without doubt is a political and military doctrine. Mosques are the places which are permitted to be used for these purposes. Killing kafirs, capturing their women and distriuting them among muslims, put those to death who desert Islam, all are commanded in quran which some believe are the words of Ishwar. All powers are inherent into Caliph and those should be killed who create FITNA in an islamic country is the laid principle. It clearly proves my point. What is the definition of fitna and who would decide it? Clearly, it is mulla who has this authority. Even a peaceful person giving message of his own religion other than islam is to be blamed for fitna. This religion portraits the image of Allmighty of a jealous, cruel and intolerant power. Where ever it reached people lost peace, lost their heritage, culture and identity. Its concept of Allmighty is so poor that it can not compete with Dharma of the East. Any way so far you have not come clear on any of the point raised by me. You can not I think. By Sudhir Bharti - 2/24/2017 11:18:21 PM

  • @Sudhir Bharti Muslims have a socio- legal system not poltical system . As per modern lines. Modern poltics follows mechavalianism. Nothing is wrong in achieving the end. While as religion follows the pleasure of Allah or Almighty or God. So to achieve the pleasure of Almighty wrong ways can't be treaded. But to achieve power religion, caste, colour, money power, musle power, wine etc can be used. It depends what works that will be used. Einstein discovered formula for solving energy crises of world it was used in the creation of nuclear bombs. But we can't blame Einstein By M Sultan Lone - 2/24/2017 11:12:56 PM

  • Sultan Lone. Islam is inclusive of politics. It is a cocktail. The point is non muslims are ignorant of its reality. They have a misconception that all the religions are same. No it is not. Islam at least does not think so. It is the root cause of kashmir problem. By Sudhir Bharti - 2/24/2017 11:09:52 PM

  • @Shafeeq correct your information. Babari Mosque was.constructed demolishing a temple. Not only it Some Nath Temple was also destroyed in Gujarat. Gyanwapi mosque at varanasi and mosque at krishna janm bhumi at mathura were also constructed on demolished temple sites. These are only few examples. Terrorists activities started with muslim attacks on hindus. Hindus had every right to take back their place of worship in a similar fashion in which muslims demand Al Aksa mosque. You are envy of RSS because it talks of Hindus, it unites them. This right to unite in the name of religion you want to keep only for muslims. Is it not true? Another thing. None is interested to know who is true muslim and who is not. It is up to you to discuss it. We have enough experience to know the muslim behaviour. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Kashmir are glaring examples that Hindu population disappeared from those places. It is amusing that instead of coming clear on the points raised by me in my comments, you talked of Babari masjid. For you if I am a kafir, why I should not treat you a Mlechha!!!

    By Sudhir Bharti - 2/24/2017 11:09:26 PM

  • @Sudhir bharti terrorist activites in india stared after babri majsid demolishen but no true muslim in india or any other part of thecworld support terrorism 
    If we indian wants to live peacrfull It is up to government and RSS because the governments be it congress or any otger party in india are not taking communialism seriously

    By Shafeeq Mohammad - 2/24/2017 11:08:06 PM

  • @Sudhir Bharti These are poltical games of polticians. These are played everywhere.

    By M Sultan Lone - 2/24/2017 11:06:12 PM

  • Muslims brought Congress leadership on its knee and made , pakistan,homeland for them. What is the condition of muslims in their homeland? The same Kadiyanies who were in forefront for pakistan were second only to Hindus to be killed. Not only it they lost even their muslim identity . Jinnah was a Shia and his clan too suffered same fate. We know the condition of human rights in POK is worse. Even then if want a separation, migrate to that side.

    By Sudhir Bharti - 2/24/2017 11:05:34 PM

  • @M Sultan Lone Counting heads does not prove any point. Hindus who are the son of soil suffer for no fault. Separatists fueled by Islamic mindset started the bloodshed and are still doing so. Killing unarmed and submissive Hindus they became ghazi. Now they face armed forces and bullet spares none. Despite all we exercise maximum restrain otherwise valley would have been vacant. By Sudhir Bharti - 2/24/2017 11:04:37 PM

  • @Sudhir Bharti Muslims died 80000 and Hindus 225 . But that should not have happened. It was sad incident. But they still are fond of kashmiries and are visiting. We participate in their social functions. By M Sultan Lone - 2/24/2017 11:00:34 PM

  • @ M Sultan Lone Also visit Kashmiri Hindus who were persecuted and purged out of their homeland by Muslims. In 1991 they were massacred and their women raped, property looted. Why ? Because they were Hindus and did not support separation on the basis of religion. Therefore do not play victim as the folly is yours. By Sudhir Bharti - 2/24/2017 10:53:06 PM

  • Let the Sultan shahin visit the jails of India and the world and find how many people are in jails who are undergoing trial in terrorism or crime and were studying in Madrassas and how many are from government schools. When we wanted to find out how many stone pelters are from Madrassas we nill. Actually it is a mind set of Sultan shahin that he will fabricate stories against Muslims and their institutions. He is mentally so sick that he targets Muslims for the wrong of others. By M Sultan Lone - 2/24/2017 10:51:57 PM

  • Nakkarkhaane mein tootee kee aawaaz ? By Dinesh Gupta - 2/24/2017 10:51:21 PM

  • The Wahhabi theology barely allows its followers to survive without resorting to violence.  Its enclosure movement that considers only those agreeably currying favour with the Wahhabi theology as Muslims, and the rest as “Mushrik” or “Kaafir” or “Bidati” while simultaneously justifying the killing of these “Mushrik” is what can be seen as a primary source of terrorism.

    Given the condemnatory words outspoken by the general secretary of JAH, Maulana Asghar Ali Imam Mehdi, it is not unfit to say that the Wahhabi theology is implicitly engaged in manufacturing terrorists and then the Wahhabi leaders condemning and blaming them for being terrorists.      

    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi غلام غوث الصديقي - 2/23/2017 9:57:43 PM

  • Janab Sultan Shahin Sb has been doing his level best for the reformation of the wrongdoings in Islamic practices within his limited resources even risking his life and honor. There is hardly any appreciation and recognition from the elite group of different sects testing the patience in good work to the fullest.

    In India, especially, the Muslims have greater problems of bread and butter, education and employment, equality in government establishment and job opportunities than triple talaq, halala or polygamy etc. No religious leader or political minority group pays attention to these genuine problems except lip service. That is why the leaders of various sects are busy in garnering riches for them forming their parties or by supporting others.

    Some scholars are trying to raise the issues related to the wrong ways of Islamic practices that also goes in vain, as no takers are there in field of the Muslim society; we are unable to solve our problems-social, economical, educational, political, nor religious.

    The euphoria created about triple talaq and halala is simply a case of polarization of votes by the extremist group of Hindus. For polygamy, in a society where about 90% of the population is below poverty line, hand to mouth, living in utter impoverishment; who is going for a second marriage if they do not have resources to marry once, to feed their own parents and kids and family members? By Raihan Nezami - 2/23/2017 9:19:06 PM

  • The World Bank Group and the Islamic Development Bank published the first Global Report on Islamic Finance, which details the prospects for the global Islamic finance industry and its potential to help reduce worldwide income inequality, enhance sharing prosperity, and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.
    Subtitled “A Catalyst for Shared Prosperity?”, the report provides an overview of trends in Islamic finance, identifies major challenges hindering the industry’s growth, and recommends policy interventions to leverage Islamic finance for promoting shared prosperity.
    Islamic finance advocates for just fair and equitable distribution of income and wealth. With a strong link to the real economy as well as risk-sharing financing, Islamic finance can help improve the stability of the financial sector. It can also bring into the formal financial system people who are currently excluded from it due to cultural or religious reasons. Unlike conventional finance, Islamic finance is based on risk-sharing and asset-based financing. By making people direct holders of real assets in the real sector of the economy, it reduces their aversion to risk.
    The report outlines a theoretical framework to analyze Islamic economics and finance based on four fundamental pillars:
    Institutional framework and public policy
    Prudent governance and accountable leadership
    Promotion of an economy based on risk sharing and entrepreneurship
    Financial and social inclusion
    The report notes, however, areas where policy interventions are needed to develop Islamic finance’s effectiveness and fulfill its potential in helping to reduce inequality. These interventions include:
    Enhance harmonization, implementation and enforcement of regulations
    Create institutions that provide credit and other information to support equity-based finance, particularly for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs)
    Develop capital markets and ṣukūk products to help finance large infrastructure projects
    Provide regulatory recognition of products from other jurisdictions to expand the markets through cross-border transactions
    What’s needed to overcome these challenges?
    The Islamic finance industry needs to expand beyond banking, which is currently a dominant component of Islamic finance, accounting for more than three-quarters of the industry’s assets.
    However, for the banking sector, the report recommends creating an enabling regulatory and supervisory environment that addresses systemic risk across jurisdictions; introducing innovative risk-sharing products and services, rather than replicating conventional risk-transfer products; unifying cross-country sharī‘ah rulings on Islamic finance; enhancing access to Islamic finance; and bolstering Islamic finance human capital and literacy.
    Another area of development is Islamic capital markets. While still relatively young, they can provide opportunities to build assets but through equity- and asset-based finance. Particularly, the ṣukūk markets (Islamic bond) are suitable for financing infrastructure and encouraging entrepreneurship. The use of sovereign ṣukūk to mobilize financing is essential to develop the market, as well as to promote transparency and efficiency of the asset pricing, according to the report.
    The report also notes that policy makers should prioritize the development of non-bank financial institutions, which are currently underdeveloped and underutilized. For example, Islamic insurance, takāful, could provide important benefits to households and firms, improving their access to financial services.
    Lastly, the report notes that using Islamic social finance can alleviate poverty and create a social safety net for the extremely poor, considering that these institutions and instruments (qard hasan, zakāt, sadaqāt, waqf) are rooted in redistribution and philanthropy. The report recommends to create governance systems to support orderly function of the Islamic social finance sector.
    By tapping into the potential of the institutions like zakāt and waqf, the report estimates that resource needs for the most deprived in most countries in South and Southeast Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa could be met.
    By Kolipaka Sudeep Kumar - 2/23/2017 6:45:16 PM

  • Why Salafi-Wahhabis refuse to accept that their own theology causes so much of turmoil in the Middle East and other parts of the world?

    What do they think of Islamic Justice and jurisprudence?

    Why their common sense failed to see the truth even after witnessing the horrendous death and destruction by al-Qaeda, ISIS, Taliban, Al-Shabaab and Boko Haram?

    Is there any statistician in this Salafi-Wahhabi group? At this rate how many millions of Shias, Sufis Ahmadis etc will be massacred in the future? How many billions of non-Muslims will be massacred until the end of the world? How many cities in the world will be destroyed like Syria?

    In the circumstances how can we blame the Americans for choosing Donald Trump as President? Or blaming Britons for Brexit?

     “We cannot to claim to love Allah and pray five times while we hate and abuse His beautiful creatures”

    By Royalj - 2/23/2017 12:31:00 PM

  •  I don't know mutch about Islam. But one thing is that you people have to think that Islam wants leadership with Bagdadis ideology or Hujrat Nizamudeen Olihs ideology . By Dinesh Pareek - 2/23/2017 10:55:40 AM

  • muslim are driven by a software, but hindu dont have any software in their brain because they have more than 1000 books and muslim have only one book to follow. By Mohan Rao - 2/23/2017 10:50:44 AM

  • Dar Muslim can do wrong ..u cant blame that on islam....if a hindu kills any1 can i blame hinduism??? By Tasaduq Hussain Dar - 2/23/2017 10:48:14 AM

  • @U p ojha whr in islam u find it??? Dont see islam as what media and muslims do...see isalm in quran and sunnah By Tasaduq Hussain Dar - 2/23/2017 10:47:14 AM

  • @Ritesh can you prove with facts that RSS people are mass murderers ? How you can them with Taliban ? By Tarun Kumar - 2/23/2017 10:46:34 AM

  • RSS is nationalist ??? Are we living in fool's paradise ? They are mass murderers, another version of taliban. By Ritesh Srivastava - 2/23/2017 10:44:53 AM

  • RSS is a.nationalist organization which advocates of inclusive Hindutva. In its domain muslims too come. To identify themselves with Arab muslim invaders is the mindset of muslims which drive them to be in a denial mode from their roots. That is why Allama Iqbal to whom muslims call rehmetulla alaih said he would not even do Sajda on unholy land of Hind. The same man, who wrote sare jahan se achha... . When a person identifies himself as a muslim he takes it in total and this identity is defined by mulla. Indian mulla is no better. It were Ali brothers, both mulla, who said even a renegade muslim is better than Gandhi. By Sudhir Bharti - 2/23/2017 10:44:30 AM

  • @U.p. Ojha , Every beard person is not Mullas. Hafiz Saeed, ISIS are not Mullas. They are outside from our country i.e India. First you should try to teach RSS, Shiv sena to love India and Indian people. Can you remove their radicalization. By Naeem Ahmed - 2/23/2017 10:43:52 AM

  • Worshipping graves is shirk. And setting partners is the biggest crime in the sight of Allah. Hence, those who were killed were actually committing most henious sin. By Mohammad Arif - 2/23/2017 10:41:56 AM

  • @Naeem Ahmed You go for #Abdul #wahab #Ibn Tamima literature written full of hate and violence we are not talking into air #Naeem Ahmad 
    That is Egyptian country removed there literature
    By Sarfaraz Amin - 2/23/2017 10:40:18 AM

  • I cant understand the situation... if someone is believing in other thing who give him power to kill him By Dr Rahul Kumar - 2/23/2017 10:37:45 AM

  • @ Imran Khan ,You should read history first, who started and supported terrorism. further what you want to say. By Naeem Ahmed - 2/23/2017 10:36:47 AM

  • @Sarfaraz Amin , What is the definition of terrorism as per you.

    By Naeem Ahmed - 2/23/2017 10:35:51 AM

  • Sarfaraz Amin ,What Hadith say about suicide. What Quran and hadith say about killing of innocent people.

    By Naeem Ahmed - 2/23/2017 10:35:00 AM

  • Don't speak lie
    By Sarfaraz Amin - 2/23/2017 10:30:33 AM


    By Sarfaraz Amin - 2/23/2017 10:30:02 AM

  • @Naeem Ahmed You are lying terrorist have religion wahabi deobandi there literature is written like that By Sarfaraz Amin - 2/23/2017 10:27:06 AM

  • @Naeem Ahmed Among shia no one is terrorist but Wahhabi sunnies are 
    Don't say they have no religion you are lying and dirty molvies are responsible 
    Show me a single shia sucide bomber
    By Sarfaraz Amin - 2/23/2017 10:22:19 AM

  • @Naeem Ahmed First read history of algerian antimperialist war against france . By Imran Khan - 2/23/2017 10:10:06 AM

  • Terrorist do not see religion whether some one is Sunni Shia or otherwise , there aim is destruction. Do not Pull Ulema in this dirty game. Ulema have no power. If you want condemnation from Ulema also give them power. Your aim is only to spread hate against Ulema and Islam. By Naeem Ahmed - 2/23/2017 10:09:21 AM

  • Dear Naseer Sahab,

    You have said, NAI could not take its ideas of reform to even University level. I will put it this way. The Muslim intellectual elite in India has almost completely ignored NAI despite its best efforts to attract them through extensive and quality coverage of its site. I am sure many bright students, scholars and faculty members of prestigious Indian universities would be getting their personal copies of NAI every day of and that is the best that Sultan Shahin Sb can do. I don't think his resources permit him to have conferences with University boards to arouse the interest or provoke the participation of their faculty members. And besides, it is not his job, nor is it going to have any impact. He is an intermediary in getting the voices and views of people like you, me, GM Sahab and others published. He cannot do any canvassing for us or for his web-portal. The ball is in your court.
    By muhammd yunus - 2/23/2017 4:30:55 AM

  • Mohd. Yunus/ Mohammed Arif

    First premises the Qur’an expounded for all humanity is the use of reason. From both of your comments you do not seem to be using reason. You say, “those who were killed were actually committing most heinous crime and in the same breadth you say, Islam does not allow any kinds of mascara or violence against any one Islam is for peace”

    ” If your second premise holds the first premise is contradicted. That is, how a religion that does not allow any kinds of violence can at the same time allow some of its followers to carry out a massacre in the Mazar.

    Obviously you are advocating ‘takfirm’ – an ideology that allows a Muslim to declare other Muslims who commit shirk as kafir and kill them simply on account of their religious orientation. An internationally reputed scholar of Islam has denounced Takfirism through his following article the caption of which speaks for itself:

    ISIS/ Takfiris Are Friends Of Satan, The Enemies Of Allah And His Messenger, Foremost In Shirk, Hypocrisy, And Apostasy And No Muslim Must Support Them In Any Form Or Fashion



     Based on the above fatwa, those who support the massacre at the Mazar stand as Friends of Satan, the enemies of Allah and His Messenger, foremost in shirk, hypocrisy, and apostasy and no Muslim must support them in any form or fashion.

    In one word, the Qur’an does not allow any Muslim to kill a Mushrik or people of any other faith on the ground of their religious beliefs.

    The ugliness in Islam’s religious thoughts in this era is expounded in my following article the caption of which speaks for itself:

    Radicalism Under The Banner Of Islam Is Mutation Of Islam Into A Cult Of Satan – So Muslims Must Create An Anti-Radicalization Narrative To Defeat And Disown It – Part 1


    By muhammd yunus - 2/22/2017 9:50:01 PM

  • Sultan Shahin ,founder editor; New Islam is a (Abusive word deleted..... Sub-editor) one he knows nothing about Islam. Islam do not allow any kinds of mascara or violence against any one Islam is for peace;Recent attack on Mazar is unfortunate either Mazar or Maqbara are not allowed in Islam and Sufism like a stupism it has no place in Islam at all it is a sect of qawali nach gana sex drugs wine etc . By Mohd Yunus - 2/22/2017 7:25:27 PM

  • Worshipping graves is shirk. And setting partners is the biggest crime in the sight of Allah. Hence, those who were killed were actually committing most henious sin.
    By Mohammad Arif - 2/22/2017 7:20:14 PM

  • Mr Nayim Ahmd sahab,
    Your post tries to justify the blast at All kalandar mosque,and court blast by Islamic terrorists.
    Are they foolish enough to be driven by the radicalists like Hafiz,and ISIS.
    please get them out from the grip of radicalists and motivate to be educated from schools those teach the lesson of humanity and not barbarism(Islam).

    By U.p. Ojha - 2/22/2017 7:06:30 PM

  • @U.P. OJha do you believe Terrorist listen to Mullas. do not put failure of anyone on Mullas. Terrorism is a result of today dirty politics not Islam and Mullas.

    By Naeem Ahmed - 2/22/2017 7:01:05 PM

  • I can mention the name of Ibn Taimiya a muslim mulla who propagated Taqfirism. It is basis of terrorism in the name of Islam. My version of Islam is the only truth and I am the only one on right path and all the others have no option but accept my version or face death. Only a mulla can do it because he is the authority over society. By Sudhir Bharti - 2/22/2017 6:59:53 PM

  • Both Naseersaab and Hats Off make good points.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 2/22/2017 11:25:08 AM

  • Very brave article. Comments on the thread are on expected lines, not surprising By Soumyakanti Chakraborty - 2/22/2017 10:33:10 AM

  • @Soumyakanti Chakraborty  aur islam ye bhi kehte hai ki kisi insaan ka qatl karne wale ki saja qatl hai aur rapist ki saja bhi qatl......isliye jo log islam ki jagah democracy aur rule of law se chalega wo society mein corruption eleminate ni kar payega............i am against those involved in killing in innocents at kalandar dargah....... By Imran Khan - 2/22/2017 10:22:56 AM

  • @Imran Khan, tu idhar udhar ki baat na kar, ye bata ki khafila kyun luta ? :) Salafis want to ban music, television, painting and poetry. Would you want to live in a world like that ? By Soumyakanti Chakraborty - 2/22/2017 10:20:11 AM

  • @Ghulam Mohiyuddin yes they should become like western liberals who killed and maimed lakhs of people in their imperialistic wars(india to algeria), who are responsible for two world wars, those liberal renaissance fellows are responsible for global poverty and conflicts by perpetuating north south divide .. recently they are spreading democracy in the process killed 20lakh people displaced 30 million, fanned sectarianism only for grabbing oil and resources. so the thing is who is more extremist or you become biased in recognising the blood spilled by your corelegionist(cruaders). By Imran Khan - 2/22/2017 10:17:22 AM

  • mr naseer ahmed should try making a youtube channel about his interpretation of the Holy Qur'an.

    in my opinion, the youtube videos of ulemas are priming pumps for aimless muslim youth brought up on the nihilistic arabian version of islam.

    if his inetrpretations can compete with the stupid, exclusionary, rigid and uncompromising messages in the cyberspace, it could be worthwhile.

    even if his opinions influence a couple of hundred youngsters, he would have made a tremendous impact.

    unless an effort is made to seize the narrative from the likes of zakir naiks, youth will be drawn to the most bizarre,. supremacist and intolerant version they can find.

    and these are just plenty.
    By hats off! - 2/22/2017 5:14:26 AM

  • Beyond articles in NAI, we have not been able to take our ideas for reformation even to the Universities where the young educated Muslims are likely to be more open.

    Change can come only through grass root level movements and not through the Ulema. 
    By Naseer Ahmed - 2/21/2017 11:00:13 PM

  • Wel chronicled article. By Comal Mahadevan Amrtheswaran - 2/21/2017 8:33:52 PM

  • We hate terrorist, but he wants to proof Muslim are terrorist By Nakib Saikia - 2/21/2017 8:16:49 PM

  • Why Islam has become totally xenophobic to the extent of madness.Yesterday shootout in paki court campus is an example.
    Need of the time is a number of Tarek Fatah to revolutionize the ethnic gang of Mulla's to recite peace 100 times before and after every namaaz in radical mosques.
    By U.p. Ojha - 2/21/2017 8:13:09 PM

  • My first intincts also said it would be someone from the wahabi sect, but it turned out to be a third party, who wanted to start a sectarian war between the other two sects. By Ali Maksud Mirza - 2/21/2017 12:40:44 PM

  • @Ali Maksud Mirza and what else has come out, and to what Tendency does the author attribute undertakings of the kind. By Megan S Mills - 2/21/2017 12:40:22 PM

  • Is he mad or what ?? those who did Shahbaz Qalandar's massacre have been caught, links are found them conneted to Iran. And no Salafis live in Iran. By Ali Maksud Mirza - 2/21/2017 12:39:32 PM

  • Daesh/ISIL claims responsibility By Megan S Mills - 2/21/2017 12:39:10 PM

  • When i used to critisize the isis and the salafy wahabisim since its inception in iraq and in other ways,they used to deatroy #masjids, shrines, islamic heritage, graves of messangers they were saying they are warriors fighting for islam lolz
    Some used to me call you are grave and shrine and grave worshipper lolz
    By Sarfaraz Amin - 2/21/2017 12:32:00 PM

  • I am a great fan of Mr. Sultan Shahin. I have been following him since long. His scholarship is profound. 
    But, with due all respect, sir, I must say that the real problem is not that Islamic practices have been corrupted. The real problem is that Islam can not be improved upon. Whenever we call any doctrine as perfect , we effectively declare that it can not adapt with new developments. Now going back and cleaning the corrupt practices can give expected results to some extent. But that is rarely sufficjent in long term.Islam does not need more cleaners, but one good reformer. But again - is the idea of reform itself acceptable within Islam ?
    By Ajoy Chakra - 2/21/2017 12:31:10 PM

  •  An excellent and well researched piece -  it fills the gap in my simultaneously posted article re German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s call to delimitate Islam from terror. My article questions whether Islamic clergy and authorities really believe that Islam is a religion of peace. The article answers it upfront. If Abdul Wahab advocated the killing of mystic Muslims and mushriks on account of their religious beliefs and practices – then he certainly does not believe that Islam is a religion of peace. Posthumously, he appears to be an ideological ally of al-Baghdadi – chief of ISIS who claims that Islam is a religion of violence, and the same may be the case with those Ulama and religious authorities of this era who follow his doctrine – assuming it is reported correctly.

    The problem in Islam’s theological assumptions and determinations is that people take their ‘masters’ of the past virtually like prophets (who must be obeyed and followed) and their writings virtually like the word of God. al-Baghdadi goes on his killing rampage as in his subconscious mind he takes Abdul Wahab as his prophet and his discourses as God’s words. And this tendency can be traced back to the Prophet’s era.

    As long as Islamic religious thought are dominated by the examples of their predecessors, the Muslims can commit the most heinous crime in the name of Islam depending upon their choice of mentor. This deification of mortals has stripped Islam of its divine heritage and is at the root of all kinds of violence in the name of Islam including sectarianism, violent extremism.  

    By muhammd yunus - 2/21/2017 5:34:52 AM

  • Timely and eloquent article! Extremism among Muslims is widespread. We do have to re-enunciate our theology so that violence, intolerance and malignant sectarianism are weeded out.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 2/21/2017 12:26:03 AM

  • Alhamdo Lillah! Excellent piece of research work inviting sincere attention and prudence upon the already deteriorated Islamic ideology among the Muslims. The sectarian divide has created a vast gap among the Muslims who are engaged in denouncing one another and present Islam in a bad shape far away from the basic characteristics and Islamic principles taught in Quran Kareem.   By Raihan Nezami - 2/20/2017 9:12:54 PM