Light n Time

Muhammad Sven Kalisch is a Professor at Münster University, one of Germany's oldest and most respected universities.

After working briefly as a lawyer, he began work in 2001 on a postdoctoral thesis in Islamic law in Hamburg, and in 2004 he went on to become Germany's first ever professor of Islamic theology.

In 2008 after extensive research he claimed there was no historical evidence of Muhammad's existence and came to the conclusion that “MUHAMMAD PROBABLY NEVER EXISTED”.

In April 2010, a spokesman for the University of Münster announced that Professor Kalisch had finally RENOUNCED ISLAM, and added that it was not crucial for a professor of Islam to be a Muslim

My friend is worried about the color of his semen instead of natural white ie is like blood red. pl help,,

Crusades of christens

Buddhist revolt in Burma

Saffron terrorism in India

Israel on Palestinians

and many many more.....

Is not all this in response to Islamic Jihad ?

When Mohammad migrated to Medina from Mecca, he had no money and resources to support his handful of supporters. How he managed such a huge resources in short time to build up a military force of 10,000 when he came back to Mecca.

The Greek root of the word idolatry is the worship of images. Text or scripture , that which is written , can convey an image of an image even more clearly than can representations of stone, or wood, or even clay. How often mankind does the thing it says it hates.--- Dr.Ali sina

No one but your own Prophet, God and people.....

Be it demonstrations against Danish cartoons, or demonstrations against a film, book, or any imaginative thing, Muslims brothers have a lot of time, energy and resources to show their commitment and love toward Islam and Muslim community. But what they forget in the process that all these actions are targeted against them self only.

For example a few cartoons of Prophet Mohammed published in any news paper which any way Muslims never go through could have gone unnoticed had they not demonstrated so violently in the past. But their foolish and stupid actions did not only yearned them hatred (islamohobia) but also encouraged all the artists around the world to put together their creative talent in creating the millions of more dirty and disgusting cartoons which are now flooded on internet. Do you have any idea how many of such cartoons are there now on net. roughly around 5.5 million. Are you happy now that your prophet is being loved so much by all others. Just think, if you can, who is harming whom?

Now they are demonstrating against the film insulting their prophet, no no, in fact they are fueling the creative mind of film makers around the world to produce more disgusting films insulting their beloved prophet to be released on net in coming future.

Now every day thousands of dirty cartoons, pictures and books against Islam are being uploaded, and no demonstrations, because you can't do anything, you cant reach to those anonymous warriors hidden behind millions of computers around the world whom you are exciting and encouraging against your own people. You have already yearned so much hatred in the name of Islamophobia. Please stop being an idiot and for God's sake grow up..

Muslims today do not worship Allah's daughters and view them as pagan deities. Having said that, it is important to note that Muhammad himself commanded his followers offer prayers to these "Allah's daughters". He later retracted it and blamed it on the Devil. It is this true event in Muhammad's life which was the topic of Salman Rushdie's book, "The Satanic Verses." (a book we certainly do not recommend reading for its profanity and racism.)

I am doing some research on religions, may some expert on Islam throw some light on the subject?

If anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will he be accepted of God; and in the next life, he will be in the ranks of those who have lost themselves and will burn in hell. (Qur'an 3:85)

Islam is an youngest religion on earth today, why then It does not have any archaeological and historical evidences to support its authenticity. Buddhism, Judaism ,Christianity, Jainism, all being older religions, yet supported by archaeological and historical facts. Is Islam only a legend without any archaeological and historical proof.

I am doing some research on "religions and violence" for a film production. I would be highly obliged if some one can furnish with a reliable data in this connection based on some authentic source.

As God being all mighty can always talk to everyone at the same time . so why he need various prophets like Abrahm , Mosses and Mohamed for common interaction.

When a child is born he or she is at the top of spiritual and divine level, free and pure, uncontaminated and divine, we reduces their potential of high level of spirituality and divinity by exposing them to so called education system and our own acquired social and religious filth in terms of morality and ethics. Remember nature is a high placed, divine and Godly proposition which we are gifted with at the time of our birth. It may be great if only we can survive with that natural gift and grow remaining like a child forever.

My Muslim friends are demonstrating violently around the world in response to the movie called " Islam the untold story" made by historian Tom Hollander. My humble advice is to ignore it if you don't like it. because such demonstrations will tag you as intolerant and in the end help islamophobia.

Have you forgotten your demonstration last time in response to cartoons of prophet Mohammed. By ignoring a few cartoons then you could have avoided millions of similar cartoons flooded now on the net. remember every action has equal reaction. By these demonstrations, similarly you will encourage millions of filmmakers around the globe to produce similar movies for upload on you tube. what you will do then and what are you doing now against millions of cartoonists who are relentlessly producing more offensive art work in the mockery of your religion.

Please grow up and learn from past mistakes.

Nothing to offend just an advice..

if you don't like just ignore it.

Let us take a look into the case of Imrana – a 28 years old woman, and the mother of five children. On June 6, 2005, Imrana, was raped by her 69 year-old father in-law Ali Mohammad. Soon after she was raped, a local Muslim panchayat (council of elders) asked her to treat her husband Nur Ilahi as her son and declared their marriage null and void! Can any law of the land justify this?

The fact that such a verdict could take place in India in the year 2005 is insulting to our legal system. Had she been a Hindu or Christian, such a verdict would not have occurred, further highlighting the inequality of the situation. In India, secularism has come to mean “non-intervening in the matter of religion.” This needs to be relooked and debated as there cannot be any discrimination in the guise of secularism.

The Hindu personal laws, too were different in different parts of the country. However, they have undergone a turbulent change, courtesy, geographically united India.

Child marriages were banned, Sati was banned, widow re-marriage was encouraged, divorce was introduced, and inheritance laws were amended. “Narabali” or human sacrifice, which was considered a religious practice of Hindus, was also banned.

While other personal laws like The Hindu personal law, have undergone reform, the Muslim law has not. It perhaps makes little sense to allow Muslims, for example, to marry more than once, but prosecute Hindus or Christians for doing the same.

Many Islamic countries have codified and reformed Muslim personal Law to check its misuse. Muslim countries like Egypt, Turkey and even Pakistan have reformed their laws. Terence Farias, in his chapter The Development of Islamic Law points out that the 1961 Muslim Family Law Ordinance of Pakistan "makes it obligatory for a man who desires to take a second wife to obtain a written permission from a government appointed Arbitration Council." The interesting point regarding Pakistan is that until 1947 both India and Pakistan had governed Muslims under the Shariat Act of 1937. However, by 1961 Pakistan, a Muslim country had actually reformed its Muslim Law more than India had and this remains true today. There is no reason why India should continue with vastly discriminatory personal laws. In fact, the reforms meted out in Tunisia and Turkey helped abolish Polygamy. Polygamy has also been either banned or severely restricted in Syria, Egypt, Turkey, Morocco, Iran and even in Pakistan. Besides Muslims who live in U.S.A., Australia, U.K. and other parts of Europe readily accepted the civil laws applicable uniformly to all citizens in the respective countries but do not feel insecure on that account. So, then, why, in India should there be such a feeling? Iran, South Yemen, and Singapore all reformed their Muslim laws in the 1970s, although Iran appears to have backslid in this respect. In the end the argument is quite clear.

When India attained independence and the issue of Uniform Civil Code (UCC) arose, much was debated at the Indian Parliament in 1948. While the founding father of our constitution and Chairman of the Constitution Draft Committee, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, supported by eminent nationalists like Gopal Swamy Iyenger, Anantasayam Iyengar, KM Munshiji, Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer and others favored the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code; it was strongly opposed by Muslim fundamentalists like Poker Saheb and members from other religions. On 23rd November 1948 a Muslim member, in Parliament, gave an open challenge that India would never be the same again if it tried to bring in Uniform Civil code and interfere with Muslim personal law. Earlier, the Congress had given an assurance that it would allow Muslims to practice Islamic personal Law and the architects of the Constitution, therefore, found a compromise by including the enactment of a Uniform Civil Code under the Directive Principles of State Policy in Article - 44. Distinguished members like Shri Minoo Masani, Smt. Hansa Mehta and Rajkumari Amrit Kaur put in a note of dissent saying that one of the factors that has kept India back from advancing to nationhood has been existence of personal laws, based on religion, which keep the Nation divided into watertight compartments in many aspects of life. They were strongly in favour of the view that Uniform Civil Code should be guaranteed to the Indian people within a period of five to ten years. But even after sixty-one years, because of perverse secularism and perverted communalism, Uniform Civil Code has not come into being.

When India attained independence and the issue of Uniform Civil Code (UCC) arose, much was debated at the Indian Parliament in 1948. While the founding father of our constitution and Chairman of the Constitution Draft Committee, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, supported by eminent nationalists like Gopal Swamy Iyenger, Anantasayam Iyengar, KM Munshiji, Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer and others favored the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code; it was strongly opposed by Muslim fundamentalists like Poker Saheb and members from other religions. On 23rd November 1948 a Muslim member, in Parliament, gave an open challenge that India would never be the same again if it tried to bring in Uniform Civil code and interfere with Muslim personal law. Earlier, the Congress had given an assurance that it would allow Muslims to practice Islamic personal Law and the architects of the Constitution, therefore, found a compromise by including the enactment of a Uniform Civil Code under the Directive Principles of State Policy in Article - 44. Distinguished members like Shri Minoo Masani, Smt. Hansa Mehta and Rajkumari Amrit Kaur put in a note of dissent saying that one of the factors that has kept India back from advancing to nationhood has been existence of personal laws, based on religion, which keep the Nation divided into watertight compartments in many aspects of life. They were strongly in favour of the view that Uniform Civil Code should be guaranteed to the Indian people within a period of five to ten years. But even after sixty-one years, because of perverse secularism and perverted communalism, Uniform Civil Code has not come into being.

Our Muslim friends love Islam and Sharia law as religion and law of Allah.As India respect all Religion and appease them by time to time. Congress implemented personal law to mollify Muslims to protect some beneficial part of sharia law. Why Indian Muslim are not fighting to implement the total sharia law in the container of personal law if they love and respect it so much. Why they are enjoying only part of it. If they can enjoy four women why their head and other parts of body should not be chopped off for other crimes committed by them according to sharia law.

How does Muslim friends responds to this?

After the Battle of the Ditch, when the coalition force of Quraish left the battle field, Prophet Muhammad attacked the last of the large Jewish tribes of Medina, the Banu Qurayza. After a 25 days siege, they (Jews) surrender unconditionally. In the end, all 600-700 males of the tribe were killed and the women and children sold into slavery.

“Sirat-a-Rasul” (page 464) by Ibn Ishaq

http://www.islam-watch.org/SyedKamranMirza/Muhamma...