HOME | About | World Muslim Congress | Our Mission | Our Sites | Quraan Conference | Muhammad Asad | Marmaduke Pickhal | Sharia | Blasphemy | Ramadan | Unity Day | Holocaust and Genocides | Pluralism Center | Muslim Speaker | Muslim Speaker | Ground Zero Mosque | The Ghouse Diary NOTE - Articles that are inclusive (not against any religion) are invited, send to wmcarchives@gmail.com

Monday, February 29, 2016

Quran - a new American Translation by Nasr

Quran - A new American Translation | www.WorldMuslimCongress.com

Indeed there are nearly 300 English translations in the market now, and each one reflects the experiences of the translator, as it should.
 Each translation slightly differs from the other, fulfilling what Prophet Muhammad wanted, to paraphrase him, " I am leaving this book for you to read and understand." The emphasis was “YOU,” Mind you, he did not assign an interpreter to refer to, and instead he expected each one will use his personal reference to understand the book while maintaining the central theme – building cohesive societies– Islam is also called the religion of human nature. 

Mike Ghouse
www.MuslimSpeaker.com 
# # # 

The American Quran Pissing Off the Saudis
The Study Quran
 puts this great religious work in historical perspective.
A new translation of the Quran, with commentary, is causing a stir—and maybe something of a revolution—in the world of English-speaking Muslims.
Why’s that? Because Salafists—adherents of a very conservative brand of Islam—have dominated the world market for Qurans for decades.
Funded by the oil-rich royal family in Saudi Arabia, which has an especially rigid Wahhabi branch of Islam, the Salafis have exported their teachers, their mosques, their audio and video productions, and religious texts across the Arab world and into Pakistan, Europe, and North America, quashing alternate interpretations that don’t fit their narrow views.
Seeing this new translation as a challenge to their orthodoxy in English-speaking countries, Salafis are none too pleased. In online discussions and reviews, influential Salafis are panning the volume, called The Study Quran,  as a soft-bellied facsimile that might be fine for academia, but not fit for following.
In fact, this no mere academic debate. Followers of the Saudi-Wahhabi-Salafi version of Islam in Europe and the United States are increasingly seen by law enforcement as a pool from which radical jihadis can draw recruits.
Some strains of this Salafi interpretation have popularized takfirism—the practice by which some Muslims declare that others are not true believers. The aftereffects are clear in fringe jihadi groups like the self-declared caliphate that calls itself the Islamic State, where those who believe differently are deemed apostates who can be, and are, slaughtered en masse. The vast majority of Salafis are not jihadis and not takfiris. But those who are use their understanding of their Quran to justify killing Shia Muslims, Yazidis, adulterers, gays, and anyone else who runs afoul of their zealotry.
Generations of the world’s Muslims have, now, grown up in the shadow of this Saudi religious empire, ignoring previous centuries of rigorous religious discourse, debate, and dissent.
The Study Quran, setting the record straight, may come as something of a revelation to Muslims and anyone else interested in Islam who speaks English. It is a formidable academic endeavor, and since it was published in November it has been flying off the shelves in a massive hardback edition. (It is also available now on Kindle.
The  editors have compiled a new translation, new commentary, and drawn on dozens of the most prominentmufassirs (interpreters or exegetes), many of whom have never before been accessible to an English-speaking audience. Indeed, “very few” of the sources cited in The Study Quran are available in English translation, head editor Seyyed Hossein Nasr told The Daily Beast.One soon comes across nuances that are unmentioned or ignored by extremists. The Study Quran notes, for instance, that verse 47:4—used by ISIS to justify beheadings—focuses on “the brevity of the act, as it is confined to battle and not a continuous command.” This interpretation would seem to challenge extremists who attempt to carry out such acts on civilians, whether on the streets of London or in Syria.
The Salafi scholars who have monopolized English-language Muslim resources are disturbed and even frightened by this textual revolution that puts them back in their place.
Salafism “was not in the mainstream of the Muslim tradition,” said Nasr. “It rejected centuries of Islamic thought.” The scholars contributing to The Study Quran, who are both Sunni and Shia, also break with the ultra-Orthodox animus against Shiism.
The Study Quran’s rich commentary, crowding around a few verses on any given onion-paper page of the hardback edition, seeks to remedy the previous absence of solid historical discourse. After all, Nasr said, even centuries ago the yearly pilgrimage to Mecca meant that exegetes, or interpreters of holy texts, were able to have a much richer exchange of ideas—and much more knowledge of one another—than European thinkers of the time.
It’s no surprise then, that Abu Eesa Niamatullah—a British Salafi with a large social media presence—cautioned followers tempted by The Study Quran to “avoid it. Like the plague.”
GET THE BEAST IN YOUR INBOX!
By clicking "Subscribe," you agree to have read theTerms of Use and Privacy Policy
“It doesn't just have mistakes, it's actually dangerous,” Niamatullah said. “This is advice to the 99 percent of people here, those who don't have the detailed tools necessary to separate the wheat from the chaff.”
Though Sunni Islam formally lacks a clerical class, Niamatullah expressed concern that those who lack proper religious or academic training might be swayed from the orthodox path by the new edition. 
“My point being that I see it as absolutely a threat to orthodox Sunni creed that such translations and commentaries, but more importantly, such deviated individuals such as Nasr being given a prominent platform to the hearts and minds of the basic masses who can't filter through the nonsense like you can,” he added in a comment.
A more moderate review, recommended by prominent cleric Yasir Qadhi to hundreds of thousands of followers on social media, acknowledges that the rigor of The Study Quran“is apparent after even a cursory reading,” but nonetheless it “is an academic and educational work, and as such includes commentaries from sources that may not be considered orthodox depending on one’s denominational orientation.” (Qadhi recentlydistanced himself from the Salafi label and critiqued some aspects of the movement.)
“Some of the Sufi commentaries can come off as uncomfortably esoteric,” the author Mobeen Vaid writes. “Khārijite positions are occasionally expounded upon, and not for the purpose of refutation.” (Kharijites were a rebel sect in the first century of of Islam.)
The differences that make it suitable for academia but not practice go all the way down to the understanding of the very nature of the Quran. “For believers,” says Vaid. “the Quran doesn't say anything, God does.”
And yet, The Study Quran fills part of what some scholars see as a perpetual hole in the study of Islam. Quranic translations abound, but centuries of commentary, debate, and context have long been the exclusive domain of those with a strong command of Arabic.
"We appear to be amidst a deluge of English translations of the Quran," Scott Lucas, a professor at the University of Arizona, wrote in 2014, reflecting on the proliferation of translations in the prior decade.


Amazon

‘The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary’ by Seyyed Hossein Nasr (Author), Caner Karacay Dagli (Author), Maria Massi Dakake (Author), Joseph E.B. Lumbard (Author), Mohammed Rustom (Author). 2048 p. HarperOne. $37.27

Pretty much any Quran given out in a da’wa, or religious outreach, program almost anywhere in the world has its roots in Saudi Arabia. Most of them use a translation completed by Yusuf Ali, an Indian-born, British-educated scholar who died in the mid-20th century. Published in 1938, it included not only Ali’s translation, but also parenthetical commentary on meaning—much of which has been stripped out by its Salafi adapters.
The first Quran ever owned by this reporter was an Ali translation, distributed through a Chelsea-based da’wa program to a bank teller, who unloaded it to this student of religion when she was still a teen. The thick hardcover has the scripture in two varieties: the original Arabic, as well as an English translation.
(Significantly, The Study Quran, already voluminous, does not include the original Arabic, the language in which Allah delivered his message to Muhammad. But the Arabic text is now readily available online and in many smaller volumes for comparison.)
Ali wasn’t the first translator of the Quran into English, of course. One of the earliest widely available translations was by George Sale, and it served as the standard for nearly two centuries. It’s rife with annotations that point to Sale’s Christian understanding of the “Mohammedan’s” holy scripture. More recent translations have come from feminists and creative translations that assign each Arabic word one—and only one—English equivalent.
And The Study Quran surely won’t be the last. The authors’ main goal, after all, is not a definitive translation—but a demonstration that different interpretations were “established, well known, and rigorously discussed over the centuries,” Nasr said.
This article has been updated.

Wednesday, February 10, 2016

Quran Translation by Safi Kaskas

Quran Translation by Safi Kaskas | www.QuraanToday.com 

I welcome this new translation of Quran by Safi Kaskas and David Hungerford among the multitudes of translations. Indeed there are nearly 300 English translations in the market now, and each one reflects the experiences of the translator, as it should.

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) understood human nature, and believed in freedom, an inalienable rights of individuals.  He has repeatedly said, there is no compulsion in religion and that you cannot push any one to believe against his or her will.  Thus, in his last sermon, he said (paraphrase), ‘I am leaving this book to you to read and understand it, hang on to it, and you cannot go wrong with it.’

Mind you, he did not assign the interpretation of the book (Quran) to anyone. He did not say, ‘look, from here on if you have questions about the book, check with So and So Shaikh.’ He know each person will read and understand through his own prism and that is why Islam is also called a Deen of fitra (human nature). I would say don't judge Islam, Christianity or any faith by the actions of the individuals, religion stands on its own - a pristine system to create peaceful societies,  most people get that right and a few don't. 




Quran cannot be more clearer than this, it repeats endlessly that no one is responsible for your actions but you, and it is your responsibility to get the book right before you act. Police will give you a ticket if you violate the traffic rules, your claim that you did not know does not release you from the mistake you made.

Quran is a book of guidance to find peace within and peace with others, if you don’t get that right, go back and read it. God cannot be wrong; it is your understanding that is wrong. By the way no one owns God, he, she or it is not any one's property either.

There is a simple test to determine the authenticity of the translation (or your understanding of it); and that is, God is not a villain of his own creation. Quran respects all creation, and respects all traditions and calls for accountability, justice and mercy to build a cohesive society where no one has to live in fear of the other.

The second test is based on the individual, the more an individual interacts with people of different faiths, the greater the understanding of Islam he or she would have, indeed Prophet Muhammad grew up in such an environment and he was pluralistic to the core like Jesus and all the great spiritual masters of the world. He respected the otherness of of the others and it is summarized in this video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7Tyt7raIXM

Religion is not about arrogant claims that you have a superior product. Arrogance creates conflicts with others right off the bat.  No matter what religion it is, it teaches humility that builds bridges and harmony between different people. 

Take a look at Safi’s translation, it's available at Amazon, “The Qur’an with references to the Bible” by Safi Kaskas and David Hungerford. You owe it to yourselves to find the truth.

Safi is an interfaith activist and he clearly grasps the essence of Quran, that is to create cohesive societies. He passes in both the tests I have mentioned earlier. I have promised him to read his translation write a review, and I shall soon do that, after I complete my book, "the Mistakes Muslims have made".

Video Interview of Safi Kaskas - https://youtu.be/HLuAvLKNjlw


Wednesday, January 6, 2016

Copy of Quran only book saved from Union’s 1865 burning of UA

1865 Quran | www.QuraanToday.com

The Libraries are a treasure! 



Published: Friday, September 10, 2010 at 3:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, September 9, 2010 at 11:58 p.m.
his copy of the Quran was saved from the 1853 burning of the UA campus.
The book is housed in the William S. Hoole Special Collections Library.
TUSCALOOSA | A copy of the Quran dating from 1853, its spine missing, its pages browning and its front cover almost detached, sits today in a library at the University of Alabama.
While Islam’s holy book now appears safe from a Florida pastor’s plan for a bonfire, the Quran at UA had its own dramatic rescue from the flames. It was the only book saved from burning of the university library at the hands of Union troops in 1865.
“We don’t know who chose it, why they chose it or how it got back to the university. All we know is that for a long, long time, we’ve had this book,” said Clark Center, W.S. Hoole Special Collections Library curator.
The order to burn the University of Alabama had been given long before federal troops arrived in Tuscaloosa on April 3, 1865. They believed that the university, along with a local textile factory and hat factory, provided materials to the Confederate army.
On the morning of April 4, 200 Union soldiers led by Col. Thomas M. Johnston approached the center of campus, the Rotunda, which held the university’s collection of books and natural history.
As the troops marched down the long, gravel street lined with cedar trees, they were met by a group of university faculty that included Andre Deloffre, the university’s librarian, and William Wyman, professor of Latin and Greek.
Deloffre begged Johnston to spare the library, one of the finest of its time. Johnston responded by sending a courier to headquarters, asking if the library could remain unscathed, but he was instructed by his general to burn the Rotunda as planned.
According to Center, what happened next has become part of University of Alabama lore. Legend has it that before Union troops set the building on fire, either Johnston, one of his aides, Deloffre or someone else went into the Rotunda to save one book — a copy of “The Koran: Commonly Called The Alcoran Of Mohammed.”
The book was an English translation of the Quran and had been published in Philadelphia in 1853. Soon after it was removed from the library, the building, along with much of the rest of campus, was engulfed in flames.
“Maybe he took it home and sent it back, maybe he went in, chose something and handed it to the librarian,” Center said. “I think, for a long time, the story was just verbal; it was just accepted that the book was here. The first time I’d seen it in writing was 1931 in the Centennial issue of The Crimson White. ”
Center said that he had no doubt the book was an original from the Rotunda and that it had probably been purchased by the library to help them cover the topic of religion as broadly as possible, since the university’s students had never been exposed to the Quran before.
“The stamps inside of it are consistent to those from other pre-Civil War books. It had definitely been here since before the war,” he said. “Religion was a big part of life back then. Most of the university’s students were Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians and even Catholics, and most had never seen something like that.”
The book now sits in the university’s W.S. Hoole Special Collections Library.
Center said the book helped modern-day historians better understand the university’s past.
“It shows that the university, in the antebellum period, was attempting to give its students a broad education to enable them to learn points of view that were not necessarily their own,” he said.

Saturday, September 5, 2015

The Fantasy Islam of Mike Ghouse by Front Page Magazine

Fantasy Islam is an imaginative construct of Dr. Steve Kirby, and he is no stranger to me.   I was there in the same boat 15 years ago.


I don’t claim to be a scholar, nor do I claim to be an authority on Islam, but I do claim that I have investigated Islam thoroughly, invited criticism, discussed with many, and have found answers. I did not have to choose to be a Muslim, there was no need for me to be one, however, I decided to choose a religion for me and Islam suited me the best for two reasons – I knew and had re-learned a lot about it, and it is an inclusive and pluralistic faith.

I will be responding to the following article by Dr. Kirby, as I have responded before to many such misunderstandings at the site www.Quraantoday.com.

Meanwhile, review this video Pluralism in Islam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7Tyt7raIXM


Mike Ghouse is a motivational speaker committed to building cohesive societies and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day. More about him in 63 links at www.MikeGhouse.net

# # # 


THE FANTASY ISLAM OF MIKE MOHAMED GHOUSE


http://www.frontpagemag.com/author/dr-stephen-m-kirby
A moderate Muslim's personal version of Islam -- and its curious non-relationship with Islamic doctrine.

  
Fantasy Islam: A game in which an audience of non-Muslims wish with all their hearts that Islam was a “Religion of Peace,” and a Muslim strives to fulfill that wish by presenting a personal version of Islam that has little foundation in Islamic doctrine.
As I pointed out in an earlier article, "Fantasy Islam" is a popular game among many non-Muslims and so-called “moderate” or “reformist” Muslims.  Mike Mohamed Ghouse appears to be such a Muslim.
Ghouse was born Mohamed Ghouse in India (He adopted the name "Mike" later).  He was raised as a Muslim until he became an atheist in the late 1960s; he returned to Islam in the late 1990s and lives in the United States. Ghouse is a frequent guest commentator on Fox News and syndicated talk radio programs, and he writes for major newspapers. Ghouse also plays Fantasy Islam.
Apostasy
In an article titled "Qur'aan on Apostasy," Ghouse makes the following claim about the punishment for apostasy:
Unfortunately, it is a common belief that 'death' should be the punishment for apostasy. However, the Qur’aan mentions nothing of such punishment, so why should we impose such a cruel and inhumane form of punishment? Are we so insecure about our own religion that if anyone is to leave it we kill them?
But Ghouse is wrong: In 4:89 of the Koran Allah commands Muslims to take hold of those apostates who have left Islam and “kill them wherever you find them.”
And, for the sake of argument, even if it wasn’t in the Koran, death for apostasy is still a part of Islam because that is what Muhammad commanded.  Muhammad said that death was the penalty for a Muslim who left Islam (e.g. Sahih Al-Bukhari, Nos. 6878 and 6923; and Sahih Muslim, No. 1676). Muhammad even specified the nature of that death:
If someone changes his religion - then strike off his head!
Al-Muwatta of Imam Malik ibn Anas, 36.18.15, in a section titled “Judgement on Abandonment of Islam.”
So we see that this "cruel and inhumane form of punishment" for apostasy is well-grounded in Islamic doctrine.
Muslim-Americans 'Uphold' the U.S. Constitution
In an article titled "Muslims are an integral part of American Heritage," Ghouse made the following statement:
As American Muslims we uphold, protect, defend and celebrate the values enshrined in the U.S. constitution.
Islamic doctrine, found in the verses of the Koran and the teachings of Muhammad (the Sunnah), is diametrically opposed to the U.S. Constitution.  Consider just these three amendments to our Constitution:
1st Amendment – Freedom of Religion and Speech: The penalty for a Muslim who wants to leave Islam is death (4:89 and Sunnah).  Non-Muslims are given the option of fighting to the death, converting to Islam, or paying the jizyah (9:5, 9:29, and Sunnah).  Once Allah and Muhammad have decided on a matter, Muslims are not allowed to disagree (33:36, 4:115), and criticism of Muhammad is cursed by Allah and punishable by death (33:57, and Sunnah).
8th Amendment – Cruel and Unusual Punishment Is Prohibited: Islam commands the following punishments: Flogging (24:2), Stoning (Sunnah), Amputation for Theft (5:38 and Sunnah), Beheading (8:12, 47:4, and Sunnah), Crucifixion (5:33), and Cutting-off of Hands and Feet from Opposite Sides for waging war against Islam (5:33).
13th Amendment – Prohibition of Slavery: Slavery, and using captured non-Muslim women as sex slaves ("those whom your right hands possess") is allowed in Islam (e.g. 2:221, 4:3, 4:24, 4:92, 23:6, 24:58, 33:50, and Sunnah).
So just by considering these three amendments, we can see that if Muslim-Americans believe in Islamic doctrine, they cannot "uphold, protect, defend and celebrate the values enshrined" in the Constitution.
The 'Best Way to Understand' the Koran
What is the “best way” to understand the Koran? Ghouse wrote this simple explanation:
The best way to understand Quran [sic] is to remember, "If it is not about justice, mercy and creating harmony", then the translation is wrong.
The immediate response to Ghouse’s statement is to look at the preceding section involving the three Amendments to our Constitution.  There is little justice, mercy and harmony there.
But Ghouse also said that Marmaduke Pickthall’s translation of the Koran, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran, was one of three translations he recommends.  So let’s look for the justice, mercy and harmony in some of the verses from Pickthall’s translation:
  • "Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you.  Allah knoweth, ye know not." (2:216)
  • "In truth the disbelievers [non-Muslims] are an open enemy to you." (4:101)
  • "O ye who believe!  Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends.  They are friends one to another.  He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them.  Lo!  Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk." (5:51)
  • "Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush.  But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free.  Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." (9:5)
  • "O Prophet!  Strive against the disbelievers [non-Muslims] and the hypocrites!  Be harsh with them.  Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey’s-end." (9:73)
  • "Lo! those who disbelieve [in Islam], among the People of the Scripture [Jews and Christians] and the idolaters, will abide in fire [sic] of hell.  They are the worst of created beings." (98:6)
There is not a lot of justice, mercy and harmony in these verses from Pickthall’s translation, so according to Ghouse’s standard, he appears to be recommending a translation of the Koran that is “wrong.”
Allah Loves Everybody
In an article titled "Quran is not for Muslims," Ghouse wrote that
God [Allah] is not the God of Muslims and no where he claims that in Quran [sic]…God loves us all, and no one is deprived of his love…
In reality we find that in the Koran Allah states that the only religion acceptable to him is Islam (e.g. 3:19 and 3:85).  And Allah states that Islam is to be made superior over all other religions, even if the non-Muslims don’t like it (e.g. 9:33, 48:28, and 61:9).  Allah curses the Jews and Christians (9:30).  He states that non-Muslims are among the worst of creatures who “will abide in the fire of Hell” (98:6), while Muslims are the best of creatures (3:110 and 98:7).  Non-Muslims are “open enemies” to Muslims (4:101) and Jews are among the worst of those enemies (5:82).  And Allah commands Muslims to be harsh toward non-Muslims (e.g., 8:57, 9:73, 9:123, and 48:29) and to kill those non-Muslims (9:5).
In spite of Ghouse’s claim, and as I noted in more detail in a previous article, Allah is only the god of Islam and the Muslims, and Allah has no love for non-Muslims.
The Ubiquitous 2:62
Chapter 2, verse 62 of the Koran is commonly quoted by Muslim-Americans to indicate that Judaism and Christianity are respected in Islam and the adherents of those two faiths will be rewarded by Allah. Ghouse continues with this theme in the article "Quran is not for Muslims":
[I]f you take care of his creation (neighbor), you need not worry; your rewards are with him. Just to make sure we understand this precisely, he says, whether you are a Jew or a Christian and by corollary other, if you take care of your neighbor, I will take care of you (2:62).
Here is Chapter 2, verse 62
Verily, those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
In spite of what Ghouse and other Muslim-Americans claim, this verse only means that Jews and Christians would be rewarded for the good deeds they did before the advent of Islam. After the advent of Islam,righteous good deeds would be accepted by Allah only if they are done by Muslims.  And this verse was actually abrogated by 3:85 which stated that Islam is the only acceptable religion to Allah, and non-Muslims will be “losers” in the Hereafter (e.g. Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Tafsir Al-Qurtubi Vol. 1, and Tafsir Ahsanul-Bayan).
Conclusion
As is common in Fantasy Islam, Ghouse’s personal version of Islam has little, if any, support from Islamic doctrine, and actually often runs counter to that doctrine.  This appears to be of little concern for many in his non-Muslim audience because such personal versions relieve their concerns about Islam and allow them to continue to consider the jihadists as just a fringe group of “radicals” who have “hijacked” and “perverted” the Religion of Peace.  Ignorance, whether willful or not, can be a great anesthesia.  But anesthesia is only temporary and will not alter the world going on around you, and to which you will eventually reawaken.
Dr. Stephen M. Kirby is the author of three books about Islam. His latest is "Islam According to Muhammad, Not Your Neighbor."

Monday, June 22, 2015

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) - the forgiver

QuraanToday.com | Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) the forgiver.


God loves those who forgive often and God loves the least who are arrogant. Everything God says in Quran is demonstrated by the prophet.

A few Muslims believe they have to defend the prophet, they are wrong, he is beyond all defending, same goes with God, he protects us and not vice versa.


Here is a list compiled by Muhammad Yunus about how forgiving the prophet was.

 The Meccans called the Prophet an impostor (30:58), insane (44:1, 68:51), and an insane poet (37:36), questioned why he could not show any miracles (6:37, 11:12, 13:7, 17:90-93, 21:5, 25:7/8, 29:50), and why the Qur'an was not revealed to a man of importance from the two cities (43:31), charged him of being coached morning and evening (25:5, 44:14). They also charged him with forging lies and witchcraft (34:43, 38:4), forging lies against God, forgery and making up tales (11:13, 32:3, 38:7, 46:8), witchcraft (21:3, 43:30, 74:24), obvious witchcraft that was bewildering (10:2, 37:15, 46:7) and of being bewitched or possessed by a Jinn (17:47, 23:70, 34:8). 

That was when he was in Mecca - the first 12 years of the revelation when he was not in a position to protest let alone revenge.He bore all these charges and insulting remarks with patience and without any protest and continued to love his people (42:23) 

Come Medinite period that saw the Prophet rising in power day by day and becoming the chief arbiter (Civil Head) of Medina who could punish anyone he wished, he remained no less forgiving:  : 

The Prophet forgave those who deserted him on way to a battlefield (Uhud) by saying: if they knew how to fight, they would have followed the Prophet (3:167).

The Prophet forgave those of his followers (3:159) who defied his orders in the battle of Uhud and ran off for booty at a crucial moment in the battle (3:153) leading to the defeat of the Muslims:

He forgave all his Meccan enemies upon integration of Mecca.

He forgave all the hypocrites who had persistently conspired against him and even planned to kill him 

He forgave the defenders at the Trench Siege who took excuse of him and left the defense line. 

He forgave the followers who declined to join him in his most risky mission to the first pilgrimage that ended in the Hudaiyba Peace Treaty.

Saturday, June 20, 2015

Don't mess with Quran.

Beware of Mis-translations of Quran | www.QuraanToday.com
How wrong was I to believe that almost all Muslims were aware of the mis-translations of Quran. It came as a big surprise to me to know that there are  Muslims  who innocently believe that everything they read "about" Quran is divine without ever questioning it. Please be aware that there are two translations of Quran that are not only wrong, but bad. They have attempted to mess with Quran, but failed.

Quran is for the entire humanity, but the Hilali Khan/Mohsin Khan duo's translation has reduced it to the exclusive book of Muslims. If a Jew, Christian or a Hindu were to read it, they have every reason to fear Muslims and the "Muslim God " who teaches hatred towards them.  All you had to do to acquire the free copy of this book was  to call 1-800 number and they would send a free copy of the Quran, I have no idea how many copies are out there in the hands of innocent people,  we can check the boasting emails or news letters proclaiming how many million copies were distributed.  A lot of damage was done.  The good news is many of the mis-translation are fixed since 2012.

Hilali Khan and Mohsin Khan Duo as great scholars. They mis-translated the Quran around 1924, and as Muslims blessed with the courage to speak, we have to disagree.
Let us not elevate any human’s words to be on par with God – men like Hilali Khan, Mohsin Khan, Tamiya, Kathir, Banna, Qutub, Maududi, Shah Waliullah and other fallible humans have made several mistakes. We should not give their word equivalency to God’s word. 

Whatever their intention was, these men have messed up the translations and interpretations of Quran. The brunt of Islamophobia that we are dealing with today was mothered by their work.  Indeed, the Spencers, Gellers, Baghdadis, Bin Ladens and Awalakis believe in that version of Islam.

Full article will be out in a few days and a link will be provided. 

Mike Ghouse is a Muslim thinker, write and a speaker, and much of his work is published in Huffington Post, Dallas Morning News, Arab News, New Age Islam and several other periodicals and at www.worldMuslimCongress.com