there is a thought that we evolved from monkeys, this belief is totally opposite to Islam. We are created by God, and every living organism, plants, animals, space was also created by God. What are the things you hear and know about this monkey belief? check also informative online book Evolution Deceit at http://www.evolutiondeceit.com/

salam


well this site is for girls only. its small. and i dont know what else to say except go check it out yourself.


feel free to comment on anything but be nice ...


www.muslimboards.cjb.net

The image of Eve as temptress in the Bible has resulted in an extremely negative impact on women throughout the Judaeo-Christian tradition. In order to understand how negative the impact on women was we have to look at the writings of some of the most important Jews and Christians of all time. Let us start with the Old Testament and listen to excerpts from what is called the Wisdom Literature in which we find," I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare....while I was still searching but not finding, I found one upright man among a thousand but not one upright woman among them all." (Ecclesiasticus 7:26-28) One has to ask what is the wisdom in denying the existence of even one upright woman on earth ? In another part of the Hebrew literature which is found in the Catholic Bible we read," No wickedness comes anywhere near the wickedness of a woman.....Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die"(Ecclesiasticus 25:19,24) Orthodox Jewish men in their daily morning prayer recite "Blessed be God King of the universe that Thou has not made me a woman." The women, on the other hand, thank God every morning for "making me according to Thy will."


The same severe tone is found also in the New Testament. Listen to St. Paul," A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I don't permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam wasn't the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner, but women will be saved through childbearing...."(I Timothy 2:11-15) St. Tertullian was even more blunt than St. Paul, while he was talking to his 'best beloved sisters' in the faith, he said," Do you not know that you are each an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the Devil's gateway: You are the unsealer of the forbidden tree: You are the first deserter of the divine law: You are she who persuaded him whom the devil wasn't valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God's image ,man." St. Augustine was faithful to the legacy of his predecessors, he wrote to a friend, " What is the difference whether it is in a wife or a mother, it is still Eve the temptress that we must beware of in any woman." Centuries later, St. Thomas Aquinas still considered women as defective, "As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of woman comes from a defect in the active force or from some material indisposition, or even from some external influence." Finally, the renowned reformer Martin Luther couldn't see any benefit from a woman but bringing into the world as many children as possible regardless of the possible side effects," If they become tired or even die, that doesn't matter. Let them die in childbirth, that's why they are there" Again and again all women are denigrated because of the image of Eve the temptress, thanks to the Genesis account.


If we now turn our attention to what the Quran has to say about women, we will soon realize that the Islamic conception of women is radically different from that of the Judaeo-Christian tradition. Let the Quran speak for itself. "For muslim men and women, for believing men and women, for devout men and women, for true men and women, for men and women who are patient, for men and women who humble themselves, for men and women who give in charity, for men and women who fast, for men and women who guard their chastity, and for men and women who engage much in Allah's praise-- For them all has Allah prepared forgiveness and great reward"(33:35) "Whoever works evil will not be requited but by the like thereof, and whoever works a righteous deed -whether man or woman- and is a believer- such will enter the Garden of bliss"(40:40) "Whoever works righteousness, man or woman, and has faith, verily to him/her we will give a new life that is good and pure, and we will bestow on such their reward according to the best of their actions"(16:97)


It is clear that the Quranic view of women is no different than that of a man. They, both, are God's creatures whose sublime goal on earth is to worship their Lord, do righteous deeds, and avoid evil and they, both, will be assessed accordingly. The Quran never mentions that the woman is the devil's gateway or that she is a deceiver by nature. The Quran, also, never mentions that man is God's image, all men and all women are his creatures, that's all. According to the Quran, a woman's role on earth isn't limited only to childbirth. She is required to do as many good deeds as any other man is required to do. The Quran never said that no upright women had ever existed. To the contrary, the Quran has instructed all the believers, women as well as men, to follow the example of those ideal women such as the Virgin Mary and the Pharoah's wife (66:11-13)

Bismilah


asalamualyakum


lets just someone forgets that they were fasting and they eat accidently, am i as a bystander suppose to stop them.


I heard that if you eat but your doing that without any intention, basically you're not aware of what you are doing, that your fast will still not be void. Even if they eat as much as they want, their fast will still be accepted.


so if thats true, then do we have a right to remind people, or shoud we just let them eat in peace?

The author, M. M. Al-A’zami, trace the history of Holy Qur’an in comparison with the Jewish and Christian scriptures – The Old Testament and the New Testament.


Holy Qur’an is a unique book in many ways, but the most extraordinary aspect of its uniqueness arises from its own claim that it is the actual Word of Allah revealed to Prophet Muhammad in “clear Arabic” (arabiyun mubeen, al-Qur’an: 16:103). The Muslims have always believed in this divine origin of the Book, which forms the basis of their faith.


On the other hand. The non-Muslims, the Orientalists and a whole range of Western scholars refused to accept the Qur’anic claim on a ‘scientific basis’. This denial gained momentum with the first translations of Holy Qur’an into Western languages in 1143, developed into a complete academic discipline that continues to flourish. New variations have been added to the original objections raised by the Makkan non-believers. Borrowing some of the tools of the so-called higher criticism of the Bible, many Western scholars have painstakingly


constructed ‘scientific’ theories that deal with the text of Holy Qur’an and attempt to prove that the Book, as we have it today, could not have come into existence without being changed and distorted on the way.


The book is not merely a refutation of Western allegations; rather, it is concerned with a wide range of issues dealing with the nature of religious texts, and a third of it is devoted to the Old and the New Testaments. At first sight this may seem inappropriate and irrelevant, but as one reads it becomes clear that the author has devoted so much attention to the two because the history of these texts and their corruption is directly related to Western attitudes toward Holy Qur’an.

Remember Bush-Team claiming that US forces found 100,000 bodies of Kurds who had been rounded up and trucked south of Kurdistan, machine-gunned to death, and buried in mass graves by Saddam’s forces. Well, like the ‘Holocaust’ and September 11 – their Zionist lies have been exposed.


According to Human Right Watch (HRW) recent report – As I expected, they come up empty:


‘This claim of HRW that they haven't got evidence that will stand up, because the graves have been compromised, overlooks one key fact: they were claiming that the Ba'ath killed hundreds of thousands. If these graves really contained all the bodies they're supposed to contain, the numbers of dead alone would convict the Ba'ath. If you read the report, they say over and over again they 'believe' such-and-such a grave actually contains thousands of bodies; but all they've been able to find is a few score (at best). I think that's what gives the scam away. They can't produce the hundreds of thousands, or even the tens of thousands they promised they would.’


On the hand, the most recent estimates of the dead total 100,000 Iraqi civilians and 60,000 to 80,000 Iraqi military, plus the almost 1,200 Americans who have died during the course of the war. The US occupation forces are currently bombing the 300,000 people of Fallujah in hopes of pacifying the city and may wind up leveling it altogether. Is the sky the limit on what it will take to bring freedom and democracy to the people of Iraq? Don't you wonder

Salaam everyone





Im new

Hi eveyone


Just came across this forum and I thought I'd register


looks like a fabulous forum


Ramadhan Mubarak to you all


Only 7 or 6 days left for EID


thats all for now


Assalamu alaikum

Tom Segev, the author of book “One Palestine”, is a journalist at Israeli English newspaper Haaretz.The book examines Palestine under the British Mandate.


According to Tom - British mismanagement, Palestinian helplessness and a Zionist fervor that overlooked the moral implications of its ideology all led to a conflict that ravaged the Middle East for the rest of the century and, by the look of things, well into the next one.


Segev portrays British policy in Palestine as being confused and driven by religious and political myths from the very beginning. Britain was awarded a mandate for Palestine by the League of Nations in 1922. Although Palestine was of limited strategic importance, a land corridor between Egypt and Iraq, the protection of the Suez Canal, and a stopping point for planes en route to India were all bandied about as justification for staying in Palestine.


Segev argues, however, that the British were mostly interested in Palestine for its religious significance. “Al-Quds has made us all feel that Christ can be our pal,” wrote one British officer upon his arrival in the Holy Land.


The British ran their mandate the way they ran much of the British Empire. They played cricket and went fox hunting, treated the locals with a mix of racism and orientalist romanticism, and attempted to modernize the country in order to make it pay for itself.


Segev portrays the British as being equally ambivalent to both national movements - “I am not for either, but for both,” Governor of Al-Quds Ronald Storrs wrote. “Two hours of Arab grievances drive me into the synagogue, while after an intense course of Zionist propaganda I am prepared to embrace Islam.”


But the British had promised one country to two peoples, and as Jewish immigration into Palestine began to rise so did the tension between the two communities. By the late 1920s Palestine was rocked by a series of riots and Segev shows the British authorities as being hopelessly ill-prepared to control a situation that was rapidly spiraling out of control.


The Arab revolt of 1936 against British rule saw the colonial authorities use brutal methods, ones previously put to the test in other colonies. Segev entitles the chapter that covers this period “Ireland in Palestine.” Palestinian communities were put under curfew, men were tortured and executed and young, bored British soldiers went on the rampage. Tellingly, Segev notes that Jewish communities were rarely subjected to this kind of treatment when Zionist groups were responsible for attacks on the British. Much of what Segev writes here is uncannily reminiscent of recent events in the Occupied Territories.


But despite Palestinian attempts to thwart the Zionists, they failed. Segev depicts the Palestinian community as being hampered by feuds between rival families, class divides and a leadership that lacked sufficient foresight and energy to match the Zionists. The relationship between the Zionists and the British gradually grew closer. Segev shows that the Zionists were far more successful in building national institutions. Jewish schools, a university, labor movements and social services were all established in Palestine, partly with the aid of donations from wealthy Jewish philanthropists.


Palestinian civil society, on the other hand, remained weak, and most of the Arab population depended on the British for services, which were often inadequate. Only three out of 10 Palestinian children learned to read and write during the mandate period.


By 1947 a war-weary Britain could no long bear the financial burden of Palestine, nor the loss of life that Jewish and Arab attacks were inflicting on its troops. The British packed up their property, handed over their mandate to the UN and washed their hands of a mess they had done so much to create.


Inevitably, this led to the war of 1948. Segev does well to highlights the contradiction within Zionist thinking toward the fate of Palestine’s indigenous population. He notes that while mainstream Zionist thought had planned for a large Arab population within a Jewish state, the concept of transferring the Palestinian population into neighboring Arab states was always present. Segev estimates that of the 750,000 Palestinians who fled their homeland during the 1948 war, around half of them were expelled.


Arguably the most important aspect of this book, however, is that as long as “Israelis” such as Segev continue to challenge the myths that the modern “Israeli” state is built upon, then the potential for further self-examination within “Israel” remains strong. The implications of such are great.

A man used to live in Saudi Arabia originally from India was a Siekh, and a Muslim Shaik ( Muhammad Farrag ) used to invite him a lot to Islam. He neither refused nor accepted the idea because of his family.


<b>Then one day Allah opened his heart to Islam, he came to the shaik in his mosque to embrace Islam. The shaik was busy with his students and some Du’ah (Muslim missioners who invite people to the worship of Allah).</b>


Sheik Muhammad did not know that the man wanted to enter in Islam so he did not give him any attention and he left the mosque with his students.


The man, who wanted to enter in Allah’s religion, remained standing at the door of the mosque watching the shaik and his students riding their cars and moving away. On that sight he could not prevent himself from crying and burst into tears. While he was standing weeping at the door of the mosque, a young man who lived in the same quarter passed by him.


He asked him about the reason of his crying and the Indian replied that he wanted to be a Muslim.


The young man (May Allah rewards him the best) took him to his house. He made him perform abulution (wudoo) and say the two testimonies (No god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger). The Indian left after he said the testimony and it was about the dusk prayer (Al-Maghrib). Then he went to his room and suffered from a severe stomachache.


The young man came to shaik Muhammad and told him the whole story. The shaik repented what he had done though he was ignorant of the matter. He went to the Indian’s room, but his colleagues told him that he had died last night and he was then in the fridge of the Central Hospital. The shaik went with some Du’ah to the hospital to receive his corpse, but the hospital refused stating that the embassy had sent to his family in India and they would receive his corpse to be burnt there. The sheik objected saying that the man became a Muslim and there were witnesses on that, but still the hospital refused.


Sheik Muhammad went to Shaik Abd Al-Aziz Bin Baz (May Allah rest his soul and have mercy upon him) and told him the whole story. Shaik Abd Al-Aziz said that the Indian should not be given to his family as he became their brother in Islam; they should pray on his corpse and bury him there. He should not be given to the unbelievers. Sheik Abd Al-Aziz sent a copy of the subject to the emirate and requested an order to give the corpse to sheik Muhammad Farrag.


The emirate ordered the hospital to give the corpse to Shaik Muhammad and he received it. Some Du’ah washed the man and put him in his coffin. The funeral prayer coincided with Al-Goma’ah (the congregational prayer). Shaik Muhammad gave a wonderful oration on the one who embraced Islam then died without making one prostration to Allah. He stated in the first oration some similar examples from history, then he stated in the second one the story of the Indian man upon whom they would pray after Al-Goma’ah. The Muslims pray upon him, then they carried him upon their shoulders and they all went to the graveyard led by a lot of Du’ah and scholars.


It was a moving scene, May Allah accept (his deeds) and have mercy upon him.


Written by meteor at clouds site.


<b>On the Authority of ‘Abdullah bin Mus’ud (May Allah be pleased with him) who said that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), the true and truly inspired said</b>, <b>“(The matter of Creation of) a human being is put together in the womb of the mother for forty days, and then he becomes a clot of thick blood for a similar period, and then a piece of flesh for similar period. Then Allah sends an angel who is ordered to write four things. He is ordered to write his (i.e. the new creature’s) deeds, his livelihood, his (date of) death, and whether he will be blessed or wretched (in religion). Then the soul is breathed into him. By Allah who is no God but Him, a man amongst you may do (good) deeds till there is only a cubit between him and paradise and then what has been written for him decides his behavior and he starts doing (evil) deeds characteristic of the people of the (Hell) Fire so he enters it. And similarly a man amongst you may do (evil) deeds till there is only a cubit between him and the (Hell) Fire, and then what has been written for him decides his behavior, and he starts doing deeds characteristic of the people of Paradise so he enters it.” Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim.
</b>