Hi, I'm Professor Kafir and welcome to our PhD course in Islam. Since lots of people liked my interventions in pic related, I've decided to expand on the subject. I'm gonna tripfag so that muslims can't pretend to be me to post false info.
Ever wondered what Islam actually says/thinks/orders about a certain matter? Why is it that muslims and infidels often say opposite things? What is the truth? More importantly: how do I DESTROY muslims with facts and citations from their own holy books when they lie about their religion?
Jow Forums has the right intentions, but without knowledge there is no powah. Unfortunately, reading books about islam and sharia is boring. Fortunately (for you), I'm autistic enough to have done the job for you. In this study course, we will examine the most eloquent passages in the islamic holy texts to really take a peek into the muslim mentality and find out their real beliefs and goals. Texts we'll use:
>The Quran. The eternal, perfect, immutable Word of Allah. Here in several translations: quran.com
>The hadiths. Millions of anecdotes (also contained in the Sunnah) about stuff Muhammad said/did. Many are considered as binding as the Quran. You'll be able to verify their validity on sunnah.com
>'Umdat as-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller) A sunni manual of fiqh (islamic jurisprudence) from the 14th century. Still considered valid by the prestigious Al-Azhar university, the greatest of the sunni world, and given to american converts to learn sharia. It's a manual of the Shafi school of jurisprudence, but the other 3 sunni schools agree on pretty much everything but the tiniest details, and when there are disagreements, the manual specifies it. PDF: docdro.id/smiCPxn
The curriculum will be thus articulated (if there is interest, otherwise I won't bother):
>Lesson 1: Muslimspeak and Taqiyya (much more real and common than infidels think). >Lesson 2: Jihad (much more complex than you'd imagine). >Lesson 3: Muhammad (and why he was quite literally the anti-Christ). >Lesson 4: Quran and Sunnah (and why they're retarded). >Lesson 5: Science (what's that? is it halal to eat?). >Lesson 6: Dhimmis (a peek into your future). >Lesson 7: Pedophilia (and why it's endemic). >Lesson 8: Slavery (the most honored muslim tradition). >Lesson 9: Women (and how to clean their litter box). >Lesson 10: Honor killings (wife or kid pissing you off? Sharia is the solution). >Lesson 11: Faggots (and the best ways to murder them).
Lessons will be on this board whenever I happen to have time.
>In pic related the previous lessons about Taqiyya and Jihad.
And now, let's begin our lesson about favorite prophet. We'll draw mostly from the quran, sahih hadiths and the Sirat, the biography of Muhammad written by Ibn Ishaq and contained in the Sunnah, the second holy book of islam. You can read it here: thereligionofpeace.com/pages/muhammad/Guillaume--Life of Muhammad.pdf
Premise: this is where we really piss muslims off. They just can't stand when someone exposes their prophet as the slimeball he really was (according to their own muslim sources). They get absolutely rabid and spit foam and lies trying to twist every betrayal, aggression, robbery, murder or rape as the victims' fault or completely ignore it as if it wasn't clearly described (in bragging tones) in their holy texts.
Muslims become even more dishonest and insufferable than usual when it comes to Mu, so this time I'm not even gonna stick around and reply to their blatant lies. Last time it took over 5 hours to debunk their lies and silence them for good. I'm not paid for this shit and tomorrow I have to wake up early. This time I'm just dropping facts and letting them speak for themselves.
Muhammad was born in 570 AD in Mecca. He was soon orphaned and from then on was protected by his wealthy uncle, Abu Talib.
When he was 25, Muhammad married 40 year old widow Khadija. Since before islam arab women were a lot freer, Khadija happened to be a rich merchant. Muhammad therefore spent the next 15 years jewing around: traveling, selling stuff and learning about judaism and christianity from the foreigners he met. (The – sometimes inaccurate – informations about these two religions will be useful to him when he'll decide to create islam.)
At 40, Muhammad started having “mystical crisis” with hallucinations and seizures (according to some infidel doctor, these crisis suspiciously resembled epilepsy). One day he saw the archangel Gabriel who ordered him to spread islam to the masses. He came back and told Khadija, who convinced him that he wasn't going insane: those were visions straight from God. He was clearly a prophet.
Muhammed accepted this wise diagnosis and decided to start revealing a “new” religion composed of a hotchpotch of Judaism (circumcision, prohibition to eat pork, severe monoteism, a fuckload of biblical stories “borrowed” verbatim), Christianity (the figure of Jesus, here demoted to a failed prophet like many others (5:75) who misunderstood islam and wasn't even crucified (4:157)), Zoroastrism (5 prayers a day), and arab paganism (the belief in djinns and demons who are responsible for men's sins).
As a central figure he chose Allah, a moon god, one of the many gods arabs had been worshipping for centuries (Muhammad's father was called Abdullah, which means “slave of Allah”). This minor god was therefore promoted to the only true God because yes.
Muhammad started preaching his new religion in his city, Mecca. The pagans didn't really care: they were very tolerant of other religions, since they themselves had dozens of gods and the constant flow of pilgrims to pray to the Kaaba (which at the time held dozens of idols) was the main source of wealth. Muhammad, at the time very weak and without any military or economic power, started revealing the most peaceful surahs in the entire quran (the ones which will later be abrogated). His message, at the time, was to never use violence against anyone, even when attacked (see for instance 5:28). So progressive.
For a while things were peaceful. Muhammad only converted about 10 people a year, but the pagans left him alone. Until Muhammad decided to change strategy and adopt a more aggressive approach to proselitism. As said clearly in the Sirat:
>«When the apostle openly displayed Islam as God ordered him, his people did not withdraw or turn against him, so far as I have heard, until he spoke disparagingly of their gods. When he did that they took great offence and resolved unanimously to treat him as an enemy» (Sirat, paragraph 167)
Only AFTER Muhammad started insulting the pagans' gods, did they start to “persecute” him. This is something muslims tend to omit when they cry about the terrible oppression their prophet was subjected to. Thing is, as we've said, that the many idols in the Kaaba were the source of the constant flow of pilgrims in the city, which was its main source of wealth. The rich pagan clans were reacting to a threat which could've damaged or destroyed their livelihood.
Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad by Stephen Coughlin is a good read on this topic
Brayden Turner
The pagans told Muhammad to stop insulting their gods and trying to turn them into a monotheistic society. He refused. They got pissed and banned him from praying to the Kaaba. He rebelled like a teenager and pissed them off even more. The pagans insulted and hit Muhammad and his followers, he replied by (creatively) insulting them (quran 111:1-5) and some muslims didn't shy from publicly insulting and even hitting powerful pagan individuals in the head (Sirat 185). More than a one-way “persecution” of a helpless victim by a bully, this was a collection of reciprocal hostilities and humiliations. What level of hostilities are we talking about, exactly? Here's an enlightening hadith:
>[Sahih Bukhari 65,4815] «I asked `Abdullah bin `Amr bin Al-`As to inform me of the worst thing the pagans had done to Allah's Apostle. He said: "While Allah's Messenger (pbuh) was praying in the courtyard of the Ka`ba, `Uqba bin Abi Mu'ait came and seized Allah's Messenger (pbuh) by the shoulder and twisted his garment round his neck and throttled him severely. Abu Bakr came and seized `Uqba's shoulder and threw him away from Allah's Apostle and said, "Would you kill a man because he says: 'My Lord is Allah,' and has come to you with clear Signs from your Lord?" (40.28)»
Wait, that is “the worst thing” the evil pagans did to Muhammad? Muslims claim that in this episode, the pagans tried to kill Muhammad. Frankly, it seems like an half-assed job. Uqba could have at least used a knife. They could have waited for him to come home at night and beat him to a pulp. They could've put their backs into it. Uqba's aggression here seems more like an exasperated reaction to Muhammad continous disobedience than like attempted murder.
Other episodes of “persecution” are even more ridiculous:
>«Once the Prophet (pbuh) was offering prayers at the Ka`ba. Abu Jahl was sitting with some of his companions. One of them said to the others, "Who amongst you will bring the Abdominal contents (intestines, etc.) of a camel of Bani so and so and put it on the back of Muhammad, when he prostrates?" The most unfortunate of them got up and brought it. He waited till the Prophet (pbuh) prostrated and then placed it on his back between his shoulders. […] They started laughing and falling on one another. Allah's Messenger (pbuh) was in prostration and he did not lift his head up till Fatima (Prophet's daughter) came and threw that (camel's Abdominal contents) away from his back.» [Sahih Bukhari 240]
Much persecution. Such oppression. I've heard of fraternity pranks worse than this. According to muslim sources, some muslim converts among the weakest were phisically beaten (like a slave named Bilal) and, in the case of an old slave woman named Sumayyah bint Khabbab, even killed. Which apparently is a terrible thing, when not done by muslims. But Muhammad was only pranked, insulted and occasionally slapped around because his wealthy uncle Abu Talib protected him.
From the Sirat, it's clear that Muhammad was the main instigator of the hostilities. The pagan leaders even went to Muhammad's uncle to plead with him to convince Muhammad to stop disrupting their business and their religion:
>«Abu Sufyan, with other sundry notables, went to Abu Talib and said: "You know the trouble that exists between us and your nephew, so call him and let us make an agreement that he will leave us alone and we will leave him alone; let him have his religion and we will have ours."» (Sirat 278)
But Muhammad refused to leave them alone. He kept demanding they give up their gods and convert to his. He wanted them to smash all the pagan idols in the Kaaba because they offended Allah, and too bad about their livelihood.
Far from accepting peaceful cohexistence, Muhammad even sneaked behind the meccans' back and made a pact with the tribes of Medina to make war against them! (Sirat 299-301) That's the kind of danger and provocation the meccans had to endure from him.
When his uncle died, Muhammad was sure the pagans would try to kill him. How did he know that? Because he got warned in a vision by Gabriel himself, who told him that the pagans decided to arm a few men and kill him in his sleep. Muhammad therefore told Ali, a young convert, to lie in his bed and pretend to be him. Then when the pagans entered the house, Muhammad came out, made INVISIBLE by Allah, and got out walking among them unharmed while sprinkling dust on their heads and preaching verses from the quran. The “bloodthirsty” pagans didn't harm Ali, his wife or any other muslim. (Sirat 325-6) This tale about invisibility and fairy dust is indicative of the superstition and the supernatural aura muslim historians draped around Muhammad during the centuries. Combine this worshipful attitude with the fact that anyone who criticizes the holy prophet is a kafir who is “waging war against islam”, and you have the least reliable historiography in existence.
Anyway, Muhammad escaped the terrible murder plot, swore revenge, declared himself a refugee and went to Medina to gather allies. Even though the meccan pagans were NOT bothering them in the slightest in Medina, he also informed his followers that Allah had changed his mind: from then on, they could fight back when attacked. In fact, they were COMMANDED to fight even when not strictly in self-defense:
>«Then God sent down to him: "Fight them so that there be no more seduction", i.e. until no believer is seduced from his religion. "And the religion is God's", i.e. Until God alone is worshipped."» (Sirat, paragraph 314.)
With this verse (quran 8:39) muslims were (and still are) enjoined to fight the unbelievers to spread islam and defeat other religions, NOT merely to defend themselves, like muslims invariably try to claim. The goal is clearly stated: make it so only Allah is worshipped. Muhammad also claimed that Allah revealed this verse:
>«And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out, for persecution (fitnah) is worse than murder.» (quran 2:191. The principle is repeated in 2:217.)
As we've seen in the previous lesson about Jihad, “fitnah” is a very elastic term which includes any kind of rebellion against islam, Allah or his prophet, from physical attacks to the simple refusal to convert to islam («'wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief» Ibn Kathir's tafsir, exegesis of verse 5:33). More about all the meaning of the term “fitnah” in this fatwa: islamqa.info/en/answers/22899/meanings-of-the-word-fitnah-in-the-quraan
This hadith is very clear about the real goal of islamic violence:
>«Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.'» (Bukhari 393)
Much self-defense. Verses 8:39 and 2:191 alone would already be enough to qualify islam as a violent, imperialistic cult hellbent on world domination. They were used by Muhammad to justify eight years of robberies and slaughters. From 622 to 630 AD, Muhammad commanded his followers to ambush meccan caravans, steal products, food and money, and kill every meccan who dared to disagree. These raids are recounted in the Sirat, starting from paragraph 416. Muhammad rarely participated, but thankfully Allah ordered muslims to give him one fifth of the loot anyway. (Sirat 425)
Note: muslims now try to justify these murderous raids by claiming that the pagans had stolen Muhammad's and his follower's belongins, so they were simply taking back what was theirs. But the Sirat states clearly that Muhammad was stealing the pagan merchandise:
>«A caravan of Quraish carrying dry raisins and leather and other merchandise of Quraish passed by...» (Sirat 424) (The Quraish were the powerful pagan clan which opposed Muhammad with the most determination.)
>«When the Apostle heard about Abu Sufyan coming from Syria, he summoned the Muslims and said, “This is the Quraish caravan containing their property. Go out to attack it.”» (Sirat 428)
Plus, the raids continued for YEARS. Are muslims really try to make us believe that every single one of those raids was just to take back their own stuff? After a few years of lucky battles and having accumulated enough soldiers and power, Muhammad attacked Mecca by surprise and finally conquered his old city. Then he attacked the neighboring tribes and conquered the entire arabian peninsula. Then he died, probably poisoned by a relative of one of his victims.
Note: while in Medina, Muhammad broke the law by attacking the meccan caravans even during the sacred months, when war was forbidden. Some of his followers were uneasy about this, but Allah came to the rescue, revealing a verse which allowed muslims to attack the meccans even during the sacred months because "persecution is worse than murder" (this was the occasion in which 2:217 was revealed). So lucky.
This was to become a habit: in the next decade, Allah would save his prophet's ass from contradictions, lies and even marital problems and daily annoyances by revealing every time a verse which allowed Muhammad to do whatever the hell he wanted. A few (hilarious) examples:
>Only Muhammad can have as many wives as he wants. The other muslims can't have more than 4 (plus however many female slaves they manage to catch). (33:50)
>Nobody can marry Muhammad's wives after his death, for that would annoy him. (33:53)
>Nobody should bother Muhammad with small talk. If they're invited in his house, they should go through with their business and leave immediately. Small talk makes him anxious. (Again 33:53, also called The Autistic Verse.)
>Muhammad can marry his adoptive son Zayd's hot ex-wife. By the laws of the time it would've been considered incest, but Allah said it's fine when Muhammad does it. (33:37)
>Once his wives got pissed because they caught Muhammad in bed with a hot christian slave, Mariya, when it was not her turn. To make them stop nagging him, Allah revealed 66:5 to threaten them with repudiation.
As Aisha the loli waifu cheekily said once: «I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires.» (Bukhari 65,4788 and Sahih Muslim 1464a) The loli is not wrong. Over the years, Mu turned Allah into his get-out-of-jail-free card. It's almost comical. The "eternal and perfect" revelations from Allah were so specific and circumstantial that the people around Muhammad were always afraid that Allah would say something about them, maybe to give their belongings or their women to the prophet:
>«During the lifetime of the Prophet we used to avoid chatting leisurely and freely with our wives lest some Divine inspiration might be revealed concerning us.» (Bukhari 5187)
About Aisha, muslims are very creative in finding excuses for their 50 year old prophet marrying a 6 year old little girl and then fucking her when she turned 9. Some of them even deny that was her age at the moment of consummation. Unfortunately for them, the hadiths are of the highest level and impossible to misunderstand:
>[Sahih Bukhari 3896] «Narrated by Hisham's father: Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and HE CONSUMED THE MARRIAGE WHEN SHE WAS NINE YEARS OLD.» (See also Sahih Bukhari 3894 and Sahih Muslim 1422c.)
>[Sunan an-Nasa'i 3378] «It was narrated that 'Aishah said: "The Messenger of Allah married me when I was six, and CONSUMMATED THE MARRIAGE WITH ME WHEN I WAS NINE, and I used to play with dolls."» (Hadith classed as "sahih", undeniable, by most hadith scholars: sunnah.com/nasai/26/183)
Muslims get really desperate in this issue. They claim that girls in that time and in the desert matured faster (no evidence of this whatsoever), they claim that a 9 year old girl has already gone through puberty (false, puberty is a process which takes years to complete, and 9 year old girls mostly haven't even STARTED it, much less completed it), they claim that Muhammad only married her for political reasons and didn't really enjoy having sex with her (again, no evidence of this whatsoever)... They really grasp at straws in this matter. It must be difficult to reconcile the image of a perfect individual with that of a 53 year old man panting and slobbering over a nine year old girl.
Muhammad in islam is called “al-Insan al-Kamil” (the perfect man). This has generated the doctrine of the “Uswa Hasana” (excellent example) according to which EVERYTHING Muhammad said or did will forever be an excellent thing to say or do, in every place and time. Nothing the holy prophet did could be wrong, and anyone who deviates from his actions is a bad muslim or even an apostate. This means that in islam fucking 9 year old girls is more than allowed, it's encouraged. Because Muhammad did it. Making it illegal is IMPOSSIBLE, because it would mean indirectly criticizing the prophet, and therefore insulting him. This is why even contemporary manuals of islamic law state that females reach sexual maturity at 9 years of age, while males have to wait until 15. (Mohammad Husayn Falah-Zadeh, "A Guide to Religious Laws", Ansariyan Publications, 2009, p. 18, paragraph "Who Is One Of Age?")
And Muhammad's pedophilia wasn't even limited to Aisha. Once he even got the hots for a baby:
>«[…] the Apostle saw her (Ummu'l-Fadl) when she was a baby crawling before him and said, 'If she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.' But he died before she grew up […]» (Sirat 461)
At the time, around the Battle of Badr, Muhammad was 54. Even if he had waited eight more years before fucking her, he would've been a man of 62 fucking a 9 year old girl. This is the kind of union islam encourages.
Anyway, back to Medina. In the beginning, muslims were still few, although the new money and the successful expeditions were starting to attract converts. According to the arab mentality of the time, if you won, it meant the gods were with you. The turning point in Muhammad's prophetic career came in 624 AD with the Battle of Badr. The meccan merchants had become annoyed at his robberies and gathered a force which outnumbered the muslims, but the muslims, fighting desperately, managed to overpower them anyway and won. This was seen by many as definite evidence that Allah actually was the only true god, or at least the more powerful one, and the new converts started to come in droves. Thousands every year.
The more soldiers, weapons and money Muhammad accumulated, the more he turned from peaceful spiritual leader to greedy despot and warlord. The surahs revealed in Medina are the most brutal ones, the ones we've examined during the previous lesson about jihad (5:33, 8:12, 8:55, 9:5, 9:29, 9:123, 33:60-61, 47:4, etc.) and which make islam a ruthless, insatiable death cult. It's at this time that Muhammad decided that muslims had the right and duty to attack and slaughter every other people until everybody became either muslim or dead. (Sahih Muslim 5917)
Muhammad spent his wealth and power accumulating money from his robberies (Bukhari 2298. Abu Dawud 2967), getting fat (Abu Dawud 4749), fucking all day long with his eleven wives and countless slaves and bragging to his bros about how he had the sexual strenght of 30 men (Bukhari 268). He also used his newfound power to expel the jews which dared to question his wisdom and refuse his religion, to murder and raid neighboring tribes on extremely flimsy or non-existent pretexts, and to assassinate anyone who opposed, questioned or mocked him.
>Al-Nadr bin al-Harith. Beheaded for the crime of telling stories which were more interesting than Muhammad's and stealing his audience. (Sirat 191 tells of how al-Nadr mocked Muhammad's stories and Sirat 458 reports that he was killed after the Battle of Badr.)
>Abu Rafi' ibn Abi Al-Huqaiq. Eviscerated for mocking Muhammad with his poetry and for helping his opponents with money and supplies. (Sahih Bukhari 3022)
>Khalid ibn Sufyan. Stabbed to death because Muhammad thought he was inciting revolt against muslims. (Hadith Sunan Abu Dawud 1249)
>Uqba bin Abu Muayt. Beheaded (as he was pleading for his children) for opposing Muhammad and for pranking him by pouring camel entrails on his back. (Sirat 458)
>Umayya b. Khalaf and his son. Both hacked to pieces for opposing islam in Mecca and harassing low-caste muslims. (Sirat 449)
>Abu Jahl. Also beheaded for opposing and insulting Muhammad. (Sirat 452)
>Ka'b bin al-Ashraf. Poet which had dared to criticize the killings described in the Sirat, paragraphs 449, 452 and 458. Muhammad complained about him and some of his followers lured Ka'b out of his house at night with an excuse and stabbed him dead after complimenting him for his shampoo. (Really: Sirat 550-552) Muhammad specifically allowed the assassin to LIE in order to kill Ka'b: «Allah's Messenger (pbuh) said "Who is willing to kill Ka`b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Messenger! Would you like that I kill him?" The Prophet said, "Yes," Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Ka`b)." The Prophet said, "You may say it."» (Sahih Bukhari 4037) Much honorable. Many truthful. Such holy prophet.
>A slave girl killed after the conquest of Mecca because she used to sing mocking songs about Muhammad. (As told in the hadiths Sunan Abu Dawud 2684 and Sunan an-Nasa'i 4067.) After conquering Mecca, Muhammad made a big show of forgiving his powerful opponents, which could (and did) become very useful political allies. Even a crazy woman named Hind bint Utbah, which cut open Muhammad's uncle's chest and ate his goddamn heart, was forgiven because she was the wife of Mecca's top politician, but slave girls were of no use to him, so they died.
>Abu Afak. Blind, very old poet which wrote against islam and Muhammad. The prophet complained «Who will deal with this rascal for me?» and immediately an eager follower killed the old man. (Sirat 995)
>Asma bint Marwan. Female poet stabbed while she slept for the crime of criticizing Muhammad for killing the old poet Abu Afak. (Sirat 996) This last episode really paints a pretty picture of islam's holy prophet: >«When the apostle heard what she had said he said, "Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?" Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he said, "You have helped God and His apostle, O Umayr!" When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, "Two goats won't butt their heads about her"» (Sirat 996) But... but muslims claim muslims never killed women: >«Umayr Ibn Adi came to her in the night and entered her house. Her children were sleeping around her. There was one whom she was suckling. He searched her with his hand because he was blind, and separated the child from her. He thrust his sword in her chest till it pierced up to her back.» (Ibn Sa`d, “Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir”, translated by S. Moinul Haq, vol. 2, pages 30-31.)
This is the “perfect man” according to 1,7 billion muslims. A man so brutal and so arrogant that he orders the assassination of women and old men because they dared to criticize his actions, and so cowardly that he won't even do it himself. When Muhammad wanted someone dead, he didn't grab a sword, he WHINED loudly and hoped that some follower would act in his place.
Note that none of these killings happened during a battle. It was always when the victims were prisoners of war, sleeping, or simply going about their day, unaware. Is this “the most honorable and merciful man who ever lived”, like muslims describe him?
Bonus episode:
>Zayd dismembers an old woman with camels, Mu approves. Muhammad sent his cucked adopted son Zayd to avenge an attack on one of his caravan. Zayd didn't find the culprits, but he found Umm Qirfa, the very old aunt of one of the culprits. Zayd shrugged, said «Close enough», tied her legs to camels and made them run in opposite directions, ripping her apart. Then he enslaved Umm Qirfa's daughter. Muhammad approved of Zayd actions and gave the slave girl as a gift to one of his men. (Sirat 980)
Despite the common muslim claim that Muhammad hated slavery and tried to abolish it, all the evidence tells us that Muhammad loved himself some slaves. He enslaved his defeated enemies, exchanged slaves with others, distributed them to his companions, raped the slaves conquered in battle (as quran 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 47:4 and 70:19-31 allow to do), and in general never even TRIED to make slavery illegal.
He could have simply forbidden it, like pork or wine. Or he could have severely limited the number of slaves one could own, like he limited his followers' wives to a maximum of four. Instead, he allowed muslims to get as many slaves as they wanted, fuck them, sell them, lash them (Sahih Bukhari 65,4942), and in general do whatever they wanted with them (even though senseless murder or mutilation of slaves was frowned upon, since it meant destruction of valuable property).
Muslims also claim that Muhammad protected slaves and made their lives much easier by giving them rights and privileges that they didn't have under paganism. What they never specify is that this favorable treatment only applied to MUSLIM slaves. When a muslim has to expiate a sin, for instance, it's laudable for him to free a slave, but only if it's «a sound muslim slave». (Reliance of the Traveller, paragraph o20.2) Needless to say, non-muslim slaves aren't treated as nicely. In the hadith Sahih Muslim 1602, Muhammad clearly implies a racial/religious hierarchy when he trades 2 black non-muslim slaves for an arab muslim one.
Muhammad repeatedly said that circumcision is good: >«Five practices are characteristics of the Fitrah: CIRCUMCISION, shaving the pubic hair, cutting the moustaches short, clipping the nails, and depilating the hair of the armpits.» (Bukhari 5891, 6297 and 5889. Also Sahih Muslim 257, Sunan an-Nasa'i 5043-4 and 5225, and many more hadiths.)
Thing is, he never limited circumcision to men. In fact, in this other sahih (undeniable) hadith he allows female circumcision while telling the circumciser to not cut too much flesh: >[Abu Dawud 5271] «A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (pbuh) said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband. […]» (sunnah.com/abudawud/43/499)
Since the circumsizer was a woman, it's clear that her patients were also women. It's unthinkable that under islam a woman would've been allowed to see, touch and circumsize penises. This other sahih hadith shows that Aisha was in fact circumsized: >[Sunan Ibn Majah 1,651] «It was narrated that 'Aishah the wife of the Prophet said: "When the TWO CIRCUMCISED PARTS meet, then bath is obligatory. The Messenger of Allah and I did that, and we bathed."»
Muhammad clearly approved of female genital mutilation. This fatwa goes deeper into the issue and shows that every madhhab (islamic law school) approves of female circumcision, to different degrees: fatwa #60314, "Circumcision of girls and some doctors’ criticism thereof": islamqa.info/en/60314
We've already talked about it in the previous lesson, but it bears repetition because it speaks volumes about Muhammad's real character: ISLAM EXPLICITLY ALLOWS THE KILLING OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN, provided they're infidels. This is clearly shown in quran 18:74-80, where Khadir kills a child and justifies it by claiming that he was a little infidel.
That passage is then quoted in some hadiths (Sahih Muslim 1812b and 1745; Sahih Bukhari 3012) where Muhammad condones the killing of women and children, as long as they're from the infidels.
See also the fiqh monography “The Clarification Regarding Intentionally Targeting Women and Children” (archive.org/details/IntentionalityTargetingWomenAndChildren), at page 17, where it's stated that «it is permissible to target the women and children when a greater benefit is in killing them, rather than keeping them alive».
Show these passages to the next muslim who claims that islamic warfare is more honorable than the western one because “muh atomic bombs muh nerve gas”.
Muhammad sure loved him some assassinations, but he didn't despise large scale genocides and expulsions either:
>Muhammad robs and expels the Banu Qaynuqa. A Qaynuqa jew pranked a muslim woman by lifting her dress. A muslim man killed the jew for this, a monstruous overreaction NOT justified by the law, and an angry jewish mob killed the murderer in retaliation. This retaliation was perfectly justified by law (a life for a life), but Muhammad still declared it an intolerable provocation and with this excuse robbed and expelled all the Qaynuqa. He wanted to kill them all, but was talked out of it by an ally. (Sirat 546) He later regretted the missed slaughter. (Further reading: thereligionofpeace.com/pages/muhammad/qaynuqa.aspx)
Note: this episode shows clearly that islam considers the life of a muslim more valuable than the life of an infidel. Hadiths and fiqh manuals still state this: >«The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “A Muslim should not be killed in retaliation for the murder of a disbeliever”.» (Sunan Ibn Majah 21,2761. Level: sahih. sunnah.com/urn/1269760) >«A life is only taken for another life equal in freedom, Islam and protection […] A free man is not killed for a slave NOR A MUSLIM FOR A NON-MUSLIM because the higher is not killed for the lower. […] A Muslim is not killed for an unbeliever but an unbeliever is killed for a Muslim.» (“Al-Risala”, 37.1a and 37.10f) >«There must be equivalence between the murdered person and the murderer. In other words, they must be equal in religion, and freedom or slavery. Accordingly, A MUSLIM IS NOT TO BE SENTENCED TO DEATH FOR KILLING A DISBELIEVER.» (Saleh Al-Fawzan, "A Summary of Islamic Jurisprudence", Al-Maiman Publishing House, Riyadh, 2005, Vol. 2, Part IX, chapter 2, p. 530.) Islam is the most discriminatory, suprematist religion in existence.
>Muhammad expels the Banu Nadir, lies and kills. Mu claimed that Gabriel warned him that the Banu Nadir would betray him, so he attacked them pre-emptively in “self-defense”. (Sirat 652-653) He forced them to surrender and expelled them, taking all their stuff. Needless to say, there is NO EVIDENCE that the Banu Nadir were planning anything. Later Mu sent some warriors to the Banu Nadir leader to draw him out of his fortress with the excuse of peace talks. As soon as the leader and his guards were out, the muslims butchered them. Mu approved of the treachery. (Sirat 981) (Further reading: thereligionofpeace.com/pages/muhammad/nadir.aspx)
>Slaughter of the Banu Qurayza. Mu said that Gabriel ordered him to destroy the Banu Qurayza (Bukhari 2813). The men had surrendered, but Mu had them all beheaded. The massacre involved 600-900 people and took the entire day. Mu watched while sitting on a cushion. Then he enslaved women and children. (Sirat 689-693. Abu Dawud 4404)
Some muslims try to justify this gruesome massacre by claiming that the Banu Qurayza had asked to be judged according to jewish law, and so Muhammad asked a jew named Sa'd ibn Mu'adh to issue a sentence, and Sa'd decided to kill the men and enslave the rest. In other words, it wasn't Muhammad's fault: it was a case of a jew jewing other jews. Problem is that Sa'd was not a jew anymore: he was a muslim convert. This is simply one of the many instances where muslims massacred jews. And where the “most merciful man ever”, far from trying to stop the inhumane slaughter, enjoyed the show for the entire day as if it was a movie. Is this how a merciful man behaves, muslims?
(In recent years muslims have tried to claim that the Qurayza were the ones at fault, or even that the slaughter didn't happen. That is contradicted by islamic historical texts and by the fact that for 1400 years muslims BRAGGED about the massacre. More details: thereligionofpeace.com/pages/muhammad/qurayza.aspx)
>Muhammad attacks Al-Yusayr ibn Rizam and kills him and 30 of his men. All because he heard that they were preparing to attack him. (Hadith by Tirmidhi n. 3923) No real evidence of this exists. Episodes like this are used today by modern muslims to justify pre-emptive slaughters and ambushes as “self-defense”.
>Slaughter of the Banu Mustaliq tribe. They were attacked «without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives.» (Bukhari 2541) But first, the women were raped; the muslims wanted to pull out, but Muhammad advised them against it saying that it was useless because any child that was predestined to be born would be born anyway, so might as well creampie them. (Bukhari 4138)
>Attack of the Khaybar. Again, Muhammad attacked by surprise: «We met the workers of Khaybar coming out in the morning with their spades and baskets. When they saw the apostle and the army they cried, “Muhammad with his force,” and turned tail and fled. […] The apostle seized the property piece by piece...» (Sirat 757) Later, Muhammad tortured Kinana ibn al-Huqayq by lighting a fire on his chest to force him to reveal the location of a supposed hidden treasure. He was then beheaded, and Muhammad tied up the evening by fucking his 17 year old widow, Safiya, which he later married (according to muslims, this makes it fine). (Sirat 764 and 766. See also: Sahih Bukhari 371.)
>Destruction of Dhul Khalasa. Dhul Khalasa was another really famous temple, so famous that it was called “the yemenite Kaaba”. Muhammad at this point had conquered Mecca and the real Kaaba, and he didn't like competition in the pilgrimage business. What happened was predictable: «The Prophet (pbuh) said to me, "Won't you relieve me from Dhu-l- Khalasa?" So I set out with one-hundred-and-fifty riders, and we dismantled it and KILLED WHOEVER WAS PRESENT THERE. Then I came to the Prophet (pbuh) and informed him, and he invoked good upon us» (Bukhari 4355. See also Bukhari 3020 and 3076.) Note: this slaughter of innocent worshippers and bystanders, which Muhammad ordered and approved of, was perpetrated without any provocation. The victim toll is estimated at around 300 (Ibn al Kalbi, Hisham, “The book of idols”, a translation from the Arabic of the Kitāb al-asnām. Princeton University Press, 1952, pp. 31–2.)
>Conquest of Mecca. In the lesson about Jihad, we've examined the verses and the hadiths where Allah and Muhammad say clearly that pacts, promises and treaties with the unbelievers have no real validity and can be rejected anytime it's convenient for the muslims (quran 9:1 and 8:58). In the lesson about Taqiyya, we've seen that lying to the infidels is not only allowed, but mandatory for religious purposes, that islamic law manuals TEACH MUSLIMS HOW TO LIE, and that Muhammad himself allowed muslims to break their promises as soon as they see a more convenient path (Sahih Bukhari 7146 and at-Tirmidhi 1530, also of sahih level). The holy prophet showed once again his moral integrity by making a peace treaty with Mecca (the Pact of Hudaybiyya) which should've lasted for 10 years but which he broke after only 2 to attack Mecca by surprise as soon as he was strong enough. (cont.)
Muslims of course insist that the meccans broke the treaty first. Here's what happened, so you can judge for yourself. The Khuza'a tribe killed a member of the Bakr tribe. The Bakr retaliated and killed a Khuza'a. The Khuza'a killed three Bakr, then allied themselves with Muhammad (dick move). The Bakr allied themselves with the meccans to not remain alone, but still attacked the Khuza'a to exact revenge for the killings. Muhammad blamed the meccans of this last retaliaton and used it as an excuse to declare the peace pact void and attack Mecca, since by that point he was strong enough to conquer it and the treaty was just an hindrance. Plus, muslims had already broken the pact way before that. A muslim convert, Abu Basir, had killed the meccans who had come to bring him back to Mecca, as the pact established, and then he had even formed a group of bandits who killed and robbed meccans. (Sahih Bukhari 2731-2) This was a clear, very serious and repeated breach of the treaty by the muslims. Not only that, but Muhammad himself had violated the treaty by keeping the meccan women instead of giving them back as he should have! Allah even had to reveal surah 60:10 to excuse his infraction: «O you who have believed, when the believing women come to you as emigrants, examine them. [...] And if you know them to be believers, then do not return them to the disbelievers».
To sum it up, Muhammad never really respected the treaty, took the first excuse to attack Mecca by surprise, conquered it, killed a few poor singers and poets who had mocked him, spared the powerful opponents to make them his allies, forced the people to choose between converting and getting butchered, and then spent the last 2 years of his life attacking other tribes by surprise in the same cowardly way. The most honorable man who ever lived, indeed.
Muslim historians and apologists always claim the same excuses to justify these massacres: BUT they were planning to attack muslims... BUT they had offended Muhammad/Allah/islam... BUT they had started the hostilities by giving money/weapons to Muhammad's enemies... BUT they had breached a treaty, etc. A couple of things.
FIRST: usually there is zero evidence of these accusations, only claims by Muhammad and his men. Of course muslim historians believe them completely (they like to keep their head attached to the neck), but Muhammad's modus operandi, his frequent lack of respect for treaties and promises and some weird circumstances (like the fact that most of his victims were caught by surprise even though they're supposed to have started the war themselves) strongly point towards Muhammad lying his ass off.
SECOND: even if all the muslim excuses were valid, Muhammad's behavior is still awful and completely contradicts the image of a honorable, merciful, kind man. Would a man like that torture someone with fire only to find money, and then have sex with his young widow? Would he behead hundreds of surrendered prisoners of war? Rape their women? Enslave their children?
Muslims can try all the excuses they want, but these stories, WRITTEN IN THEIR OWN HOLY BOOKS, paint a picture of their prophet which is the polar opposite of what they claim. As said by former muslim Ali Sina: «Muhammad is a narcissist, a pedophile, a mass murderer, a terrorist, a misogynist, a lecher, a cult leader, a madman, a rapist, a torturer, an assassin and a looter.» I would add: an obese liar with such bad hygiene he had lice (staringattheview.blogspot.com/2010/02/muhammads-lice.html)
You are one based poo. I'll protect you from the witch.
Pakis are not human.
Jaxon Rodriguez
Explain and refute the concept of abrogation and Islam.
Example
The Qur'an is unique among sacred scriptures in accepting a doctrine of abrogation in which later pronouncements of the Prophet declare null and void his earlier pronouncements.
>Chapter 9 of the Qur'an, in English called "Ultimatum," is the most important concerning the issues of abrogation and jihad against unbelievers. It is the only chapter that does not begin "in the name of God, most benevolent, ever-merciful."[54] Commentators agree that Muhammad received this revelation in 631, the year before his death, when he had returned to Mecca and was at his strongest.[55] Muhammad bin Ismail al-Bukhari (810-70), compiler of one of the most authoritative collections of the hadith, said that "Ultimatum" was the last chapter revealed to Muhammad[56] although others suggest it might have been penultimate. Regardless, coming at or near the very end of Muhammad's life, "Ultimatum" trumps earlier revelations.
>Because this chapter contains violent passages, it abrogates previous peaceful content. Muhsin Khan, the translator of Sahih al-Bukhari, says God revealed "Ultimatum" in order to discard restraint and to command Muslims to fight against all the pagans as well as against the People of the Book if they do not embrace Islam or until they pay religious taxes. So, at first aggressive fighting was forbidden; it later became permissible (2:190) and subsequently obligatory (9:5).[57] This "verse of the sword" abrogated, canceled, and replaced 124 verses that called for tolerance, compassion, and peace.[58]
Suyuti said that everything in the Qur'an about forgiveness and peace is abrogated by verse 9:5, which orders Muslims to fight the unbelievers and to establish God's kingdom on earth.
>Muhammad came out, made INVISIBLE by Allah, and got out walking among them unharmed while sprinkling dust on their heads and preaching verses from the quran. lol I love this shit. When you're done with the more serious topics can you do a thread on the most obviously laughable parts of Islam?
Isaiah Green
>All religions say exactly the same thing >All
Fuck off fedora fag.
Stop equating the inbred child rapist religion with everything. Some religions are better than others. For example, atheism is worse than Buddhism. But both are better than Islam.
Chase Gomez
They also like to invent a convoluted timeline where she was actually 19 based on all sorts of circumstancial evidence like her sister's age and dates of battles, all sourced from the same collection of hadith that explictly mention her age.
Chase Wilson
Thus the Quran disproves itself by claiming its perfect and allah protected but then it needed abrogation and was organized out of chronological order. Then it claims to be clear but counyless Hadiths are needed to put it in context which are simultaneously accepted and rejected by countless Muslims the world over. The Quran is probably one of the most poorly written "holy books" in the world and the fact that people still accept its teachings anywhere is a testament to the collective gullibility and stupidity of mankind.
This whole thread is fake propaganda based on fictitious arguments. OP will never make a real objective argument without making false statements or using things taken out of context.
Exmoose here. Born and raised with these stories youre sharing, feels nice to finally hear a different side. Doing great work son
Leo Miller
>this time I'm not even gonna stick around and reply to their blatant lies Please do. That's the best part to see their sputtering damage control. They're so used to talking to infidels that know nothing about their retarded desert cult and pedo rapist prophet that they have no answer to anyone that is educated and uncucked
I love your lessons, prof. Do you have any intention to write a book or something about all this? Seems you have a lot of material
David Martinez
Wait user if Allah is a moon god then why is the singular noun إله used for god (singular)? Lam is a moon letter that naturally melts into the article "al" creating Allah (the god). The fact that you mentioned the moon god rumor (which I would believe if I could find substantiation for it) throws much of what you said into question. Please answer, very interested to know more.
Thomas Rodriguez
Rather, lam is a sun letter. My bad I admittedly know a lot less than you.
Easton Clark
It's not a rumor, it's a school of thought with lots of evidence in its favor. Admittedly not conclusive evidence, but it was never disproven. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah_as_a_lunar_deity) Of course the allah of islam is NOT a moon god. It's the omnipotent entity which created everything. The Allah worshipped BEFORE islam would have been the moon god.
I know it's funny to destroy muslims' bullshit, but it takes hours of repeating the same arguments over and over because they ignore everything which disproves them and discuss with more dishonesty than the jewiest jew. Can't do it tonight, I have to wake up in 5 hours.
I already wrote one in italian, but publishing houses are too cucked to even consider publishing anything that criticizes islam. Oriana Fallaci could do it because she was already famous and because it was before Charlie Hebdo. When we europeans still had a shred of integrity. Now, it's impossible. Nobody wants to take a chance. They don't care that it means bending over to islam and admitting the terrorists effectively won.
I'm seriously thinking about writing a leaner version of the book in english (100-150 pages) and self-publishing it on Amazon.
>disinfo. >all quotations from the official biography of Muhammad included in the Sunnah and religiously studied by hundreds of millions of muslims. >cultural and historical context is provided for every episode. >no counter-argument whatsoever. >wants to be taken seriously.
>mohamed was the bearer of the morals of god >mohamed raped, slaughtered and enslaved thousands of people >this is good >this is bad now, but was once good, therefore the morals of mohamed and his god are as mutable as a bipolar teen girl. His god submits to time and place, as opposed to make time and place submit to him. >this was and is bad
Asher Johnson
I can't speak for my country has a unique set of laws.
Adrian Davis
>Hi, I'm Professor Kafir and welcome to our PhD course in Islam. You forgot to hand out the syllabus >pic related
Why the fuck do you know so much about Islam? I stopped reading up on it after i discovered that Muhammad believed initially (and probably correctly) that a demon was attacking him when he got his "revelations." Know anything about that?
Daniel Rogers
Yeah, in the beginning he thought it was a demon talking to him. Then he talked about it with his milf wife Khadija and she convinced him that it was a messenger from God and that he was a prophet.
And thus 1400 years of inbreeding and barbarity ensued. Fucking women...
I started to notice muslims lying their asses off about some things about islam. Started to dig and to make my way through websites and forums both by apologists and by anti-islam people, realized I had to read the actual islamic texts to really understand the issue without biases, took a few years to read everything relevant and now here I am.
Oliver Jackson
>The Quran. >The eternal, perfect, immutable Word of Allah How did you come to this conclusion?
Christian Hall
I think if you read the thread, you would realize that OP does not believe this.
Ethan White
If the claim made is from him, I'm wondering how he knows this.
Asher Baker
>a good read this yo
Robert Brooks
He's reciting how the Quran is viewed in Islamic jurisprudence and Muslim scholars
Jesus christ man please stop embarrassing yourself.
Nathaniel Nguyen
Well, they encourage lying to propagate their faith. It's not bad to lie as long as it serves Islam.
Chase Lewis
Jow Forums gets a PhD in Islam, by Professor.Kafir !pjIvye1PUw
In this study course, we will examine the most eloquent passages in the islamic holy texts to really take a peek into the muslim mentality and find out their real beliefs and goals.
The curriculum will be thus articulated: >Lesson 01: Muslimspeak and Taqiyya (much more real and common than infidels think). archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/193089072/ >Lesson 02: Jihad (much more complex than you'd imagine). archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/193585054/ >Lesson 03: Muhammad (and why he was quite literally the anti-Christ). archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/194939425/ >Lesson04: Quran and Sunnah (and why they're retarded). >Lesson05: Science (what's that? is it halal to eat?). >Lesson06: Dhimmis (a peek into your future). >Lesson07: Pedophilia (and why it's endemic). >Lesson 08: Slavery (the most honored muslim tradition). >Lesson 09: Women (and how to clean their litter box). >Lesson 10: Honor killings (wife or kid pissing you off? Sharia is the solution). >Lesson 11: Faggots (and the best ways to murder them).
Charles Moore
Go back to fucking children in whatever sand dune you crawled out of. No one cares about your bogus, tired, immoral and bullshit religion.
Dull desert scripture about a pedophile, and a God claim that cant be verified. Did Jow Forums convert yet? If he doesnt believe, let him answer. Christ almighty
Gabriel Perry
You are a retard. OP is clearly not pro-Islam, but you must have dropped out of kindergarten.
Matthew Russell
He's criticizing it you retard. When he quotes retarded passages from the Quran he's letting everyone know that all devout Muslims believe whatever the shit is 100%. Because the mainstream Muslim view is the Quran is perfect and any Muslim that even slightly disagrees with anything in it is an apostate that should be killed.
Nicholas Morris
Bump
Christian Cooper
>He's criticizing it you retard You're not on rebbit, dope. Everyone here is already doing this, if you think this is new then I dont know what to tell you.
Andrew Butler
My good Mr. Luzzatto, is as follows. I've been following this dirty campaign for years. The Sunnah is not a cohesive body, much less the Hadiths. There are criteria of reliability and veracity, in addition to rigorous hermeneutical criteria. I know ahead of time - that is reheated copypasta of the worst quality - are mere fanciful invectives of dishonest, aimed at functional illiterates. It is mere intellectual dishonesty, the kind that deserves no frontal response.
Yes, this is a copypasta. Is not that how you prefer it?
Just as one cannot debate with pigeons, I will not take my time doing this with you. So, I just step in to distribute my sage, thank you very much.
Michael Rodriguez
bump
Easton Gonzalez
You literally argued his post into being correct again. Fuck, you are retarded.
Aiden Baker
In early Facebook days, there was this group called "American Infidels". Sort of a civic nationalist board but knowledgeable and based as fuck on Islam. Early on we had lists of tactics that Muslims used in debate. The same taqiyah and misdirection were used there as here by Muslims but were dishonest attempts to confuse or misdirect the reader rather than address simple points on the Quran. Here are some of them.... When approached with contradictions or clear ethical dilemmas in the Quran, Muslims would do the following: 1) Claim the verse is out of context even though the Quran itself is organized out of chronological context. 2) Deny the Hadith supporting an interpretation of the Quran even though it was a Hadith widely held in Islamic schools as authentic, and even tho the Quran cannot be understood in context without Hadith. 3) Redirect the conversation into a discussion about the adversaries religion or the Bible or some random act by a historical figure outside Islam as if it is relevant. Or bitch about American or Western foreign policy as if Muslim history began with Israel, the Gulf War or the Crusades. When all this failed they would go to.. 4) Ad hominem, accusations of being a jew or brainwashed by jews.
We eventually made a joke out of citing specific rules in the list and calling them on it. When that didn't work they tried mass reporting and banning, moles, hacking, and junking up the boards in what we would call here slide threads. Eventually Zuck shut the board down as Facebook became an SJW authoritarian communist company. Thus was 2005 or 2006. Those were good shitposting days on the web user.
