> Muslim Response Ali Sina: Why I left Islam

[salman]

:

In this article, we'll examine some of the facts which lead Ali Sina to leave Islam. I'll refute his silly arguments and show that he often appeals to emotions.

Before I begin, there are few common things to note about supposedly Muslim leaving Islam:

1) Most of them hardly know anything about Islam
2) Most of them actually never offered salah in their whole life before apostatizing or hardly offer the five daily salah
3) They start attacking the Islam immediately, which is fine because every ignorant thinks that he knows everything. So at the end of the day, they help us by giving us the opportunities to expose them their ignorance and gross errors.

Now, why do I say they are supposedly Muslims: it is because someone who never prayed salah or hardly prayed salah is already out of Islam. The evidence for this is the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in which he said: "The covenant that stands between us and them (non-Muslims) is prayer; whoever gives up prayer is a kafir." [Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2621; al-Nasaa'i, 431; Ibn Maajah, 1079; classed as sahih by Shaykh al-Albani (May Allah have mercy on him) in Sahih al-Tirmidhi, 2113]

Now, that is aside let's go through one of the incidents which encouraged Ali Sina to leave Islam. His whole testimony of leaving Islam can be found here. I personally do not advise my fellow Muslims, who have weak imaan or never have confronted the suspicious arguments of enemies of Islam, to visit his website.

I seek refuge in Allah Ta'ala from my nafs and the cursed Shatan. With the Name Of Allah, Ar-Rahman (The Bestower Of Mercy), Ar-Raheem (The Most Merciful), I start writing; Seeking His Help and His Blessings.

Originally Posted by Ali Sina

The more I read, the more I questioned Muhammad's sense of justice. The following is very disturbing. I dare say any man who reads it and is not taken aback with disgust has a long way to go to become a human.

Indeed, the stories you are going to mention are very disturbing but it depends from which point of view you are talking about. For example, Muslims may find it disturbing because why would someone, who was protected in the Islamic State established by al-habib (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), suddenly start insulting the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) when he didn't do anything to her. There are couple of problems with his last statement:

1) I would have expected something far better from scholar like Mr Sina other than emotional ranting. Mr Sina and his goons will always rant about logic and this and that but here Mr Sina himself committing logical fallacy: appealing to emotions!

2) Like I mentioned before, the stories will be disturbing for people depending on their perspective, so they will be disgust and therefore according to you they are all humans. Thus, your argument is pointless and it nullifies your attack to claim that Muslims need to become actual humans.

Originally Posted by Ali Sina

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 38, Number 4348
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.
I felt the above story was a manifest injustice. Muhammad condoned a man killing a pregnant mother and his own unborn child just because he said that she insulted the Prophet!

This hadith is acceptable so let's not go into saying that it is fabricated or weak etc. Let me summarize the whole story in few points

1) A slave woman of a blind companion (May Allah be pleased with her) used to insult the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam).
2) The blind man forbade her but she didn't stop and one day he killed her
3) The Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) found out next morning and gathered the people
4) The Blind man came forward and told the whole story and the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) didn't take any action against him

Now, it is not surprising that the attackers like Mr. Sina would choose few points of the story and attack the noble character of al-habib (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) or omit the reasons why there was no action taken against the blind man. All the attackers will omit the important points which only proves the justice of the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam). Shaykh Muhammad Salih Al-Munajjid says:

This story is indicative of the justice with which the Muslims dealt with the people of the Book, which was enjoined in the sharee'ah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), who was a mercy to the worlds. The rights of the Jews who are under Muslim rule are guaranteed and protected, and it is not permissible to transgress against them by causing them any annoyance or harm. Hence when the people found a Jewish woman who had been killed they were alarmed and referred the matter to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), who had made the covenant with them and guaranteed them security, and who did not take the jizyah from them. He got angry and adjured the Muslims by Allah to find out who had done this deed, so that he could determine his punishment and judge his case. But when he found out that she had transgressed the covenant several times by reviling the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and impugning him, she forfeited all her rights and deserved the hadd punishment of execution which is imposed by sharee'ah on everyone who reviles the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), whether he is a Muslim, a dhimmi or a mu'aahid (non-Muslim living under Muslim rule), because impugning the status of the Prophets is kufr or disbelief in Allah the Almighty, and a transgression of every sacred limit and right and covenant, and a major betrayal which deserves the greatest punishment.

This is the correct understanding of this story. It is not as many of those who hate and revile sharee'ah rule and slander the character of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) say. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not choose to kill her in this manner, but because she deserved to be executed as a hadd punishment for breaking the covenant and reviling the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), he did not demand qisaas from her killer. She had said to him many things reviling the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), time after time, and he told her to stop but she did not stop, and he rebuked her but she paid no heed, until he could no longer bear it and he silenced the voice that insulted his religion and his Prophet.

As for killing a dhimmi unlawfully, it is major sin, and the warning concerning that is very stern, as was proven in Saheeh al-Bukhaari (3166) from 'Abd-Allah ibn 'Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) who narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Whoever killed a mu'aahid will not smell the fragrance of Paradise, although its fragrance may be detected from a distance of forty years' travel." Imam al-Bukhaari included this report in a chapter in his Saheeh entitled "Chapter: the sin of one who kills a mu'aahid unlawfully."

Source

So, the woman wasn't killed merely due to the reason she insulted the Prophet (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa salam), rather due to the reason she broke the covenant. Thus, as shaykh mentions, she forfeited her rights of protection and broke the law. How do you expect the Messenger of Allah (sall-allhu 'alayhi wa salam) to punish the blind man, who dealt according to the law to his slave woman, who broke the law? At least, try to make some sense Mr. Sina!

Now, regarding the last statement of Mr. Sina's scholarly misinterpretation of the hadith and lack of knowledge: Mr. Sina, where does the hadith say that she was pregnant or foetus dropped out of her belly? If you would have read the other versions of this narration reported in Tabarani and Bayhaqi, you would not have got yourself into this mess. Let's quote the Shaykh again:

There is nothing in the report to indicate that there was a foetus in the Jewish woman's womb. The one who understands that from the context is mistaken. As for the words in some versions of the report, "a child fell between her legs, and became covered with blood", this does not indicate that in any way whatsoever, rather it seems that it was one of her two children whom he described as being "like pearls", who came to his mother because he felt sorry for her then got covered with blood. The evidence for that is that the version of the hadeeth that was narrated by al-Tabaraani says "Her two children came between her legs and became covered with blood." In the version narrated by al-Bayhaqi it says: "Her two children fell between her legs covered with blood."

This is also indicated by what it says in Su'aalaat al-Aajurri Aba Dawood al-Sijistaani (p. 201): Abu Dawood said: I heard Mus'ab al-Zubayri say: 'Abd-Allah ibn Yazeed al-Khatami was not a companion of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). He said: He is the one whose mother was killed by the blind man, he is the child who fell between her legs, (the woman) who reviled the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

Source

Originally Posted by Ali Sina

Muhammad himself slept with Mariyah, the maid slave of his wife Hafsa, without marrying her.

Slavery in Islam is another day's topic but let me expose him. Get your facts straight Mr. Sina. I know you, like the other haters, are very quick at distorting the facts and trapping the ignorants but let me give you a history lesson: 1) There is dispute among Muslim scholars whether Mariyah al-Qibtiyyah (May Allah be pleased with her) was the mothers of believers, meaning she was his wife or his concubine. 2) Those scholars who say that she was his concubine agree on the fact she was given to him by the ruler of the Egypt.

So here, readers can see your academic dishonesty. I would love to see your authentic source which says that she was the maid slave of our mother Hafsa (May Allah be pleased with her).

Originally Posted by Ali Sina

Forgiving someone for killing another human being just because he said she insulted Muhammad is unacceptable.

As already explained above, she broke the law and hence deserved the punishment. Actually, dealing with the insulting issue lightly in secular system leads to many worst results. For example, bullying children physically or verbally could make them commit suicide. I'm sure we can find examples of this here or there. I'm not implying that we kill them but only pointing the negative consequences of insulting.

Originally Posted by Ali Sina

What if that man was lying to escape punishment? What does this story say about Muhammad's sense of Justice?

First, there is no evidence for this. Second, if we assume that he was lying then he committed a grave sin and will get what he deserves on the day of judgement and the woman will receive the justice. Since there was no evidence against what the blind man said and the blind man himself confessed, it was dealt accordingly. If the death plenty would have been carried on him unjustly, who would have taken care of his children? Would you then have ranted about the "unjust" of Prophet Muhammad (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam)? How many times have you spoken or written against many judges in our times issuing unjust punishment against the supposedly criminals?

Originally Posted by Ali Sina

During the past 1400 years, how many husbands escaped punishment for killing their innocent wives by accusing them of blaspheming the prophet of God and this Hadith allowed them get away with it?

First bring an evidence and then we can talk about it!

Originally Posted by Ali Sina

Here is another one:
Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 38, Number 4349
Narrated Ali ibn AbuTalib:
A Jewess used to abuse the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and disparage him. A man strangled her till she died. The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) declared that no recompense was payable for her blood.

Again, she broke the covenant under which she was protected and thus dealt according to the law for breaking the law. Unless, someone thinks like one of Mr. Sina's fans:

Originally Posted by Always_Faithful

Any form of punishment is an injustice stimulated by emotional fallacy. No-one deserves torture or suffering regardless of what they have done

First, I ask this genius: How carrying out the punishment for a crime is an emotional fallacy? so yeh, according to this guy, we should just let people do whatever they want, but when it comes to Muslims or their Prophet (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), then do not hold back the ranting about injustice etc.

Originally Posted by Ali Sina

It was not easy to read these stories and not be moved. There is no reason to believe that all these stories were fabricated. Why should believers, who have tried to depict their prophet as a compassionate man fabricate so many stories that would make him look like a ruthless tyrant?

too bad for you Mr. Sina! As far concerning your last statement, you may want to brush up your basic of 'uloom-al hadith (science of hadith). I know it is too hard to comprehend but basics should be fine for a scholar like yourself. Now, for the benefits of the readers: Why can't a non-Muslim forge these stories and attribute to a trust worthy companion? This is the reason why we have the science of hadith in Islam to evaluate the authenticity of a narration.

Originally Posted by Ali Sina

I could no longer accept the brutal treatment of those who chose not to accept Islam, or that those who criticize any religion must be put to death. Faith is a personal matter.

First, Mr. Sina, one side you, over and over again, tell Muslims to leave their religion if they want to become humans. Other side, you say faith is a personal matter. So which one is it? Second, again, Mr. Sina, you are either displaying your lack of historical knowledge or committing academic dishonesty. Let me give you a history lesson: Did the Messenger of Allah (salla-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) kill or order to kill the people of Taif when they ordered the kids to torture him? Did he kill or order to kill the woman who used to throw garbage at him? Did he kill or order to kill the woman who insulted him when he was carrying her stuff (helping her)? The list is long but we'll end with these and leave the readers with something to think about.

Wallahu a'alim (and Allah knows best)

alhamdulillah, this concludes my critically analysis of part of his testimony. Mr. Sina several times displayed his ignorance, academic dishonesty and committed logical fallacy, appealing to emotions. All kinds of comments are welcome, just make sure that you don't break any of our rules.

[asma]

walekum assalam ,

as far as Prophet (sallalaho alaihis wassalam's ) marriage with Maria (Ra) is concerned it verily did take place - source tafseer ibn katheer. biographies of Prophet (sallalaho alaihis wassalam's ) wives and children.

mashallah nice refutation indeed.

[Raied]

Wow, bro looks like youve really put some time into this. May Allah rewarrd you for this. InshAllah.
Excellent article. Totaly "shuTs" Ali Sina up.

[Assad]

Ali Sina is one hillarious person which I have ever seen in my life. I have seen many Christian missionaries who atleast try to have a scholastic approach although biased but they do talk about facts.

Ali Sina makes up fairy tales and write articles which are no where found in any Authentic or non authentic Islamic sources and then Ali Sina starts believing all his lie to be true.

This alone disapproves that Ali Sina had ever been a Muslim. At most , he may have been a Shia muslim as he belongs to Persia so it may be right to assume this.

Best wishes

[salman]

Originally Posted by Raied

Wow, bro looks like youve really put some time into this. May Allah rewarrd you for this. InshAllah.
Excellent article. Totaly "shuTs" Ali Sina up.

Barak Allahu feeka bro. this was my first rebuttal to one of the knowns supposdely scholars who are trying their best to expose Islam, more like exposing themselves. insha'Allah, more are coming, once I get my hands free from couple of other projects and my final exams.

Originally Posted by Acid

Ali Sina is one hillarious person which I have ever seen in my life. I have seen many Christian missionaries who atleast try to have a scholastic approach although biased but they do talk about facts.

Ali Sina makes up fairy tales and write articles which are no where found in any Authentic or non authentic Islamic sources and then Ali Sina starts believing all his lie to be true.

This alone disapproves that Ali Sina had ever been a Muslim. At most , he may have been a Shia muslim as he belongs to Persia so it may be right to assume this.

Best wishes

Wa'alaykum As-Salam bro

well, if I could remember correctly, when I first read this article of his a long time ago, he said that he heard these ahadith from a mulla but now it's not there; i suppose one of his goon fans would have corrected him saying: "respected Dr. Sina, you see you were a shia but these narrations are found in sunni ahadith books, why would a shia mulla mention it, considering the fact that mullas hardly know any ahadith".

If you read the first page of this article, he says that he did lots of research and found these problems; however, it doesn't seem the case as I have showed. Either, he was being dishonest, as he didn't present the complete historical evidences, or he didn't know them, which only shows that he didn't research throughly. How ever you look at it, he only digged his own grave with his own arguments!

[Al Habeshi]

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem,

as-Salaamu 'Alaykum,

Man I don't get that Ali Sina guy, so wierd, I can't help but this that these guys are so dihonest.

I do have one question:

First, there is no evidence for this. Second, if we assume that he was lying then he committed a grave sin and will get what he deserves on the day of judgement and the woman will receive the justice. Since there was no evidence against what the blind man said and the blind man himself confessed, it was dealt accordingly. If the death plenty would have been carried on him unjustly, who would have taken care of his children? Would you then have ranted about the "unjust" of Prophet Muhammad (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam)? How many times have you spoken or written against many judges in our times issuing unjust punishment against the supposedly criminals?

I don't know if that is a sufficient answer to simply say, if we cannot find any evidence he is lying then at least we know he will get punished on yawmal qiyamah.

I'm trying to find answers for this story on multaqa because I've been hearing it alot lately, in the case of the Prophet, sallaAllahu alayhi wa salam,

I can understand taht he would have had Allah tell him different if the man was lying, so because I already have faith in Him sallaAllahu alayhi wa salam for various reasons I can trust His sallaAllahu alayhi wa salam judgement here.

Br.al-Habeshi

[salman]

^wa'alaykum as-salam

akhee, his whole argument is based on assumption. Secondly, I wrote it a while ago and I know it needs some improvement.

[Al Habeshi]

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem,

Yes I know his arguements are rubbish and same old stuff I came across his site when I first became Muslim.

But I still don'tget that particular part, if you get what I mean.

Br.al-Habeshi

[salman]

^subhaanAllah akhee, mash'Allah you're a revert; I didn't even notice.

On topic, are you confused about the story of blind sahabi (radiAllahu anho) killing his female slave? I remember, I did come across a thread on this story on Multaqa.

[Al Habeshi]

Originally Posted by salman

On topic, are you confused about the story of blind sahabi (radiAllahu anho) killing his female slave? I remember, I did come across a thread on this story on Multaqa.

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem,

The questions that come to mind are like:

Could someone now days kill someone and say they were dishonering the Prophet, sallaAllahu alayhi wa salam.

Also, could a Muslim just kill anyone who insulted the prophet sallaAllahu alayh wa salam.

I think you could answer these by showing things like:

In a court of law after the prophet's time, sallaAllahu alayhiwa salam, how would such a case be dealt with.

I don't know, but it's an interesting topic.

Br.al-Habeshi