Killing the apostate! Islamic?? Whats the source? Whats there to consider?

[firedragon]

Do you think that sunnah.com is an anti Islamic website?
Do you think it is a fraud website?

Nope.

Ok, I just assumed that they were good translators and that good translators would either consult with or be hadith scholars themselves, but it is human to make wrong assumptions some times, no big deal.

No worries.

I said a scan, not a cut and paste. If you have it on file that you can copy paste from why not just send the whole file?

Done.

How is this relevant to what you referenced to shakeel?

Was an example of scholarship, not translation.

You assume he has access to them even after he told you he does not?

Im sure he could read arabic. Maybe he could. Most muslims can read very well. I dont know if you can and by the way you have been communicating it seems you cannot. So though you are nitpicking trying to pick a fight for nothing like a child, it was not meant to you because I know that you can't read arabic. So it is not fair for me to ask you to read an arabic book. And you didnt ask me for sources because you were busy supporting Shakeel and his "scholars" who he never mentioned.

strange.

 

[Niblo]

There is a great deal of diversity among Islamic scholars and jurists concerning the issue of capital punishment for apostasy. For the majority (I can’t say how large a majority) apostasy is a crime, for which the maximum penalty is death. For the minority, apostasy is a sin, with no earthly punishment.

Both sides look to the Qur’an and the aḥādīth – hearsay accounts of the Prophet’ deeds and words – for justification.

While the Qur’an speaks of apostasy more than a dozen times; nowhere does it authorise an earthly punishment for abandoning faith. On the contrary, we read this:

‘There is no compulsion in religion: true guidance has become distinct from error.’ (Al-Baqara: 256); and this:

‘Say: “Now the truth has come from your Lord: let those who wish to believe in it do so, and let those who wish to reject it do so.”’ (Al-Kahf: 18); and this:

‘As for those who believe, then reject the faith, then believe again, then reject the faith again and become increasingly defiant, Allāh will not forgive them, nor will He guide them on any path.’ (Al-Nisa: 137).

In a footnote to this last verse, Dr. Mohammad Hashim Kamali, a noted Islamic scholar and former Professor of Law at the International Islamic University of Malaysia writes:

‘Had apostasy been subject to a temporal punishment, it would have been mentioned here. For this Qur’anic verse clearly visualises instances of renunciation of Islam more than once without actually mentioning a punishment for it.’ (‘Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence’).

The Qur’an makes it perfectly clear that when it comes to apostasy, Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) reserves for Himself the right to judge; and to do so on the Day of Judgement. The Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) has no say in the matter. On the contrary, his role is to convey the message – to preach and teach the Faith, as expressed in the Qur’an – and nothing more. He is not to impose it by force:

‘Ask those who were given the Scripture, as well as those without one: “Do you too devote yourselves to Him alone?” If they do, they will be guided, but if they turn away, your only duty is to convey the message. Allāh is aware of His servants.’ (Al-‘Imran: 18-20; my emphasis). See also Al-Kahf: 29; Al-Ma’ida: 92.

If the Prophet was given no Qur’anic authority to punish apostasy, then by what right do we?

Continued:

 

[Niblo]

Is it fair to say that aḥādīth collections of Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are considered true by Sunni Muslims?

The Muslim Community is divided on this matter. At one extreme we have the Qur’anists; folk who consider all aḥādīth to be unreliable; worthy only of outright rejection. At the opposite extreme are those who claim that to doubt the authenticity of even a single ḥādīth is to place oneself outside the fold of Islam.

The majority of Muslims – I believe – float somewhere in between.

Dr. Kamil writes:

‘Muslim jurists and ulama have developed elaborate methodologies for the authentication of hadith with the purpose precisely to enhance the scope of scientific objectivity in their conclusions. This they have done in full awareness that in no other branch of Islamic learning has there been as much distortion and forgery as in hadith.’ (‘A Textbook of Ḥādīth Studies’; my emphasis).

There was extensive forgery of aḥādīth in the early decades of Islam, following the murder of Uthman, the third caliph. According to Dr. Kamil, the killing of Uthman ‘dealt a heavy blow to the unity of the umma’, resulting in ‘the emergence of serious political differences and partisan groups such as Shia, Kharijites and Mutazila.’

Aḥādīth were forged for political, rather than religious, reason. They were – according to Dr. Kamali – an ‘epiphenomenon of these developments and the conflicts they precipitated eventually led to the collapse of the early caliphate barely forty years after its inception.’

Any ḥādīth that stands in conflict with the Quran – in such a way that no reasonable compromise and interpretation can remove it; or that conflicts with the accepted behaviour of the Prophet, or with another ḥādīth; or with human experience, or the natural sciences must be treated with caution.

Continued:

 

[Niblo]

Is it fair to say that Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim both state that the penalty for apostasy is death?

That is a matter of interpretation!

The ‘apostasy’ aḥādīth of Sahih Muslim are – in effect – duplicates of al-Bukhari’s, and so I intend to focus on the latter.

The principal ḥādīth offered in support of the death penalty for apostasy is this: ‘Ibn Abbas said: The Messenger of Allah said, “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.”’ (Sahih Al-Bukhari).

My belief is that this ḥādīth is an outright forgery. However, Dr. Kamil, and Professor Abdullah Saeed – Sultan of Oman Professor of Arab and Islamic Studies at the University of Melbourne – appear to disagree with me

Both argue that the ḥādīth is ambiguous, and in need of interpretation, since – if taken literally – would require the death penalty for, say, the Jew who becomes a Christian; or a Christian or Hindu who becomes a Muslim.

Dr Kamil reminds us that: ‘According to the rules of Islamic jurisprudence, when a text becomes open to one level of interpretation, it is automatically reduced from the level of the definitive (qat͑i) to that of speculative (zanni) and may henceforth be subjected to further levels of interpretation, which would, in this case, most likely be that this hadith had envisaged treason as a capital offence and not apostasy as such.’ (‘A Textbook of Ḥādīth Studies – Authenticity, Compilation, Classification and Criticism of Ḥādīth’; my emphasis).

He writes of a second ḥādīth:

‘There is no evidence to indicate that the Prophet Muhammad himself ever imposed the death penalty on any apostate for a simple act of conversion from Islam. If such evidence had existed, it would have provided the necessary prophetic authority to back the death penalty. On the contrary, however, one hadith in the collection of Bukhari (one of the most important collections of hadith for Sunni Muslims) details a man who came to Medina and converted to Islam. Shortly after his arrival, this man wanted to return to his former religion and asked the Prophet for permission to do so. The Prophet let him go free, without imposing the death penalty or, indeed, any punishment.’ (Ibid; my emphasis).

Abdullah Saeed writes, of this same ḥādīth:

‘This man several times sought permission from the Prophet to be released from Islam but the Prophet declined, before eventually allowing him to leave Medina and revert to idolatry. Had the Prophet wanted to impose capital punishment for apostasy, he could have done so.’ (‘Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam’; my emphasis).

Continued:

 

[Niblo]

Professor Saeed writes:

‘A number of today’s top Muslim scholars (for example, Muhammad Hashim Kamli, Hasan al-Turabi, Rashid Ghannouch, and Taha Jabir al-Alwani) argue that there is no evidence in the actual practice of the Prophet to suggest that he put anyone to death simply because of his or her conversion from Islam. Any association of the death penalty with apostasy in sayings attributed to the Prophet should therefore be interpreted in light of the socio-political context of the time.

‘In the modern period, in which religious freedom has been guaranteed in major international human rights documents and is considered one of the most important rights of a human being, Muslims should emphasise the Quranic position on freedom of belief; that is, there is no coercion in matters of faith and belief. Any hadith that exist on this issue should be interpreted (or reinterpreted) in light of the guidance of the Quran, which has supremacy over all other forms of evidence in Islamic norms and values.’ (Article entitled ‘Hadith and Apostasy’; published in ‘Public Discourse’ - Journal of the Witherspoon Institute).

Dr Kamil writes:

‘The basic position in Islamic law is supportive of the freedom of the individual to profess the religion of his or her choice without compulsion. Neither the Prophet Muhammad, nor any of his Companions, compelled anyone to embrace Islam. They did not sentence anyone to any punishment solely for renunciation of Islam, and there is evidence also in the Qur’an to that effect.’

‘The handful of cases of apostasy reported during the Prophet’s lifetime are in effect offences of treason: the individual would renounce Islam, leave Madinah, join the pagans of Quraish and fight the Muslims – all in rapid succession. This was the scenario at a time when the two communities, the pagans of Mecca and the nascent Muslim community in Madinah, were actively at war. There were no neutral grounds under those circumstances. Bearing in mind also that there were over twenty-six military engagements (and many more smaller skirmishes) between Muslims and non-Muslims in the space of about ten years, there was an active but extended state of war.’ (‘Sharia Law’).

Apostasy is a sin, and not a crime; and there is no justification – either within the Qur’an or in the actual practice of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) – for any kind of temporal punishment simply for leaving the Faith.

 

[firedragon]

Professor Saeed writes:

‘A number of today’s top Muslim scholars (for example, Muhammad Hashim Kamli, Hasan al-Turabi, Rashid Ghannouch, and Taha Jabir al-Alwani) argue that there is no evidence in the actual practice of the Prophet to suggest that he put anyone to death simply because of his or her conversion from Islam. Any association of the death penalty with apostasy in sayings attributed to the Prophet should therefore be interpreted in light of the socio-political context of the time.

‘In the modern period, in which religious freedom has been guaranteed in major international human rights documents and is considered one of the most important rights of a human being, Muslims should emphasise the Quranic position on freedom of belief; that is, there is no coercion in matters of faith and belief. Any hadith that exist on this issue should be interpreted (or reinterpreted) in light of the guidance of the Quran, which has supremacy over all other forms of evidence in Islamic norms and values.’ (Article entitled ‘Hadith and Apostasy’; published in ‘Public Discourse’ - Journal of the Witherspoon Institute).

Dr Kamil writes:

‘The basic position in Islamic law is supportive of the freedom of the individual to profess the religion of his or her choice without compulsion. Neither the Prophet Muhammad, nor any of his Companions, compelled anyone to embrace Islam. They did not sentence anyone to any punishment solely for renunciation of Islam, and there is evidence also in the Qur’an to that effect.’

‘The handful of cases of apostasy reported during the Prophet’s lifetime are in effect offences of treason: the individual would renounce Islam, leave Madinah, join the pagans of Quraish and fight the Muslims – all in rapid succession. This was the scenario at a time when the two communities, the pagans of Mecca and the nascent Muslim community in Madinah, were actively at war. There were no neutral grounds under those circumstances. Bearing in mind also that there were over twenty-six military engagements (and many more smaller skirmishes) between Muslims and non-Muslims in the space of about ten years, there was an active but extended state of war.’ (‘Sharia Law’).

Apostasy is a sin, and not a crime; and there is no justification – either within the Qur’an or in the actual practice of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) – for any kind of temporal punishment simply for leaving the Faith.

Who are you brother? You have done a pretty great job really.

I have not read up on these scholars you are referring to. But the sound of it seems like the traditional concept of Wasath. As in people who take a middle path. Its a very interesting concept because there is some similarity to the Buddhist principle of Madyama Pratipadha.

Lots of people tend to think this Wasath is only in extreme action, as in taking a moderate path, with no extreme paths, this way or that way. That means no murderous rampages, nor the other end of being a passive human being who takes everyones torture. But it also is a middle path in life as a whole approach to life. Every aspect of life. I love it.

Nevertheless, you are absolutely right. The prophet, or his followers, or their followers, you and I, or anyone for that matter has not been mandated in the Quran to kill anyone for apostasy. Nowhere. Zilch. Thats the main point.

Peace.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Professor Saeed writes:

‘A number of today’s top Muslim scholars (for example, Muhammad Hashim Kamli, Hasan al-Turabi, Rashid Ghannouch, and Taha Jabir al-Alwani) argue that there is no evidence in the actual practice of the Prophet to suggest that he put anyone to death simply because of his or her conversion from Islam. Any association of the death penalty with apostasy in sayings attributed to the Prophet should therefore be interpreted in light of the socio-political context of the time.

‘In the modern period, in which religious freedom has been guaranteed in major international human rights documents and is considered one of the most important rights of a human being, Muslims should emphasise the Quranic position on freedom of belief; that is, there is no coercion in matters of faith and belief. Any hadith that exist on this issue should be interpreted (or reinterpreted) in light of the guidance of the Quran, which has supremacy over all other forms of evidence in Islamic norms and values.’ (Article entitled ‘Hadith and Apostasy’; published in ‘Public Discourse’ - Journal of the Witherspoon Institute).

Dr Kamil writes:

‘The basic position in Islamic law is supportive of the freedom of the individual to profess the religion of his or her choice without compulsion. Neither the Prophet Muhammad, nor any of his Companions, compelled anyone to embrace Islam. They did not sentence anyone to any punishment solely for renunciation of Islam, and there is evidence also in the Qur’an to that effect.’

‘The handful of cases of apostasy reported during the Prophet’s lifetime are in effect offences of treason: the individual would renounce Islam, leave Madinah, join the pagans of Quraish and fight the Muslims – all in rapid succession. This was the scenario at a time when the two communities, the pagans of Mecca and the nascent Muslim community in Madinah, were actively at war. There were no neutral grounds under those circumstances. Bearing in mind also that there were over twenty-six military engagements (and many more smaller skirmishes) between Muslims and non-Muslims in the space of about ten years, there was an active but extended state of war.’ (‘Sharia Law’).

Apostasy is a sin, and not a crime; and there is no justification – either within the Qur’an or in the actual practice of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) – for any kind of temporal punishment simply for leaving the Faith.

Thank you for sharing this. I learned a lot by reading it.

 

[Niblo]

Who are you brother? You have done a pretty great job really.

I have not read up on these scholars you are referring to. But the sound of it seems like the traditional concept of Wasath. As in people who take a middle path. Its a very interesting concept because there is some similarity to the Buddhist principle of Madyama Pratipadha.

Lots of people tend to think this Wasath is only in extreme action, as in taking a moderate path, with no extreme paths, this way or that way. That means no murderous rampages, nor the other end of being a passive human being who takes everyones torture. But it also is a middle path in life as a whole approach to life. Every aspect of life. I love it.

Nevertheless, you are absolutely right. The prophet, or his followers, or their followers, you and I, or anyone for that matter has not been mandated in the Quran to kill anyone for apostasy. Nowhere. Zilch. Thats the main point.

Peace.

As-Salāmu ‘alaykum wa Rahmatullāhi wa Barakātuhu, brothers Firedragon and Conscious Thoughts.

Many thanks for your compliments, but the credit rightly belongs to the scholars I quote.

About me:

I was raised as a Baptist in South Wales. At the age of fifteen I became a Catholic, and I remained one for over fifty years. For ten years I was a professed member of the Carmelite Third Order. I spent a year with the Carmelite Friars at Hazlewood Castle in Yorkshire (now a hotel); and over a year with the Cistercians at Mount Saint Bernard Abbey in Leicester, testing a vocation (I had close contact with the Abbey for many years before that). It became clear that life in a religious order was not my calling, and so I became a husband and father (as the Abbey Secretary said to me: ‘Our novitiate is a seedbed of good Catholic marriages!’).

I look back at my time with the Carmelites and Cistercians with great affection. Even though I no longer share their doctrinal beliefs I admire their spirituality, and their honest convictions; and their way of life – especially the Cistercians. It has been my privilege to know many excellent Christians: paternal grandfather; priests, religious and laity. Each was an example of the best of their Faith.

About fifteen years ago my son became a Muslim. He obtained a degree in Classical Arabic; married a Moroccan lass (who I consider to be my third daughter); and now lives there. He is a translator of Qur’an and aḥadīth exegesis; and of other scholarly works. My daughter (in-law) is a sharifa. One of her ancestors, ʻAbd al-Salām ibn Mashīsh al-ʻAlamī, was the spiritual guide of Abu al-Hasan ash-Shadhili, founder of the Shadhili Tariqa. My son is a Sufi of that Tariqa; and a murīd of Shaykh Seyyed Hossein Nasr.

Having gained a Muslim family I made it my business to learn all I could about Islam (I’m still learning!). It was during this long process that I began to question certain Christian beliefs I once held as true; and which I had defended many times over the years. Moving from Christianity to Islam was not an easy journey; but it was the right journey……at least for me.

May Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) reward both of you for your contributions to this Forum; and grant you His protection in these most difficult times.

 

[Spirit of Light]

As-Salāmu ‘alaykum wa Rahmatullāhi wa Barakātuhu, brothers Firedragon and Conscious Thoughts.

Many thanks for your compliments, but the credit rightly belongs to the scholars I quote.

About me:

I was raised as a Baptist in South Wales. At the age of fifteen I became a Catholic, and I remained one for over fifty years. For ten years I was a professed member of the Carmelite Third Order. I spent a year with the Carmelite Friars at Hazlewood Castle in Yorkshire (now a hotel); and over a year with the Cistercians at Mount Saint Bernard Abbey in Leicester, testing a vocation (I had close contact with the Abbey for many years before that). It became clear that life in a religious order was not my calling, and so I became a husband and father (as the Abbey Secretary said to me: ‘Our novitiate is a seedbed of good Catholic marriages!’).

I look back at my time with the Carmelites and Cistercians with great affection. Even though I no longer share their doctrinal beliefs I admire their spirituality, and their honest convictions; and their way of life – especially the Cistercians. It has been my privilege to know many excellent Christians: paternal grandfather; priests, religious and laity. Each was an example of the best of their Faith.

About fifteen years ago my son became a Muslim. He obtained a degree in Classical Arabic; married a Moroccan lass (who I consider to be my third daughter); and now lives there. He is a translator of Qur’an and aḥadīth exegesis; and of other scholarly works. My daughter (in-law) is a sharifa. One of her ancestors, ʻAbd al-Salām ibn Mashīsh al-ʻAlamī, was the spiritual guide of Abu al-Hasan ash-Shadhili, founder of the Shadhili Tariqa. My son is a Sufi of that Tariqa; and a murīd of Shaykh Seyyed Hossein Nasr.

Having gained a Muslim family I made it my business to learn all I could about Islam (I’m still learning!). It was during this long process that I began to question certain Christian beliefs I once held as true; and which I had defended many times over the years. Moving from Christianity to Islam was not an easy journey; but it was the right journey……at least for me.

May Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) reward both of you for your contributions to this Forum; and grant you His protection in these most difficult times.

May Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) bless you and your family in this time of Cornavirus.
I hope to read more of your posts in the future

 

[firedragon]

As-Salāmu ‘alaykum wa Rahmatullāhi wa Barakātuhu, brothers Firedragon and Conscious Thoughts.

Many thanks for your compliments, but the credit rightly belongs to the scholars I quote.

About me:

I was raised as a Baptist in South Wales. At the age of fifteen I became a Catholic, and I remained one for over fifty years. For ten years I was a professed member of the Carmelite Third Order. I spent a year with the Carmelite Friars at Hazlewood Castle in Yorkshire (now a hotel); and over a year with the Cistercians at Mount Saint Bernard Abbey in Leicester, testing a vocation (I had close contact with the Abbey for many years before that). It became clear that life in a religious order was not my calling, and so I became a husband and father (as the Abbey Secretary said to me: ‘Our novitiate is a seedbed of good Catholic marriages!’).

I look back at my time with the Carmelites and Cistercians with great affection. Even though I no longer share their doctrinal beliefs I admire their spirituality, and their honest convictions; and their way of life – especially the Cistercians. It has been my privilege to know many excellent Christians: paternal grandfather; priests, religious and laity. Each was an example of the best of their Faith.

About fifteen years ago my son became a Muslim. He obtained a degree in Classical Arabic; married a Moroccan lass (who I consider to be my third daughter); and now lives there. He is a translator of Qur’an and aḥadīth exegesis; and of other scholarly works. My daughter (in-law) is a sharifa. One of her ancestors, ʻAbd al-Salām ibn Mashīsh al-ʻAlamī, was the spiritual guide of Abu al-Hasan ash-Shadhili, founder of the Shadhili Tariqa. My son is a Sufi of that Tariqa; and a murīd of Shaykh Seyyed Hossein Nasr.

Having gained a Muslim family I made it my business to learn all I could about Islam (I’m still learning!). It was during this long process that I began to question certain Christian beliefs I once held as true; and which I had defended many times over the years. Moving from Christianity to Islam was not an easy journey; but it was the right journey……at least for me.

May Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) reward both of you for your contributions to this Forum; and grant you His protection in these most difficult times.

Waalaikum Salam warahmathullahi wabarakaathuhu. Shukran jazeelan laka akhi.

 

[danieldemol]

So though you are nitpicking trying to pick a fight for nothing like a child, it was not meant to you because I know that you can't read arabic.

I wasn't nitpicking, I was looking for a way to bring you and Shakeel on the same page.

And you didnt ask me for sources because you were busy supporting Shakeel and his "scholars" who he never mentioned.

No matter how much you wish it were so, acknowledging someone else takes a different approach is not supporting them.

 

[danieldemol]

Abdullah Saeed writes, of this same ḥādīth:

‘This man several times sought permission from the Prophet to be released from Islam but the Prophet declined, before eventually allowing him to leave Medina and revert to idolatry. Had the Prophet wanted to impose capital punishment for apostasy, he could have done so.’ (‘Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam’; my emphasis).

Continued:

Thanks for sharing Niblo, another perspective is welcome.

If there is no compulsion in religion why did the Prophet allegedly deny the man's request to leave Islam 'several times'?

If I didn't want to compel someone I would let them change religion the first time they asked me.

Is it possible the general rule of the Prophet was no apostasy but He caved under persistent pressure from this man?

 

[firedragon]

If there is no compulsion in religion why did the Prophet allegedly deny the man's request to leave Islam 'several times'?

Which man? How do you know this happened for sure?

 

[firedragon]

Is it possible the general rule of the Prophet was no apostasy but He caved under persistent pressure from this man?

So you go on what you think are "possible". Like "its possible there is a spaghetti monster exists", an atheists argument. Or its possible we were all created by Aliens in support of Realism.

Its possible that Jesus was God incarnate. Its possible the Brahma was Abraham. Anything

 

[danieldemol]

Which man? How do you know this happened for sure?

Where did I say it happened for sure? Do you know what "allegedly" means?

 

[danieldemol]

So you go on what you think are "possible". Like "its possible there is a spaghetti monster exists", an atheists argument. Or its possible we were all created by Aliens in support of Realism.

Its possible that Jesus was God incarnate. Its possible the Brahma was Abraham. Anything

It appears you think a human being caving under pressure is in the same likelihood as spaghetti monsters.

 

[firedragon]

Where did I say it happened for sure? Do you know what "allegedly" means?

So why do you question about something you are not sure about? You should first then ask "did this happen". Dont you think?

 

[firedragon]

It appears you think a human being caving under pressure is in the same likelihood as spaghetti monsters.

As usual you cherry picked from a sentence. But I am sure you understood the gist of the sentence which you obviously ignored.

Anything is "possible" if you want it to be. And you seem hellbent in wanting "it is a possibility Muhammed wanted apostates killed" but the oldest documents dont say that.

So you seem to be looking at "possibilities" now since you cannot provide any evidence for your cause.

La ikraaha fiddheeni - Quran.

 

[Shakeel]

As usual you cherry picked from a sentence. But I am sure you understood the gist of the sentence which you obviously ignored.

Anything is "possible" if you want it to be. And you seem hellbent in wanting "it is a possibility Muhammed wanted apostates killed" but the oldest documents dont say that.

So you seem to be looking at "possibilities" now since you cannot provide any evidence for your cause.

La ikraaha fiddheeni - Quran.

So wait, did you try to refute all the ahadith that I quoted in my first comment? I haven't been following much, but I noticed you only complain about Ikrima, without evidence, but I didn't notice you address the others. I must have missed it.

With your logic one might say the simple English words, there is no compulsion in the deen, might as well be claimed to contradict the fact that Allah will not accept any other religion on the day of judgment, that people who disbelieve in it will be tormented in hell for an eternity or that non-Muslims must abide by Islamic law in an Islamic country.

It cannot be applied universally in that sense because it wouldn't be true. For instance, hijab is compulsory for a woman, prayer is compulsory on Muslims, fasting and zakat are compulsory.

 

[firedragon]

complain about Ikrima, without evidence,

Thats dishonest. I have given you enough evidence and you didnt even know the scholars, you didnt know any of our own legacy, and now you say "without evidence"?

Dishonesty is not liked. So mate, Muslim, Christian, Atheist or alien, dishonesty is dishonesty.

Thus. Ciao. No more with that type of dishonesty mate.

Salam.