Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Topics' started by Khanah, Oct 1, 2021.
I'm not saying he himself believed it - but he did argue that the Bible can be read to state he was crucified but not killed. There are numerous videos of his to that effect and I skipped through one not so long ago.
As mentioned in my previous post- I believe it was a ridiculous strategy in the first place. And zakir and Co have taken the baton and run with it. Indeed, zakir and shabir also refer to the same verse to say he was not crucified- but they change the meaning of the term 'crucified' to mean death on the cross. Therefore, they say he alayhissalaam did not die on the cross but he alayhissalaam lost consciousness there.
No, that's wrong.
Ahmed Deedat did not believe or preach that. Many places and lectures he recited 4:157 and asserted that Sayyiduna 3isa 3alaihis salam was neither crucified nor killed by another method.
This idea of affirming the crucifixion is something that is extremely widespread amongst apologists today, primarily those engaged in dialoguing with Christians in debates.
Ahmed Deedat used to, when debating the occurrence (or otherwise) of the crucifixion, claim that Nabi Isa alayhissalaam did not die on the cross although he was crucified (I seek refuge in Allah), became unconscious and then 3 days later appeared to his disciples- hence the confusion. I don't know if this is something he actually claimed to believe or if he was engaging in some kind of debate tactic to try and prove the resurrection did not occur using the bible only.
1. If this was only a debate tactic, then this is a ridiculous one, no doubt. To try and prove something like this from the bible is akin to trying to prove Darwin didn't believe in evolution from his own book- why bother? This is in no way a natural reading of the text. In any case, when trying to debate a christian on this point- what is the purpose? You just look like a lunatic and destroy your own credibility, quite frankly.
2. We do not believe in the crucifixion at all- so this 'theory' is against our beliefs anyway- what is the purpose of trying to convince others that this is what happened?
Unfortunately, Zakir Naik (who has a reach numbering millions) uses this exact (stupid) tactic and in fact affirms this as a legitimate belief- see here:
Shabir Ally, another well known apologist who has debated many famous Christians including the likes of William Lane Craig, says something similar:
Look here at Ali Ataie who takes a completely different interpretation:
Ataie is a colleague of Hamza at Zaytuna and studied at Dar ul Mustafa in Yemen, I believe. Perhaps someone should ask his former teachers to refute him on this point- it would carry more weight.
How does he deny the explicit verse- sometimes I think he's actually got some kind of dementia. His rants do come across that way.
Additionally, has he never read any tafsir? Some major scholars hold to the substitution explanation. And in those explanations, either the substitute is a sinner i.e. a roman centurion or judas. Or he is a volunteer from amongst the Muslims of the time. So in any of these cases, how is this possibly injustice as he claims?
those with delicate dispositions will be offended if i say that this murtad talks like a donkey. he sounds just like the gobar-folk of india!
this murtad clearly denies the aayat of the qur'an and calls it nonsense!
the jahil mutlaq does not even know that the aayat from the qur'an refutes him:
according to this jahil, hazrat isa alayhis salam was crucified - whereas the qur'an says in explicit words: 'they did not crucify him'.
and imran's nonsense about 'death' - how will the imbecile explain "qataluhu"?
laa Hawla wa laa quwwata illa billah.
Allaah bless you
Do you have a PDF link to the work of Ukbari?
Allaah bless you
What I have stated regarding him and the Russians is not a conspiracy. When we watch the entire video you sent, we get a feel for what he is trying to convey.
He openly supports Russia and Eastern Orthodoxy:
And here he is at the invitation of Alexander Dugin:
True, he may also be incompetant and arrogant so that he frequently makes statements like this. But the political usefulness of this tool cannot misunderstood as a conspiracy.
Finally here is an interview he gave with the Russian propaganda agency News Front:
I don't think we need to attribute this to conspiracy over incompetence or arrogance- that's what Imran himself does. He's just as delusional as David Icke amongst others.
What this guy doesn't seem to understand is- whilst it's possible for an individual scribe to make a mistake when writing out a manuscript, it's not possible for this same mistake to be accepted into the community of muslims because our huffaz would point it out immediately. To believe this mistake crept into later generations without thousands of huffaz noticing (some of whom would have learnt without ever seeing a mushaf, as is often the case today in some places such as Mauritania) is beyond belief.
Unfortunately he somehow has 400k subscribers and nearly 100k people have seen this video- may Allah protect the muslims from such fake intellectuals.
What a time we live in! Lies, especially Kufr, spread so quickly.
He denied the wording of several mass-transmitted Qira'at, saying the wording of a Shadh Qira'ah is the "correct" wording, forgetting that the Qur'an was revealed in seven Ahruf and so it is possible that both are correct. If he had just said, "If we look at the wording in this other recitation, we can recite the verse this way too," he would not have fallen into Kufr. What need did he have to deny the mass-transmitted Qur'an?
Yet instead he wished to say, "Look the Muslims are incompetant, they have all been reciting the Qur'an wrong all this time!"
And when you look at the comments section, it is filled with (Eastern Orthodox) Christians praising him, and of course they would praise him: he has attacked what was his own religion, attacking the preservation of the Qur'an!
Why did he feel the need to deny the Qur'an?
Because he needs to placate the Russian government and his friend the Russian Fascist Alexander Dugin. If one watches his videos this has always been the message that he has tried to shove down our throats - that Russia is Rum, Rum is our future ally and so the Russians are our allies. He has suggested that the true believers who followed Isa Alayhis Salam were the Eastern Orthodox Christians - a bizarre and ahistorical claim as Eastern Orthodoxy itself formed from the East-West Schism and they believe in the trinity, a form of Shirk, that Isa Alayhis Salam never taught.
This can only be for a political motive, for the Russian government to increase its hold over its citizens who are Muslims, curb dissent against Russian Imperialism in Muslim Lands (and future such campaigns) and gain an ally in the Muslims against our common enemy of the west.
Well we are clear - neither do we support Western Colonialism nor do we support Russian Imperialism.
In Imran Hosein attacking the Muslim view of the Qur'an, he has given a clear signal to his foreign supporters on where his allegiance lies and what he is prepared to do in order to support his Russians friends.
those interested can check out al-muyassar fi'l qira'aat al-arba' 'asharah, edited by kurayyim rajih
archive link: DOWNLOAD PDF (82 MB)
also mentioned in iyrab qira'at al-shawadh of ukbari:
a person becomes a kafir for expressly rejecting the well-known reading of the qur'an and calling it a mistake and calls it 'foolishness' (bewaqufi hai). the guy is kafir (implied) for saying the qur'an was "world of sound"
astaghfirullah, this man who is incapable of uttering the word, 'zukhruf' and pronounces it like an illiterate peasant as 'zukhraf' - supposedly, it is this jahil who knows better than the imams of the qira'at? the point is not about the variant reading, but his sneering at one of the correct and in fact, jumhur readings.
this is the predicament of our age. utter jahils unable to recite the qur'an properly trying to fault imams of qira'at, many of whom were native arabs. armchair critics, who have never had the good fortune of reading a book on qira'at, summarily dismissing a well-known and mutawatir reading - only because it contradicts their fanciful notions.
imran hossein should repent from the kufr he has uttered. and publicly do tawban and tajdid (renewal of faith).
la Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.
the variant is among uncommon readings. this jahil is inverting the reality - making an uncommon reading as THE standard and rejecting the jumhur reading. and may Allah disfigure his filthy and ugly face for casting aspersions on the qur'an.
you can look up kurayyim rajih's quick reference for 14 qira'at: (the comment of shadh narration is at the bottom of the page).
i also include two well known tafsirs. ibn kathir, for his popularity.
and abuHayyan for his lexical analysis.
Can you share a pdf of that document if possible.
Bridges Translation of the Quran in the 10 modes of recitation
So what I gathered from this is as follows:
Imran Hossein rejects the kasra on the letter ʿayn in the word لَعِلْمٌ in Surah Zukhruf āyah 61.
Imran Hossein asserts that the letter ʿayn has a fatḥah on it.
I checked the Bridges translation of the Qur'ān (not an endorsement of the people on the project) which brings together the ten qira'āt in one translation and I did not see any mention of a different qira'āt for that word in this āyah in particular. It also said the āyah was referring to Sayyidunā ʿĪsā (ʿalayhis salām).
Just came across some video on YouTube where imran Hosein was refuted for saying a word in the quran had been changed and the ummah has been reading that word wrong for hundreds of years- pure apostasy. Check from 1:04:20 onwards.
Some deobandi called Hasan Ali apparently met him and asked him to repent and he refused- its ironic even the deos can see through this fool.
Unfortunately it seems like his fan boys are out in force in the comments section supporting him. I think this is an issue with conspiracy theorists of his ilk - he has to twist reality to fit his warped ideas and its now come to this conclusion. Claiming Dajjal was hiding in England amongst other absurdities - it would have been better for him if he had stopped there.
There are too many youth out there listening to this guys videos- they must be warned.