Which Party Has More Sense, Pope Benedict XVI?
äÔÑ ãä ÞÈá Maqreze Ýí 09/25/2009 16:16

Which Party Has More Sense, Pope Benedict XVI?

By Dr. Hani Siba’i


The Head of the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI (his real name is Joseph Ratzinger), has given a lecture entitled “The Relationship between the Mind and Violence in Islam and Christianity.” The Pope has quoted the following sentences:

“A short while ago, it came to my mind a conversation, published by Professor Theodore Khory, from University of Munster, which was held between the Roman Emperor Manuel II Paleologus and a “learned Persian” Muslim on “Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both”. This meeting took place in 1391 near Ankara, during the Emperor’s stay in his winter residence.

IT seems that this Emperor has recorded this conversation during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402, because his argument was more comprehensive than his Persian counterpart. Pope Benedict XVI then quoted some statement, mentioned by Professor Khory about Jihad in Islam and its relation with violence:

“In the seventh dialogue, as reported by Professor Khory, the Emperor talked about the issue of Jihad, the Holy War. It is certain that the Emperor was aware that the Verse 256 of Surat al-Baqarah says: (There is no compulsion in religion). It is one of the first Suras to be revealed in the Qur’an as scholars stated, and it referred to the period when Muhammad had no power and was subjected to constant threat. But it is also certain that the Emperor was aware of what happened, in the subsequent period, in the Qur’an about the Holy War.”

So we can deduce that the Qur’an states (There is no compulsion in religion) when the Prophet r was weak in Makkah, that is when he was using Taqiyyah (concealment of one’s belief to escape persecution), according to Professor Khory, the Emperor and Pope Benedict XVI. This is confirmed by the Emperor’s knowledge of what was revealed in the Qur’an, in the subsequent period, about the Holy War; that is when Jihad was prescribed in the Madinah period. So Pope Benedict XVI is fully aware and acquainted with what he believes and says, which contradicts the statement made by sheikh al-Azhar Tantawi and some Muslim scholars when they accused Pope Benedict XVI of ignorance of Islam!!!

Pope Benedict XVI then moves to a paragraph of direct insult, ascribed to the Roman Emperor, and he was praising the Emperor and consenting to his resentful analysis:

“Without mentioning much explanation, such as ‘the difference between the treatment of Islam to the believers, the People of the Book and the disbelievers,’ the Emperor has unexpectedly suggested to his Persian counterpart the main question for us, which is the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

I say: who clears the name of the Virgin Mary? Isn’t it the Qur’an revealed by Allah I to His Prophet r? Who clears the Noble Messengers from the accusation of adultery and theft? Isn’t it the Qur’an revealed by Allah I to His Prophet r? How can their hatred and envy reach such a moral degradation?

Pope Benedict XVI continued his transgression, quoting the following statement:

“The decisive statement in this argument against the spread of religion (i.e., Islam) by using violence is: acting in a way which is incompatible with the mind and incompatible with the nature of the Lord.  Professor Theodore Khory commented on this statement saying: According to the Byzantine Emperor, who had learned the Greek philosophy, this statement was clear with regards to the Islamic creed. The Choice of the Lord is not absolute and His Will is not linked with any of our saying or even with the mind.”

So, the Catholic Pope deduced that “the Prophet Muhammad r did not bring anything new, that he r conveyed only that which was evil and inhuman and that Islam is a religion that promotes violence, and that Islam is against the mind and intellect,” (Mighty is the word that comes out of their mouths. They utter nothing but a lie) (Surat al-Kahf: verse 5).

Therefore, from the above introduction, I would like to comment on the Pope’s statement, in an attempt to defend our beloved Prophet r and our Great Religion, Islam, praising Allah I who guides us to be Muslims:

First: Al-Baqillani and the Pope

Second: Holy Violence from their Holy Book

Third: the Disgraceful History

Fourth: Conclusion

First: Al-Baqillani and the Pope

Some people might wonder about the relationship between judge Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn at-Tayyib al-Baqillani, from Baghdad, the Great Imam of his time who died in 403 A.H and Pope Benedict XVI?

The connection between the two is that the Emperor in Constantinople had asked the Abbasid Caliph to send him one of the Muslim scholars for a debate with the ancestor of Pope Benedict XVI. The Abbasid Caliph has chosen the distinguished Imam al-Baqillani to debate with them. This debate was mentioned by al-Qadhi Iyyad in his “Tarteeb al-Madarik”, by adh-Dhahabi in his “Siyar A’lam an-Nubala’” and Ibn Khallakaan in “Wafayaat al-A’yan”. Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn at-Tayyib al-Baqillani was a prodigy during his era, very persuasive, the spokesman of the Ummah and the sheikh and defender of Sunnah, a very clever scholar, and knowledgeable of all sciences. He managed to defeat the masters of the Mu’tazili sect and silence all innovators of his time. In short, this prominent scholar did not approach the Christians to ask them for a debate of the so-called “Dialogue of Civilisations;” but it was the Roman Emperor who had pleaded with the Muslims for a debate on the fundamentals of the two religions’ creed.

A short summary about the course of the debate:

Judge al-Baqillani refused to take off his turban when he entered upon the Emperor, and he insisted on not taking off his socks when he was asked to do so. He said: “I do not take them off and I will only enter with my full Muslim dress; I am one of the Muslim scholars and what you request from us (change our dress) is humiliation and dishonour to us. Allah I has elevated us with Islam and honoured us with our Prophet Muhammad r. In addition, when the Kings send their messengers to another king, they should be honoured and respected, and not humiliated, especially if they are scholars; humiliating a scholar is a disgrace before Allah and before Muslims.” The Emperor had no option but to welcome him and accepted his terms and conditions.

This is a lesson for today’s Muslim scholars, especially for those who disgrace themselves when they enter into a debate with the West, to the point that if one of them is asked to take off his garment and turban, or anything that symbolises Islam, such as his beard, he will assent, without hesitation.  Rather there are some scholars who are prepared to give up the fundamental basics of Islam, under the pretext of encouraging others to appreciate the Shari’ah! Obviously, this is what cheered Benedict and his company and incited Bush and his band of criminals, and everyone on earth to abuse the religion of Islam and its Messenger, Muhammad, may peace be upon him.

Return to the debate of al-Baqillani:

Due to the length of the debate, I will report only some scenes of it, as follows:

The first position:

Adh-Dhahabi said in the Biographies Part10, page 408, the publication of as-Safa library, Cairo: “The tyrant (the Roman emperor) asked him: ‘What happened to your Prophet’s wife?’ al-Baqillani replied: ‘Just as it happened to Maryam, daughter of ‘Imran; Allah declared their innocence, but ‘Aishah did not come with a child’ and so he silenced him.”

The second position:

Al-Qadi ‘Ayyad said in his book “Tarteeb al-Madarik” Part2, page 210, the publication of dar-al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyah, Beirut, reporting the debate: “The emperor said to him: ‘What do you say about the splitting of the moon which you claim it was a miracle of your prophet?’ al-Baqillani said: “This is true according to us.  The moon had split during the time of our Prophet, peace be upon him, until people had seen it. Only present people and those who happened to watch the event had witnessed it.

The emperor asked: “But how is it that not all people had seen it?”

Al-Baqillani replied: “Because not all people were prepared to watch its splitting.”

The emperor asked: “Is there any relationship between you and this moon? Why is it that the Romans and all other nations had not witnessed it, but you, in particular, had seen it?

Al-Baqillani replied: “What about the “table” (i.e. the table which was sent down upon prophet ‘Isa (Jesus), peace be upon him, from the heavens)? Is there any relationship between you and that table? You (the Christians) have seen it, but not the Jews, the Magus, the Brahmans, the atheists, especially your neighbours, the Greeks. They all deny such thing, yet you have seen it while other nations did not.”

The king then asked one of their great priests to intervene:

Al-Baqillani said: “They brought a man with a blond hair, and when he sat, I reported the issue to him and he said: ‘What the Muslim has said is maintained; I know of no other answer, except what he said.’ I said to him: ‘What do you say about the eclipse? Do all people on earth see it or just the people in the region where it takes place?’ the priest replied: ‘It is seen only by those who are in the region where it takes place.’ I said: ‘So what do you deny about the splitting of the moon, since it takes place in a region where only its people can witness it and those who prepare themselves to see it? As for those who are in place where they cannot see the moon, they would not be able to witness it.’ The priest said: ‘It is as you said. No one can deny what you just said; the argument is about the narrators who reported the event.

The king asked: ‘and how to discredit the narrators?’ the priest said: ‘When signs like this one are true, they should be reported by a large crowd to a large crowd, until the necessary knowledge about it reaches us.  Had been so, we would have received the necessary knowledge about it.  Therefore, since no necessary knowledge about it has reached us, it means that the information is fabricated.’ The king turned to me and said: “Your answer?”

I said: “What is irrevocable and unquestionable for him regarding the “table” is irrevocable and unquestionable for me regarding the splitting of the moon.  It would be said to him: had the sending down of the “table” been true, it would have been reported by a large number of people; and so there would be no Jew or Christian or dualist except that he is aware of it by obligation.  Since they do not necessarily know about it, it means that the information is fabricated and a lie.”

The priest and the king were startled, and so was the whole gathering, which concluded with that fact.”

The Third Position:

It was said that the Roman king had promised to meet al-Qadi al-Baqillani in one of the Christian congregations.  Al-Baqillani attended the meeting, which was characterised by excessive adornment.  He was offered a seat next to the king who was displaying all signs of pride, with his crown on, and surrounded by his men.  Then came the Patriarch (the Pope in his time) and al-Qadi al-Baqillani greeted him with a question that led to an exquisite conversation between them, as reported by scholars al-Qadi ‘Ayyadh and Adh-Dhahabi:

Al-Baqillani asked him: “How is the family (wife and the children)?”

The question was hard on the Patriarch and everyone in the gathering. They all performed the Cross sign over their faces and condemned al-Baqillani’s question!

The king said: “Don’t you know that the monk abstains from such thing?”

Al-Baqillani replied: “You approve of his abstention of that but you attribute to the Lord of the Worlds a female companion and a child; you don’t deem the Lord of the Worlds above such thing.”

I say: This was the way of our great scholars, who raised themselves above falsehood with their faith.  They never sold themselves out with their knowledge, and never offered themselves cheaply at the expense of their religion.  They were truly stars in the space of history.

Second: The Holy Violence from their Holy Book!

The Pope Benedict the sixteenth accused Islam of violence! We will not reply against him neither with the Qur’an nor with the Sunnah nor with extracts from the book of Ibn Taymiyyah (The Authentic Reply to those who changed the Religion of Christ”, nor even from the debates of Sheikh Ahmed Deedat, in which he defeated them, may Allah have mercy upon him.  But we reply against him from the Old Testament, in which the Pope Benedict and all Christians believe, to know, with sharp proofs, who is the arrogant liar!

These are some of the extracts from some books of the Old Testament:

(1) Deuteronomy, Chapter 20:

Going to the battle after besieging a city that refuses to surrender:

And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.

Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations. But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth.

But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.

(2) Deuteronomy, Chapter 12:

These are the statutes and judgments, which ye shall observe to do in the land, which the LORD God of thy fathers giveth thee to possess it, all the days that ye live upon the earth Ye shall utterly destroy all the places, wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every green tree.

And ye shall overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their groves with fire; and ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and destroy the names of them out of that place.

(3) Deuteronomy, Chapter 13:

If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying,

Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known; Then shalt thou inquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you;

Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword.

And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again.

(4) Deuteronomy, Chapter 7:

But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire.

For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.

(5) Ezekiel, Chapter 9:

And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity:

Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house.

And he said unto them, Defile the house, and fill the courts with the slain: go ye forth. And they went forth, and slew in the city.

(6) Numbers, Chapter 31:

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites: afterward shalt thou be gathered unto thy people.

And Moses spake unto the people, saying, Arm some of yourselves unto the war, and let them go against the Midianites, and avenge the LORD of Midian.

Of every tribe a thousand, throughout all the tribes of Israel, shall ye send to the war.

So there were delivered out of the thousands of Israel, a thousand of every tribe, twelve thousand armed for war.

And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand of every tribe, them and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, to the war, with the holy instruments, and the trumpets to blow in his hand.

And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.

And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.

And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods.

And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire.

And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts.

And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and unto the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the camp at the plains of Moab, which are by Jordan near Jericho.

And Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and all the princes of the congregation, went forth to meet them without the camp.

And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle.

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?

Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

I say: What would the reply of Pope “Benedict” be regarding all these clear texts, urging for violence and killing of women, children and old people, with no sign of mercy of pity?

How would the Pope Benedict and the Patriarchs reply to these texts urging for the destruction of houses and whole cities upon their inhabitants?

How would the Pope Benedict and the Patriarchs explain this unmerciful incitement for brutality against animals, trees, crops and everything that belongs to their enemies?

The Poet Ahmed Shawqi was right in his condemnation to those who claim to fight in the name of Jesus Christ, who is innocent of them:

You were neither a blood thirsty man **  nor indifferent towards the weak and the orphans

O bearer of the suffering of mankind **   many of our sufferings are caused in your name

The disgraceful and bloody history of the Benedict Family:

We are not going to talk about the massacres of Muslims by the Christians during the Crusade wars, but we will rather talk about the massacres carried by the Cross worshippers among each others and with other nations, in the following points:

First: The Slaughter of Saint Bartholomew.

It was the slaughter of the Protestants in all parts of France.  They slaughtered by the Catholics, by order of the King of France, Charles the Ninth, following a request from his mother Catherine De Medici on 24th August, 1572.

There were different statements regarding the number of killed people in that massacre, and some assumed it had reached sixty thousand (60,000). Oh, how terrible! In one single day, the grandfathers of Benedict killed sixty thousand Protestants of their own people.  It is truly an honourable history!

Second: The losses of the First World War (1914-1918): nearly thirty five million dead (35m).

The arms expenses reached the figure of 2100 billion dollars ($2100B)

The losses of past wars: 207 million dead; most of them during the imperialistic invasions, and also in civil and national wars.

I say: These wars had nothing to do with the Muslims, and there was no al-Qaeda organisation or any terrorism, except the western terrorism, in that period between Christians themselves!

The Nazi of Christian Hitler was a pure Western product!

The Fascism of Christian Mussolini was a pure Christian product!

The Ku Klux Klan groups, which caused terror against African Americans, were a pure Christian American product!

The placing of bags as hood-masks on Muslim prisoners’ heads in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and Bagram was inspired from those savage and terrorist groups, who used to burn villages of black people, and used to put hanging posts in front the houses black people to terrorise them!

Not to mention the mafia and inter-continental crimes, which are all a western Christian product!

Third: The American president, William McKinley, who ordered the invasion of The Philippines in 1898, said: “We did not go to the Philippines to occupy it; but the matter was that Jesus Christ had visited me in my sleep and asked me to act like Americans and go to the Philippines to make its people enjoy civilisation”!

Believe it or not! The presidents of the Christians receive divine revelations! McKinley invades the Philippines because the Lord visited him in his dream!

George W. Bush was also visited by the Lord calling him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq! (what for?) so that those populations enjoy civilisation!!

Has democracy been established? Are the people of the Philippines enjoying the paradise of the Christian west?

Of course, the country once called Aman-Allah (a predominantly Muslim state liberated by Muslims), has now become the Philippines with a Muslim minority! The western Christian civilisation is highlighted in the manners and skills of eating dogs and cats and killing the Muslims, exactly what is happening now in the enjoyment of the Iraqi and Afghan populations of the western Christian civilisation, under the leadership of America!

Fourth: Johann Galtung said: “The western countries are a property of the US, and the US is in alliance with God.” (Fahd al-‘Araabi: America which teaches us democracy, p.311).

I say: This is an alliance with Satan obviously, because God does not enjoin evil and immorality.  Allah said the truth when He said about them:

(The unbelievers are protectors, one of another: unless ye do this, (protect Each other), there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief.) Surat al-Anfaal, Verse 73 (8:73).

Fifth: Robert Crush quoted his superior’s command: “I want a count of dead bodies not prisoners of war.”  Crush added: “We used to consider as ligitimate dead body anybody over 12 years old.” (America Who Teaches us Democracy: p.342).

Sixth: In Italy, and until recently (in 1762), “prisoners’ bodies were destroyed on the wheel of torture bone by bone, or tied up to the tail of a provoked horse, then dragged on the ground.” (Wall Durant: The Story of Civilisation, Translated by Fuad Andrew Samg, 39-40, p.176)

I say: Of course I haven’t mentioned the issue of investigation trials because they are not worth mentioning, for they are among the successive sordid atrocities committed by Benedict’s ancestors and his catholic fellowmen against Muslims in Andalusia!!  A very decent Christian Western civilisation, indeed!!

Seventh: The Eradication of the Indigenous:

In his book The Conquest is Ongoing (Translation by Mia Zabahan, p.13), Noam Chomsky pointed out that the Europeans’ conquest of the world brought about two unprecedented disasters in history: The destruction of the indigenous in the western hemisphere and deterioration of Africa, where slave trade soared high.”  Chomsky attributes the most significant factor behind the Europeans’ success to their conquest of the world: “Europe’s ability to foster and manipulate the culture of violence.”

Eighth: The Bangali capital Dākhā was booming at the time that the Europeans dubbed it the Manchester of India, as a reference to the British industrial Manchester!  So, what happened to its people under the promoters of the Western Christian civilisation?  Its populace, according to Chomsky, shrank from 150,000 to 30,000 due to British terrorism!!

Ninth: The so-called civilised Europeans killed 10 million people from Zaire!  Noam said, “Churchill would set up the principle of chemical attack, then would say, ‘It is completely right to use lethal gases against uncivilised tribes’, p.43.  This is what they have done in the past and what they are doing at present in Afghanistan!  Otherwise, how Benedict would interpret the presence of the Christian NATO in Afghanistan?  Are they offering cakes, manna and quails to the poor and wronged Afghani people?  Or are they showering them with tons of explosives and lethal gases which utterly wipe out villages!  What are those who claim to be Jesus followers doing in Afghanistan?  Aren’t they spreading violence, murder, destruction in the land?  Aren’t they committing rapes and arrogantly destroying land?  Who has killed one and half million Iraqis during the unjust sanctions against Baghdad?  Aren’t the perpetrators, the leaders of the so-called civilised Christian Western civilisation?  Who has killed more than 200,000 people in Iraq since the invasion in 2003?  Aren’t they the civilised Christian West and its sheep-like collaborators?  Where is the blush of shyness, Benedict?”

Tenth: A witness from your folk: Before his death, the Spanish historian Las Casa wrote in his will: “I think that Allah will pour his wrath on Spain because of the atrocities committed, and because most Spanish people benefited from the blood-soaked wealth usurped along the coasts and amidst slaughter and destruction.” (Chawsky: p.58)  I (the author) would say: “Wouldn’t it be wise to follow in the footsteps of the Spanish historian Las, Benedict?  Wouldn’t it be wise to resort to reason and speak out the truth, and wash your hands of the followers of your creed who have committed crimes against humanity at large?  So which group is wiser than the other, Benedict?

The best of arguments:

With the foregoing, it has become clear to us which group has more sense than the other.  So, is it the one which disgraces their prophets or the one which honours them?  What wisdom do you claim you have, Benedict, when you believe in the Prophet Lut’s incestuous relationship with his two daughters?  This is the shocking extract from Genesis 19:30-38:

“Lot left Zoar and retired with his two daughters to a cave in an adjacent mountain. In Gen. 19:30-38, Lot's daughters incorrectly believed they were the only females to have survived the devastation. They assumed it was their responsibility to bear children and enable the continuation of the human race. On two subsequent nights, they got their father drunk enough to sleep with them, and they became pregnant. The first son was named Moav (Hebrew, lit., "from the father" [meh-Av]). He was the patriarch of the nation known as Moab. The second son was named Ammon or Ben-Ammi (Hebrew, lit., "from our nation"). He became the patriarch of the nation of Ammon.”

So, imagine: drinking alcohol and committing illegal sexual intercourse, and not just a simple illegal sexual intercourse by an ordinary person.  It is an act by an infallible prophet, who committed incest with his two daughters and not just one, which means, a lineage of illegal sexual intercourse.  So, this is the secret behind the spread of dissoluteness, incest and committing the forbidden by doing what Lut’s people used to do, homosexuality and lesbianism.  One would argue, why one should at all be surprised since a prophet, pure and infallible as he was, would commit incest with his two daughters?  Do such brains deserve respect when they believe in lies such as these forged against Allah’s Messengers?

Where are the brains of those people who claim that the son of god was living in a woman’s womb?  Why his father (the god) abandoned him and did not intervene in his crucifixion and sordid murder?  Where is the wisdom of this father (the god) who stood and watched his son’s crucifixion by those criminals?  Where is your brain, Benedict, when you believe that the Prophet Jacob fought with Allah as mentioned in Genesis 32:

“But when the man saw that he was not able to overcome Jacob, he gave him a blow in the hollow part of his leg, so that his leg was damaged.  And he said to him, Let me go now, for the dawn is near. But Jacob said, I will not let you go till you have given me your blessing. Then he said, What is your name? And he said, Jacob.  And he said, Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel: for in your fight with God and with men you have overcome.  Then Jacob said, What is your name? And he said, What is my name to you? Then he gave him a blessing.  And Jacob gave that place the name of Peniel, saying, I have seen God face to face, and still I am living.  And while he was going past Peniel, the sun came up. And he went with unequal steps because of his damaged leg.  For this reason the children of Israel, even today, never take that muscle in the hollow of the leg as food, because the hollow of Jacob's leg was touched.”

Imagine (May Allah bless our brains, we Muslims)  Prophet Jacob were fighting Allah, the Lord of the two worlds, and the Lord were begging him to let him go because the dawn was setting, and the Lord did not know the name of Jacob and would ask him what his name was, and would give him the name of Israel!!  Then, there is the latest funny and saddening story of that muscle in the hollow of the leg which the Israelis do not eat because Jacob's leg was touched!!  Thank Allah for the blessing of brain!  (We should have forged against God a lie if we returned into your creed, after God delivered us from it.) (The Qur’ān, 7:89)  Where are their brains, when they believe that Jesus accused Messengers before him of theft!  This is not a lie which we have forged against Benedict and his followers!  Evidence in John:10 says: “Therefore Jesus said again, "I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep.  All who ever came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them.”

Imagine and think deeply about the fact that Allah’s Messengers were thieves and robbers!!  This is a great lie!  Now, Benedict, the truth is at last discovered, and it has become crystal clear to every sane person ‘which group has more sense’!!


* Director of the al-Maqreze Centre for Historical Studies, London