Jump to content

Virk?


mrggg123
 Share

Recommended Posts

whts the difference between chowdhury and jatt?

That's what these Pakistani Punjabi and Mirpur Muslim Jatts call themselves (Big Landowners - Chaudhury's)

Muslim Jats of Azad Kashmir

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Jats are one of the larger communities found in the Azad Kashmir, making up the majority of the population of Mirpur District, and forming a large part of the populations of Kotli and Bhimber districts.

According to the 1901 Census of India conducted by Britain, the total Jat population of the princely state of Kashmir was 148,000, and all were Muslim.[1] Most of them resided is areas that now form Azad Kashmir, although there were few villages in the Jammu (especially in villages like Muradpur, dassal danidhar, bagla, lam and many villages of mender and poonch) and Kathua regions, most of whom immigrated to Pakistan.

Little is known about when the Jat settled in the foothill of the Pir Panjal, but reference was made by the Mughal Emperor Babar of the their presence in his memoirs Babarnama.[2]

Distribution[edit]

Jats predominantly reside in the traditional Jat heartlands of Chakswari, Dadyal, the city of Mirpur and the countryside surrounding these areas, which all form part of the Mirpur district which is overwhelmingly Jat.

The main Jat villages in or around the city of Mirpur are Ban Khurma, Chitterpury, Balah-Gala, Kalyal, Khambal, Purkhan, Sangot and Thathaal as well as many villages around the Chechian area.

The Mirpuri Jat make up a substantial portion of the British Pakistani community, as many of the Jat villages were flooded by the construction of the Mangla Dam.[3]

Language[edit]

The Kotli, Dadyal and Chakswari Jats speak in a broad Pahari dialect, whilst those of Mirpur City and its immediate surrounds speak in a dialect which resembles the Pothwari spoken in the Jhelum area, while the Bhimber Jats speak in the Pahari dialect influenced by the Punjabi spoken in Gujrat District.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.faithfreedom.org/challenge/rapist.htm

But why blame these Pakistani Jatts when all they are doing is following in the footsteps of Prophet Muhammad.

Prophet Muhammad: A Rapist

Muhammad allowed his men to rape the slave women captured in raids. However, after capturing the women, Muslims faced a dilemma. They wanted to have sex with them but also wanted to return them for ransom and therefore did not want to make them pregnant. Some of these women were already married. Their husbands had managed to escape when taken by surprise and were still alive. The raiders considered the possibility of coitus interruptus (withdrawing from intercourse prior to ejaculation). Unsure of the best course of action, they went to Prophet Muhammad for counsel.

Bukhari reports:

Abu Saeed said: “We went out with Allâh's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allâh's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist." [1]

Notice that Prophet Muhammad does not forbid raping women captured in war. Instead, he indicates that when Allâh intends to create anything, nothing can prevent it. In other words, not even the absence of semen can prevent it. So Muhammad is telling his men that coitus interruptus would be futile and ill-advised because it would be an attempt to thwart the irresistible will of Allâh.

Prophet Muhammad does not say a word against the forced insemination of these captive females. In fact, by criticizing coitus interruptus, in effect he supported forced insemination of female slaves.

In the Qur’an, Muhammad’s god made it legal to have intercourse with slave women, the so-called “right hand possessions,” even if they were married before their capture.[2]

Juwairiya:

Ibn Aun has narrated: “I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn 'Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn 'Umar was in that army.” Bukhari 3.46.717 (see also Muslim 019. 4292)

Prophet Muhammad sent one of his companions; Bareeda bin Haseeb, to spy on the Bani al-Mustaliq and after assessing the situation he ordered his men to attack. Muslims came out of Madina on 2nd Shaban of 5 A.H. and encamped at Muraisa, a place at a distance of 9 marches from Medina.

Juwairiya was one of the captives during the raid of Banu Mustaliq. When all the prisoners were made slaves and distributed among the victorious Muslim soldiers, Juwairiyah fell to the lot of Thabit bin Qais. She was the daughter of Haris, the leader of the clan.

The Islamic site muslims.ws writes: “She was the daughter of the leader of the clan, and therefore, very much felt the discomfiture and disgrace of being made slave of an ordinary Muslim soldier. Therefore, she requested him to release her on payment of ransom.

Thabit agreed to this, if she could pay him 9 Auqias of gold. Hazrat Juwairiyah had no ready money with her. She tried to raise this amount through contributions, and approached the Holy Prophet also in this connection. She said to him "0' Prophet of Allah! I am the daughter of Al Haris bin Zarar, the Lord (chief) of his people. You know that it is by chance that our people have fallen captive and I have fallen to the share of Thabit bin Qais and have requested him to release me considering my status, but he has refused. Please do an act of kindness and save me from humiliation". The Holy Prophet was moved and asked the captive woman if she would like a thing still better. She asked as to what was that thing. He said that he was ready to pay her ransom and marry her if she liked. She agreed to this proposal. So the Holy Prophet paid the amount of ransom and married her.”

First he raids a population without warning because they were easy targets and wealthy. As usual he kills the unarmed able-bodied men, plunders their belongings, then enslaves the rest. The narrator says, “According to the prevailing practice all the prisoners were made slaves and distributed among the victorious Muslim soldiers.” Prevailing practice? Didn’t Muhammad come to show people the right way? Why should he follow the evil prevailing practices of a people whom he called ignorant? By doing so, he set the example and those evil practices became standard practices of the Muslims for ever.

The narrator says that upon seeing Juwairiyah the Prophet was “moved”. Methinks that movement must have happened in his male organ because his heart seems to have remained cold and unmoved. Although Muslims call this marriage, I call it rape.

Safiyah

Safiyah was a beautiful 17 years old Jewish woman who was captured when Muhammad’s troops raided Kheibar. She was the daughter or Huyeiy Ibn Akhtab, the chief of the Banu Nadir, a Jewish tribe of Medina , whom Muhammad had beheaded two years earlier along with the men of Banu Quriaza. The tribe of Banu Nadir had been already banished from Medina and their properties were confiscated.

Safiyah had married to her cousin Kinana, who was a young Jewish leader of Kheibar. When Muhammad raided that fortress, he killed its unarmed men and captured the rest. A Jewish traitor, (reminds me of Noam Chomsky) to gain Muhammad’s favor and be spared from death, told him that Kinana was the treasurer of the town and that he used to hide the money in some ruins. Muhammad ordered Kinana to be tortured to reveal the whereabouts of the treasures and killed him.

Then he asked the prettiest woman from amongst that captives to be brought to him. Ibn Ishaq writes: "The apostle occupied the Jewish forts one after the other, taking prisoners as he went. Among these were Safiya, the wife of Kinana, the Khaibar chief, and two female cousins: [sisters of Kinana] the apostle chose Safiya for himself. The other prisoners were distributed among the Muslims.

Bilal brought Safiya to the apostle, and they passed the bodies of several Jews on the way. Safiya's female companions lamented and strewed dust on their heads. When the apostle of Allâh observed this scene, he said, 'Remove these she devils from me.' But he ordered Safiya to remain, and threw his reda [cloak] over her. So the Muslims knew he had reserved her for his own. The apostle reprimanded Bilal, saying, 'Hast thou lost all feelings of mercy, to make women pass by the corpses of their husbands?'”

Safiyah was taken to Muhammad’s tent. Muhammad wanted to have sex with her on that very night, only hours after torturing to death her husband. She resisted his advances. That night Abu Ayyub al-Ansari guarded the tent of Muhammad. When, in the early dawn, Muhammad saw Abu Ayyub strolling up and down, he asked him what he meant by this sentry-go; he replied: "I was afraid for you with this young lady. You had killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives, I was really afraid for you on her account". (Ibn Ishaq, p. 766)

The next day Muhammad covered Safiyah with his mantle, an act signifying that she is now his. Safiyah was groomed and made-up for Muhammad by Umm Sulaim, the mother of Anas ibn Malik and was taken to Muhammad who married her in a mock marriage ceremony and raped her that night. Muslims call this marriage. I call that rape. I am certain not many young women would like to jump into bed with an old man who happens to be the murderer of their father and husband and many other relatives. That poor woman had no choice; therefore that marriage was nothing but a mockery of this sacred institution. At that time Muhammad was close to sixty years old.

Rayhanah

Another victim of Muhammad was Rayhana, a 15 year old girl from the tribe of Banu Quraiza. Muhammad massacred all the men of that tribe. Then women were brought to him to pick and he chose Rayhana. Rayhana never married Muhammad and unlike Juwairiyah and Safiyah never feigned being a Muslim to have an easier life. She preferred to remain a sex slave rather the wife of the murderer of her father, brothers and uncles.

[1] Bukhari, Volume 5, Book59, Number 459. Many other canonical hadiths recount how Muhammad approved intercourse with slave women, but said coitus interruptus was unnecessary because if Allâh willed someone to be born, that soul would be born regardless of coitus interruptus. See the following:

Bukhari 3.34.432: “Narrated Abu Saeed Al-Khudri: that while he was sitting with Allâh's Apostle he said, "O Allâh's Apostle! We get female slaves as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allâh has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.”

Sahih Muslim is another source considered factual and accurate by virtually all Muslims. Here is Sahih Muslim 8.3381: “Allâh's Messenger (may peace be upon him) was asked about 'azl, (coitus interruptus) whereupon he said: The child does not come from all the liquid (semen) and when Allâh intends to create anything nothing can prevent it (from coming into existence).”

Muslims also consider Abu Dawood highly accurate and factual. Here is Abu Dawood, 29.29.32.100: “Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, ‘Tell them.’ She was embarrassed. He said, ‘It is alright, and I do it myself.’ Malik said, ‘A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practicing coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife does not practice coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission.’"

See also Bukhari 3.46.718, 5.59.459, 7.62.135, 7.62.136, 7.62.137, 8.77.600, 9.93.506 Sahih Muslim 8.3383, 8.3388, 8.3376, 8.3377, and several more.

[2] Qur’an, 4:24: “Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allâh ordained (Prohibitions) against you.”

Qur’an, 33:50): “O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allâh has assigned to thee.”

Qur’an, 4:3: “If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a slave) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.”

Sina's Challenge

I receive many emails from angry Muslims, who sometimes beg me, and sometimes order me to remove this site. I consider both, pleading and bullying, signs of psychopathology. Argumentum ad baculum and argumentum ad misericordiam are both logical fallacies.

If you do not like this site and want me to remove it, instead of acting as a bully or as a victim, disprove my charges against Muhammad logically. Not only will I remove the site, I will publicly announce that Islam is a true religion. I will also pay

$50,000 U.S. dollars

to anyone who can disprove any of the dozen of the accusations that I have made against Muhammad.

I accuse Prophet Muhammad of being:

a narcissist

a misogynist

a rapist

a pedophile

a lecher

a torturer

a mass murderer

a cult leader

an assassin

a terrorist

a looter

I have debated with many Muslims. Their defense of Islam can be summarized in two categories:

  • Denial of the authenticity of Islamic sources that report the stories of crimes of Muhammad (example: debate with Edip Yukssel, a leader of the Submitters)
  • Moral relativism and situational ethics, e.g., “In those days, pedophilia, assassination, rape, raid, pillage, massacre and lying, were common practices, so Muhammad is innocent because he did what everyone else was doing.” Muslims even go as far as to question the legitimacy of the Golden Rule to claim I do not have any basis to condemn Muhammad. In other words, who can say what is good and what is evil? That is up to the messenger of God to decide. (Example: debate with Yamin Zakaria)

These are the main two arguments that Muslims present in defense of Islam. Any rational person can see they are logical fallacies.

These charges are irrefutable. You simply can't disprove them because they are reported in Islamic sources and as such they are as good as confession. You can't acquit a criminal after he has confessed, unless you plead insanity, which is my point.

Muslims often ask: "Who will judge whether or not an attempt to disprove your accusations against Muhammad and Islam, was successful?" The readers will be the jury. It is not difficult to see which side is right once both arguments are presented without one side fearing the other. I will publish the debates in this site. My opponents are also encouraged to publish them in any Islamic site. Please note that I will not accept face to face debates. The debates must be in writing.

Edit 2007/07/29

The above challenge was issued in 2001 and it hasn't been met yet. See the debates I had with Muslims. Also see the pathetic attempt of some Muslims trying to refute me here , here, here and here. Is that all the Muslim world can offer? Where are the scholars of Islam? Why such an important task is left to a bunch of amateurs who actually do more damage to Islam? Isn't it time that the real scholars come forth and refute my charges?

The truth is that several of the people that debated me were real scholars, such as the eminent Pakistani scholar Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi and his disciple Dr. Khalid Zaheer. This debate is a must read and is available for download. Dr. Zaheer is a learned man, a moderate Muslim and a good human being. I have utmost respect for him.

As of this date (2007), I will no longer debate with people who want to debate anonymously. I only debate with reputable scholars. I made this decision because often, Muslims moved by their faith and zealotry, but with little knowledge of Islam, challenge me to debate. They rehash the same tried and refuted arguments that bore everyone and disappear. Then, other Muslims, either accuse me of fabricating those debates or pooh-pooh my opponents for not being scholars.

As of this day, I am also doubling the reward. If you are not a reputable scholar, you can still win the prize. All you have to do is persuade a scholar to debate with me. If he (she) disproves my charges or can prove that Muhammad was a prophet of God, both you and he (she) will be rewarded $50,000 dollars each. This is to encourage you to write to your admired scholar and convince them that Islam is in danger and that it is their duty to defend it. Once you write to invite someone, please CC a copy to us for announcing the invitation. Our email is faithfreedom2 (at) gmail.com

Yes, Islam is in grave danger. Never, since its inception, Islam has faced a threat as serious as this. Today, millions of ex-Muslims are questioning the claimed truth of Islam, can make their criticisms heard worldwide, and unlike before, not fear for their lives. As long as these questions are not answered, this trend is only bound to continue, until the trickle becomes a torrent and the fall of Islam becomes obvious. In the past, the critics of Islam briefly shined like lamps in darkness, only to be put out by winds of persecution. What is happening today can be likened to the break of the dawn. Darkness has no chance in front of this much light. Muslims are waking up and leaving Islam like never before. A spiritual and intellectual revolution is underway. This is the century of enlightenment of the benighted Muslims. The giant is finally awakening. The days of Islam are numbered. This demon of hate and ignorance will be slain by the hands of its own primary victims. The unity of mankind and the world peace are around the corner.

Please advertise this challenge. Every Muslim must see it. This is like throwing water on their fire. Nothing will dampen their zeal more than the realization that among a billion Muslims there is not a single scholar who can prove the wild claims of Muhammad, nor acquit him of these grave charges. This unmet challenge has a sobering effect on them. They can make any excuse, such as, I am not worth their response, that there have been greater men than me who opposed Islam, or that I have been refuted already, but they will not be able to fool themselves. The more this challenge is circulated, the more Muslims will be forced to remain silent and doubt Islam. Do not undermine the psychological effect of this impossible challenge.

Sincerely

Ali Sina

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most Mirpuris are Jatts while the rest are Rajputs. Mirpuris are same as pothoharis of Pakistan in terms of their dialect spoken. In their society the Rajputs are considered superior over the Jatts. Historically they were a martial people like Pothoharis tribes who maintained their independence. Mirpuris largely converted to Islam during the time of Aurangzeb. The Bhangi misl was the first among the Sikh chiefs to bring them into submission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.faithfreedom.org/challenge/rapist.htm

But why blame these Pakistani Jatts when all they are doing is following in the footsteps of Prophet Muhammad.

Prophet Muhammad: A Rapist

Muhammad allowed his men to rape the slave women captured in raids. However, after capturing the women, Muslims faced a dilemma. They wanted to have sex with them but also wanted to return them for ransom and therefore did not want to make them pregnant. Some of these women were already married. Their husbands had managed to escape when taken by surprise and were still alive. The raiders considered the possibility of coitus interruptus (withdrawing from intercourse prior to ejaculation). Unsure of the best course of action, they went to Prophet Muhammad for counsel.

Bukhari reports:

Abu Saeed said: We went out with Allâh's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allâh's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist." [1]

Notice that Prophet Muhammad does not forbid raping women captured in war. Instead, he indicates that when Allâh intends to create anything, nothing can prevent it. In other words, not even the absence of semen can prevent it. So Muhammad is telling his men that coitus interruptus would be futile and ill-advised because it would be an attempt to thwart the irresistible will of Allâh.

Prophet Muhammad does not say a word against the forced insemination of these captive females. In fact, by criticizing coitus interruptus, in effect he supported forced insemination of female slaves.

In the Quran, Muhammads god made it legal to have intercourse with slave women, the so-called right hand possessions, even if they were married before their capture.[2]

Juwairiya:

Ibn Aun has narrated: I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn 'Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn 'Umar was in that army. Bukhari 3.46.717 (see also Muslim 019. 4292)

Prophet Muhammad sent one of his companions; Bareeda bin Haseeb, to spy on the Bani al-Mustaliq and after assessing the situation he ordered his men to attack. Muslims came out of Madina on 2nd Shaban of 5 A.H. and encamped at Muraisa, a place at a distance of 9 marches from Medina.

Juwairiya was one of the captives during the raid of Banu Mustaliq. When all the prisoners were made slaves and distributed among the victorious Muslim soldiers, Juwairiyah fell to the lot of Thabit bin Qais. She was the daughter of Haris, the leader of the clan.

The Islamic site muslims.ws writes: She was the daughter of the leader of the clan, and therefore, very much felt the discomfiture and disgrace of being made slave of an ordinary Muslim soldier. Therefore, she requested him to release her on payment of ransom.

Thabit agreed to this, if she could pay him 9 Auqias of gold. Hazrat Juwairiyah had no ready money with her. She tried to raise this amount through contributions, and approached the Holy Prophet also in this connection. She said to him "0' Prophet of Allah! I am the daughter of Al Haris bin Zarar, the Lord (chief) of his people. You know that it is by chance that our people have fallen captive and I have fallen to the share of Thabit bin Qais and have requested him to release me considering my status, but he has refused. Please do an act of kindness and save me from humiliation". The Holy Prophet was moved and asked the captive woman if she would like a thing still better. She asked as to what was that thing. He said that he was ready to pay her ransom and marry her if she liked. She agreed to this proposal. So the Holy Prophet paid the amount of ransom and married her.

First he raids a population without warning because they were easy targets and wealthy. As usual he kills the unarmed able-bodied men, plunders their belongings, then enslaves the rest. The narrator says, According to the prevailing practice all the prisoners were made slaves and distributed among the victorious Muslim soldiers. Prevailing practice? Didnt Muhammad come to show people the right way? Why should he follow the evil prevailing practices of a people whom he called ignorant? By doing so, he set the example and those evil practices became standard practices of the Muslims for ever.

The narrator says that upon seeing Juwairiyah the Prophet was moved. Methinks that movement must have happened in his male organ because his heart seems to have remained cold and unmoved. Although Muslims call this marriage, I call it rape.

Safiyah

Safiyah was a beautiful 17 years old Jewish woman who was captured when Muhammads troops raided Kheibar. She was the daughter or Huyeiy Ibn Akhtab, the chief of the Banu Nadir, a Jewish tribe of Medina , whom Muhammad had beheaded two years earlier along with the men of Banu Quriaza. The tribe of Banu Nadir had been already banished from Medina and their properties were confiscated.

Safiyah had married to her cousin Kinana, who was a young Jewish leader of Kheibar. When Muhammad raided that fortress, he killed its unarmed men and captured the rest. A Jewish traitor, (reminds me of Noam Chomsky) to gain Muhammads favor and be spared from death, told him that Kinana was the treasurer of the town and that he used to hide the money in some ruins. Muhammad ordered Kinana to be tortured to reveal the whereabouts of the treasures and killed him.

Then he asked the prettiest woman from amongst that captives to be brought to him. Ibn Ishaq writes: "The apostle occupied the Jewish forts one after the other, taking prisoners as he went. Among these were Safiya, the wife of Kinana, the Khaibar chief, and two female cousins: [sisters of Kinana] the apostle chose Safiya for himself. The other prisoners were distributed among the Muslims.

Bilal brought Safiya to the apostle, and they passed the bodies of several Jews on the way. Safiya's female companions lamented and strewed dust on their heads. When the apostle of Allâh observed this scene, he said, 'Remove these she devils from me.' But he ordered Safiya to remain, and threw his reda [cloak] over her. So the Muslims knew he had reserved her for his own. The apostle reprimanded Bilal, saying, 'Hast thou lost all feelings of mercy, to make women pass by the corpses of their husbands?'

Safiyah was taken to Muhammads tent. Muhammad wanted to have sex with her on that very night, only hours after torturing to death her husband. She resisted his advances. That night Abu Ayyub al-Ansari guarded the tent of Muhammad. When, in the early dawn, Muhammad saw Abu Ayyub strolling up and down, he asked him what he meant by this sentry-go; he replied: "I was afraid for you with this young lady. You had killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives, I was really afraid for you on her account". (Ibn Ishaq, p. 766)

The next day Muhammad covered Safiyah with his mantle, an act signifying that she is now his. Safiyah was groomed and made-up for Muhammad by Umm Sulaim, the mother of Anas ibn Malik and was taken to Muhammad who married her in a mock marriage ceremony and raped her that night. Muslims call this marriage. I call that rape. I am certain not many young women would like to jump into bed with an old man who happens to be the murderer of their father and husband and many other relatives. That poor woman had no choice; therefore that marriage was nothing but a mockery of this sacred institution. At that time Muhammad was close to sixty years old.

Rayhanah

Another victim of Muhammad was Rayhana, a 15 year old girl from the tribe of Banu Quraiza. Muhammad massacred all the men of that tribe. Then women were brought to him to pick and he chose Rayhana. Rayhana never married Muhammad and unlike Juwairiyah and Safiyah never feigned being a Muslim to have an easier life. She preferred to remain a sex slave rather the wife of the murderer of her father, brothers and uncles.

[1] Bukhari, Volume 5, Book59, Number 459. Many other canonical hadiths recount how Muhammad approved intercourse with slave women, but said coitus interruptus was unnecessary because if Allâh willed someone to be born, that soul would be born regardless of coitus interruptus. See the following:

Bukhari 3.34.432: Narrated Abu Saeed Al-Khudri: that while he was sitting with Allâh's Apostle he said, "O Allâh's Apostle! We get female slaves as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allâh has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.

Sahih Muslim is another source considered factual and accurate by virtually all Muslims. Here is Sahih Muslim 8.3381: Allâh's Messenger (may peace be upon him) was asked about 'azl, (coitus interruptus) whereupon he said: The child does not come from all the liquid (semen) and when Allâh intends to create anything nothing can prevent it (from coming into existence).

Muslims also consider Abu Dawood highly accurate and factual. Here is Abu Dawood, 29.29.32.100: Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, Tell them. She was embarrassed. He said, It is alright, and I do it myself. Malik said, A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practicing coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife does not practice coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission."

See also Bukhari 3.46.718, 5.59.459, 7.62.135, 7.62.136, 7.62.137, 8.77.600, 9.93.506 Sahih Muslim 8.3383, 8.3388, 8.3376, 8.3377, and several more.

[2] Quran, 4:24: Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allâh ordained (Prohibitions) against you.

Quran, 33:50): O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allâh has assigned to thee.

Quran, 4:3: If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a slave) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.

Sina's Challenge

I receive many emails from angry Muslims, who sometimes beg me, and sometimes order me to remove this site. I consider both, pleading and bullying, signs of psychopathology. Argumentum ad baculum and argumentum ad misericordiam are both logical fallacies.

If you do not like this site and want me to remove it, instead of acting as a bully or as a victim, disprove my charges against Muhammad logically. Not only will I remove the site, I will publicly announce that Islam is a true religion. I will also pay

$50,000 U.S. dollars

to anyone who can disprove any of the dozen of the accusations that I have made against Muhammad.

I accuse Prophet Muhammad of being:

a narcissist

a misogynist

a rapist

a pedophile

a lecher

a torturer

a mass murderer

a cult leader

an assassin

a terrorist

a looter

I have debated with many Muslims. Their defense of Islam can be summarized in two categories:

  • Denial of the authenticity of Islamic sources that report the stories of crimes of Muhammad (example: debate with Edip Yukssel, a leader of the Submitters)
  • Moral relativism and situational ethics, e.g., In those days, pedophilia, assassination, rape, raid, pillage, massacre and lying, were common practices, so Muhammad is innocent because he did what everyone else was doing. Muslims even go as far as to question the legitimacy of the Golden Rule to claim I do not have any basis to condemn Muhammad. In other words, who can say what is good and what is evil? That is up to the messenger of God to decide. (Example: debate with Yamin Zakaria)
These are the main two arguments that Muslims present in defense of Islam. Any rational person can see they are logical fallacies.

These charges are irrefutable. You simply can't disprove them because they are reported in Islamic sources and as such they are as good as confession. You can't acquit a criminal after he has confessed, unless you plead insanity, which is my point.

Muslims often ask: "Who will judge whether or not an attempt to disprove your accusations against Muhammad and Islam, was successful?" The readers will be the jury. It is not difficult to see which side is right once both arguments are presented without one side fearing the other. I will publish the debates in this site. My opponents are also encouraged to publish them in any Islamic site. Please note that I will not accept face to face debates. The debates must be in writing.

Edit 2007/07/29

The above challenge was issued in 2001 and it hasn't been met yet. See the debates I had with Muslims. Also see the pathetic attempt of some Muslims trying to refute me here , here, here and here. Is that all the Muslim world can offer? Where are the scholars of Islam? Why such an important task is left to a bunch of amateurs who actually do more damage to Islam? Isn't it time that the real scholars come forth and refute my charges?

The truth is that several of the people that debated me were real scholars, such as the eminent Pakistani scholar Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi and his disciple Dr. Khalid Zaheer. This debate is a must read and is available for download. Dr. Zaheer is a learned man, a moderate Muslim and a good human being. I have utmost respect for him.

As of this date (2007), I will no longer debate with people who want to debate anonymously. I only debate with reputable scholars. I made this decision because often, Muslims moved by their faith and zealotry, but with little knowledge of Islam, challenge me to debate. They rehash the same tried and refuted arguments that bore everyone and disappear. Then, other Muslims, either accuse me of fabricating those debates or pooh-pooh my opponents for not being scholars.

As of this day, I am also doubling the reward. If you are not a reputable scholar, you can still win the prize. All you have to do is persuade a scholar to debate with me. If he (she) disproves my charges or can prove that Muhammad was a prophet of God, both you and he (she) will be rewarded $50,000 dollars each. This is to encourage you to write to your admired scholar and convince them that Islam is in danger and that it is their duty to defend it. Once you write to invite someone, please CC a copy to us for announcing the invitation. Our email is faithfreedom2 (at) gmail.com

Yes, Islam is in grave danger. Never, since its inception, Islam has faced a threat as serious as this. Today, millions of ex-Muslims are questioning the claimed truth of Islam, can make their criticisms heard worldwide, and unlike before, not fear for their lives. As long as these questions are not answered, this trend is only bound to continue, until the trickle becomes a torrent and the fall of Islam becomes obvious. In the past, the critics of Islam briefly shined like lamps in darkness, only to be put out by winds of persecution. What is happening today can be likened to the break of the dawn. Darkness has no chance in front of this much light. Muslims are waking up and leaving Islam like never before. A spiritual and intellectual revolution is underway. This is the century of enlightenment of the benighted Muslims. The giant is finally awakening. The days of Islam are numbered. This demon of hate and ignorance will be slain by the hands of its own primary victims. The unity of mankind and the world peace are around the corner.

Please advertise this challenge. Every Muslim must see it. This is like throwing water on their fire. Nothing will dampen their zeal more than the realization that among a billion Muslims there is not a single scholar who can prove the wild claims of Muhammad, nor acquit him of these grave charges. This unmet challenge has a sobering effect on them. They can make any excuse, such as, I am not worth their response, that there have been greater men than me who opposed Islam, or that I have been refuted already, but they will not be able to fool themselves. The more this challenge is circulated, the more Muslims will be forced to remain silent and doubt Islam. Do not undermine the psychological effect of this impossible challenge.

Sincerely

Ali Sina

Dude what do u even get out of copying and pasting all this <banned word filter activated>? Why waste your energy on all this missionary cr*p. Futile. Work on your own life. "Muhammed" et al have all been and gone. Their chance at life is long over. Now its our time, what are we the Sikhs doing about this? Or our own community matters? Our personal matters even? We're not here to judge others and nor were we around at the time of Muhammed to make the above comments. You rely on info provided by christian missionaries...lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude what do u even get out of copying and pasting all this

Not at all bro. Sikhi is for Sarbat da Pala so we can't just selfishly think about ourselves. We gotta free the whole world of the false ideology that a certain pedophile called Prophet Muhammad created. Islamic State, Boko Haram + why the 1947 Sikh Genocide (worse than 1984 even) + the historic Ghallughara's of Sikhs happened is all cuz of Islam bro.

Prophet Muhammad : A Pedophile

Muhammad “married” Aisha when she was six years old.

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old. Muslim 8. 3310

Narrated 'Aisha:that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he sexually consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death). Bukhari 7. 62. 64

Narrated 'Aisha:that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he sexually consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)' Bukhari 7. 62. 65

Narrated 'Ursa:The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and sexually consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death). Bukhari 7. 62. 88

Arab year is lunar, which is shorter than solar year. In solar years, Aisha was 8 years 9 months old when Muhammad consummated his marriage with her. Consummate? This is a nice way to say raped her. According to Muslims, a woman must consent to her marriage or the marriage is null. How can a 6-years old child consent to her marriage? Without a consent, how can we call this relationship between a 51 years old man and a 6-years old child marriage?

Some Muslims claim that it was Abu Bakr who approached Muhammad asking him to marry his daughter. This is not true.

The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry." Bukhari 7.62.18

Even though Abu Bakr was fool enough to let Muhammad have sex with his little daughter, that marriage was invalid, because the only person who should have given consent was a minor. Aisha was unaware of what was going on and was surprised when pedophile Prophet Muhammad pulled down his pants and invited her to sit on his lap. She Narrated:

When the Prophet married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and nothing surprised me but the coming of Allah's Apostle to me in the forenoon. Bukhari 7. 62. 90

Aisha was playing with dolls like any other 8 year old child would do. She was not ready for marriage and had no understanding of it.

Narrated 'Aisha:

I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Bukhari 8. 73.151

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. Bukhari 5.234

Having sexual feelings for small children is called pedophilia. According to Ayatollah Montazeri, the most revered Shiite cleric of Iran , the “marriage” of Muhammad and Aisha was a political maneuver to placate the enemies of Islam. He wrote: The reason for this marriage was that the Prophet was under the intense pressure by his enemies like Abu Lahab and Abu Jahl and was completely dependant of the protection of other tribes. Abu Bakr had a lot of tribal influence. And rejecting his offer, in those conditions, for the Prophet was not prudent. In reality this marriage was symbolic and not to satisfy his sexual instinct, because, as a rule a 53-year-old man cannot have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl.

This is nonsense. Abu Bakr was already a devout follower of Muhammad and his confidant. Abu Lahab and Abul Hakam (whom Muhammad derogatorily called Abu Jahl, father of ignorance) had nothing to do with Abu Bakr. How can having sex with a child placate one's enemies? Assuming this ridiculous excuse is true, what about Aisha? Was she only a pawn for Muhammad’s political maneuvers?

In one thing the Grand Ayatollah is right. As a rule a 53-year-old man cannot have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl, unless he is a pedophile.

The Islamocritic scholar, Abul Kasem, has demonstrated that in Islam there is actually no age limit for marrying a child. He found the following hadith which shows a Muslim man can marry an infant. However should one of his adult wives suckle that infant both wives become haram to him.

Case of one of two wives suckling the other-If a man marry an infant and an adult and the latter should give milk to the former, both wives become prohibited with respect to that man [their husband], because if they were to continue united in marriage to him, it would imply the propriety of joint cohabitation with the foster-mother and her foster-daughter, which is prohibited, in the same manner as joint cohabitation with a natural mother and daughter-It is to be observed on this occasion, that if the husband should not have had carnal connexion with the adult wife, she is not entitled to any dower whatever, because the separation has proceeded from her, before consummation :-but the infant has a claim to her half dower. [Hedaya Vol. I Book III, page 71 (Ref. 6)]

Abul Kasem also quoted the story of Umar marrying a child just four or five years old.

Umme Kulthum was 4 or 5 years old when Caliph Umar married her. This child was his most favourite wife (just like prophet Mohammad). There is a great controversy about the identity of this child bride of Umar. Many scholars claim that she was the daughter of Ali and Fatima. Others say that Umme Kulthum was the posthumous daughter of Abu Bakar and Habiba. Abu Bakar died (13 A.H.) a few months before Umme Kulthum was born. She was the half sister of Aisha. So, Umar asked Aisha for the hand of Umme Kulthum when she (Umme Kulthum) was only 4 - 5 years old. Aisha agreed and Umar and Umme Kulthum got married.

According to Abul Kasem’s calculations, Umar was 56 years old when he married this little girl. Why would he not wait for Umme Kulthum to reach the age of nine? Shouldn’t Umar follow the sunna (example) of his prophet? The answer is that Muhammad did not set any limits for child marriage. Ummar must have remembered when Muhammad expressed his desire to marry a crawling baby before death overtook him. This story is reported by Ibn Ishak, the most authentic biographer of Muhammad. Most other biographies are based on this monumental work of Ibn Ishak/Ibn Hisham

(Suhayli, ii.79: In the riwaya of Yunus I.I recorded that the apostle saw her (Ummu’l-Fadl) when she was baby crawling before him and said, ‘If she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.’ But he died before she grew up and Sufyan b. al-Aswad b. Abdu’l-Asad al-Makhzumi married her and she bore him Rizq and Lubaba….(Ref.3, page 311)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all bro. Sikhi is for Sarbat da Pala so we can't just selfishly think about ourselves. We gotta free the whole world of the false ideology that a certain pedophile called Prophet Muhammad created. Islamic State, Boko Haram + why the 1947 Sikh Genocide (worse than 1984 even) + the historic Ghallughara's of Sikhs happened is all cuz of Islam bro.

Prophet Muhammad : A Pedophile

Muhammad married Aisha when she was six years old.

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old. Muslim 8. 3310

Narrated 'Aisha:that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he sexually consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death). Bukhari 7. 62. 64

Narrated 'Aisha:that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he sexually consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)' Bukhari 7. 62. 65

Narrated 'Ursa:The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and sexually consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death). Bukhari 7. 62. 88

Arab year is lunar, which is shorter than solar year. In solar years, Aisha was 8 years 9 months old when Muhammad consummated his marriage with her. Consummate? This is a nice way to say raped her. According to Muslims, a woman must consent to her marriage or the marriage is null. How can a 6-years old child consent to her marriage? Without a consent, how can we call this relationship between a 51 years old man and a 6-years old child marriage?

Some Muslims claim that it was Abu Bakr who approached Muhammad asking him to marry his daughter. This is not true.

The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry." Bukhari 7.62.18

Even though Abu Bakr was fool enough to let Muhammad have sex with his little daughter, that marriage was invalid, because the only person who should have given consent was a minor. Aisha was unaware of what was going on and was surprised when pedophile Prophet Muhammad pulled down his pants and invited her to sit on his lap. She Narrated:

When the Prophet married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and nothing surprised me but the coming of Allah's Apostle to me in the forenoon. Bukhari 7. 62. 90

Aisha was playing with dolls like any other 8 year old child would do. She was not ready for marriage and had no understanding of it.

Narrated 'Aisha:

I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Bukhari 8. 73.151

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. Bukhari 5.234

Having sexual feelings for small children is called pedophilia. According to Ayatollah Montazeri, the most revered Shiite cleric of Iran , the marriage of Muhammad and Aisha was a political maneuver to placate the enemies of Islam. He wrote: The reason for this marriage was that the Prophet was under the intense pressure by his enemies like Abu Lahab and Abu Jahl and was completely dependant of the protection of other tribes. Abu Bakr had a lot of tribal influence. And rejecting his offer, in those conditions, for the Prophet was not prudent. In reality this marriage was symbolic and not to satisfy his sexual instinct, because, as a rule a 53-year-old man cannot have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl.

This is nonsense. Abu Bakr was already a devout follower of Muhammad and his confidant. Abu Lahab and Abul Hakam (whom Muhammad derogatorily called Abu Jahl, father of ignorance) had nothing to do with Abu Bakr. How can having sex with a child placate one's enemies? Assuming this ridiculous excuse is true, what about Aisha? Was she only a pawn for Muhammads political maneuvers?

In one thing the Grand Ayatollah is right. As a rule a 53-year-old man cannot have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl, unless he is a pedophile.

The Islamocritic scholar, Abul Kasem, has demonstrated that in Islam there is actually no age limit for marrying a child. He found the following hadith which shows a Muslim man can marry an infant. However should one of his adult wives suckle that infant both wives become haram to him.

Case of one of two wives suckling the other-If a man marry an infant and an adult and the latter should give milk to the former, both wives become prohibited with respect to that man [their husband], because if they were to continue united in marriage to him, it would imply the propriety of joint cohabitation with the foster-mother and her foster-daughter, which is prohibited, in the same manner as joint cohabitation with a natural mother and daughter-It is to be observed on this occasion, that if the husband should not have had carnal connexion with the adult wife, she is not entitled to any dower whatever, because the separation has proceeded from her, before consummation :-but the infant has a claim to her half dower. [Hedaya Vol. I Book III, page 71 (Ref. 6)]

Abul Kasem also quoted the story of Umar marrying a child just four or five years old.

Umme Kulthum was 4 or 5 years old when Caliph Umar married her. This child was his most favourite wife (just like prophet Mohammad). There is a great controversy about the identity of this child bride of Umar. Many scholars claim that she was the daughter of Ali and Fatima. Others say that Umme Kulthum was the posthumous daughter of Abu Bakar and Habiba. Abu Bakar died (13 A.H.) a few months before Umme Kulthum was born. She was the half sister of Aisha. So, Umar asked Aisha for the hand of Umme Kulthum when she (Umme Kulthum) was only 4 - 5 years old. Aisha agreed and Umar and Umme Kulthum got married.

According to Abul Kasems calculations, Umar was 56 years old when he married this little girl. Why would he not wait for Umme Kulthum to reach the age of nine? Shouldnt Umar follow the sunna (example) of his prophet? The answer is that Muhammad did not set any limits for child marriage. Ummar must have remembered when Muhammad expressed his desire to marry a crawling baby before death overtook him. This story is reported by Ibn Ishak, the most authentic biographer of Muhammad. Most other biographies are based on this monumental work of Ibn Ishak/Ibn Hisham

(Suhayli, ii.79: In the riwaya of Yunus I.I recorded that the apostle saw her (Ummul-Fadl) when she was baby crawling before him and said, If she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her. But he died before she grew up and Sufyan b. al-Aswad b. Abdul-Asad al-Makhzumi married her and she bore him Rizq and Lubaba.(Ref.3, page 311)

1947 sikh genocide?

Argh u just pasted that again to annoy me...lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1947 sikh genocide?

Yeah bro the Muslims in Pakistan killed 20% of the Sikh population in 1947. Imagine if about 100million people in the USA, UK, Canada and Australia got killed tomorrow. That's the scale of the Sikh Genocide suffered in Pakistan 1947. Obviously the historic Ghallughara's were even more worse than that as the majority of Sikhs of those times were killed in the Vade and Chhote Ghallughare.

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Wadda_Ghalughara

You see bro even tho the pedophile Prophet Muhammad was long dead before Sikhi it was his depraved ideology in the Quran which advocates slavery, terrorism, pedophilia, rape which led to Sikha di shaheedian throughout history.

It's sad that you weren't aware of the massive Genocide of Sikhs by Pakistan in 1947 (that inspired Indira Gandhi).

But if you read this article it will give you an idea of one small area where Master Tara Singh came from.

1947 Rawalpindi Shaheedis

We all know that the riots of 1947 were the worse that the Sikhs faced in the last century. Sikhs in 1947 lost all their property, money and many lost their lives. They chose to live in India and did not change their religion to secure their property, money or lives. After leaving everything in Pakistan Punjab, the came to East Punjab i.e. Indian side of Punjab and built everything from scratch. Then another massacre came in the 1980s when tens of thousands of Sikhs died for Sikhi.

In the next few days, I am going to write on selected incidents that occurred in Rawalpindi area of Pakistan, in March 1947. This area was worse affected by the riots of partition in 1947. The Sikhs were massacred by the Muslims of that area. The striking thing that I want to write under this thread is not that Sikhs got massacred but how bravely the Sikhs fought back aggression and how much they sacrificed to keep Sikhi. Some of the stories are very emotional and very hard to read. I am not sure if I can narrate these stories as well as they were narrated by the people who actually saw all this with their own eyes. I will try.

AREA OF POTHOHAAR I.E. RAWALPINDI AREA OF PAKISTAN

This area was the centre of Sikhi in those days. Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh jee writes that before he went to jail, this area was full of bibiyaan with dastaar and many families had adopted the strict Khalsa rehit. It was in this area where Sant Baba Attar Singh jee Mastuanawaale, did rigorous bhagti for many years. This is the land where great Sikh Siri Thakur Nihaal Singh, reputed to be a brahmgiyaani gursikh, did great preaching of Gurmat. This is where Baba Khem Singh Bedi did heavy parchaar of Gurmat and inspired many to take amrit of Guru Sahib.

Sikhi parchaar was so heavy in this area that even Brahmin Hindus adopted Sikhi and became tyaar bar tyaar Singhs. This area was very prosperous and Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh jee writes in one of his books that due to increase in maaiya, may Sikh families had become weak in Sikhi and had become more indulged in worldly pleasures. Who knows, maybe this is why this area was hit most severely by the riots of 1947

MASSACRE OF THEHA KHALSA AREA OF RAWALPINDI – MARCH 1947

This small town of Theha Khalsa was one of the main towns of Pothohaar (Rawalpindi area). Sikhs and Hindus living in this town were very well off. In total about 500 families lived in this small town. There were some Muslim families living there too but there was no communal problem at all.

In the fateful month of March 1947, riots started in other parts of Pothohaar. Actually it is wrong to call it riots because the Sikhs were not attacking anyone, just defending themselves. The Sikhs of Theha Khalsa town assembled at the local Gurdwara Sahib to discuss what to do. Sant Gulaab Singh was the undisputed leader of this village and he was from a very well-to-do family. His ancestral home was very big. During the discussions, he suggested that all the Sikhs of that village assemble at this house and stay there till the danger of riots is over. He said that it would be easy to defend if all the Sikhs stayed at one spot.

He further said that at this crucial time only Guru Sahib can help them.

SIKHS MOVE TO THE HAVELI OF SANT GULAAB SINGH

All the Sikhs after hearing the emotional lecture of Sant Gulaab Singh agreed to move to his house. They brought all their money, jewellery and gold etc, along with them and assembled at his house. In total about 1200 Sikhs and some Hindus assembled at his house. They fortified the haveli by making bunkers and replacing regular doors with heavy doors. They covered the walls of the haveli with shields of iron.

First of all they secured a large room and brought all Saroops of Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib jee over there. Over 36 saroops were brought to that room. Big tanks of water were filled and large quantity of fire-wood and grains was stocked up. The Sikhs were in great danger, so they all started doing paath day and night. They asked Guru Sahib for strength to save their faith.

MUSLIMS ATTACK THE HAVELI FILLED WITH SIKHS

On March 8, 1947 while the sangat was doing Siri Rehraas Sahib paath, many thousand Muslims came and surrounded the building. They were shouting “ALLAH HOO AKBAR”, “MUSLIM LEAGUE ZINDABAD”, “KAFRON KO MAAR DO” i.e kill the infidels. There must have been at least 6000 Muslims and all had weapons. Many had guns. Some were on horse backs and they were shouting anti Sikh slogans. They were uttering obscenities against Master Tara Singh and other Sikh leaders.

The sangat kept doing simran of Vaheguru Vaheguru. The Muslim crowd assembled in the school building. It is not clear what was decided in that meeting but when they came out of the meeting they started burning the shops and houses owned by the Sikhs. Then they attacked the haveli where all the Sikhs were present. The Sikhs had some guns and they kept the crowd away.

On one side of the haveli, they attacked with great vigour. Sardar Partap Singh, a very brave young man, took along with him about 8-9 singhs and attacked the attacking Muslims. They attacked with so much force that the Muslims were pushed back. One of the bullets hit Sardar Partap Singh on his leg.

The next day again the Muslims came back but this time they did not wait for the night. They came back around 10am. The Muslims again attacked but could not get in the haveli. Then the Muslims sent a representative to talk to the Sikhs holed up in the haveli. Sant Gulab Singh refused to accept their conditions that the Sikhs should disarm themselves.

This way the fight went on for 2 more days. Finally on the last day, the Muslims came with bombs and said that they would bomb the haveli if the Sikhs did not get out of there. The Muslims promised by swearing on the Koran that they were only interested in the gold and money and not in killing anyone. The Sikhs had no choice but to get out. They did ardaas and moved out, leaving all belongings behind.

After the Sikhs came out, they got surrounded by the large crowd of Muslims. The Sikhs arrived at the sarovar of the local Gurdwara Sahib. The pathaans armed with latest weapons surrounded the Sikhs sitting around the sarovar. The Sikhs were chanting “Satnam Siri Vaheguru”. By then about 10,000 Muslims came where the Sikhs were. Along with them, they had dozens of barbers lined up to cut the hair of Sikhs. Children were crying for food and milk. Old and young were helpless to do anything. The whole scene was a scene from hell.

SHAHEEDI SAAKA

Sant Ghulab Singh jee writes as follows:

“by this time Sardarni Lajavanti Kaur asked me if she could go to the well by my hut. I took her to the well and everyone washed their faces and drank fresh water. There were 90 bibiyaan (Sikh females). Many were unwed young girls. My granddaughters, grandsons, nieces, and other related women were there amongst them”.

“Soon a person came and asked me to go to the Gurdwara Sahib where the aggressors (jarvaane) were troubling the sangat. He said that the sangat was calling me. I said Sat Sree Akaal to bibiyaan and started walking towards the Gurdwara Sahib”.

“The well was about 200 feet from the Gurdwara Sahib. When I reached there, a Muslim leader came up to me and asked me, “So what have you decided?” I found out that the singhs had been given half an hour to accept Islam or else they get ready to die. The Singhs present there said to the Muslims that they would do what Sant jee (this daas i.e. I) tell them to do”.

“Dhan Pita Kalgidhar! I laughed after hearing this from the Muslim leader. I said, “Your cruel and tryant emperors like Aurangzeb and Farukhsiyaar too could not do anything to the Sikhs. What can you do, when they could not do anything. Do what you want to do. We will never give up Sikhi and will never become Muslims”.

“When I came to the Gurdwara Sahib, some pathaans and thugs from Punachh and Mairabaad sensing that the bibiyaan were alone at the well, reached there and surrounded the well. They addressed the bibiyaan, “Now we are going to take away your daughters and sister and will marry them after converting them to Islam.” At that time Sardarni Laajavantee Kaur could not resist Bir Rass anymore and said, “Scoundrels! Who can touch the daughters of Guru Kalgidhar. From the time we took amrit, we accepted death as reality and don’t fear it.”

The Muslims thugs got angry hearing such answer from Sardarni Lajavanti Kaur. They moved forward towards her. Sardarni jee was holding her 5 year old granddaughter and a grandson. She loudly said the jaikaara, “Bole So Nihaal!! Sat Srree Akaal!!”. Saying this she jumped in the well, in order to avoid getting her granddaughter and herself raped by the Muslims. Within seconds all Sikh women jumped in the well. All 90 jumped in. A person came running to me and told me the whole incident. After hearing this incident, all Sikhs present there said, “Dhan Gursikhee!! Dhan Guru Kalgidhar! I dashed towards the well”.

“At that time what to talk about the pathaans but all aggressors were shaken from within. They were saying that who can kill such people who can sacrifice their lives to save their honour.”

“When I reached the well, my granddaughter, Harbhajan Kaur, my daughter-in-law Kartar Kaur and one sister-in-law Sardarni Ram Rakhee were crying as the well was full and they did not drown. By then 87 lives had been taken. They were taken out of the well. I was baffled. I uttered, “Dhan Gurdev, these daughters of yours have passed your test. Please show me the way too. At that time I had clear darshan of Dhan Guru Nanak Dev jee and Hazoor said, “You still have to see more of this bloodshed. You have to do some more sewa of sangataan”.

“After this bloody massacre, the Muslims got scared and started running away but some scoundrels were left. All Sadh Sangat came to my house and stayed there for the night. Muslims tried to find a lone Sikh to convert but could not convert anyone”.

“I climbed a tall tree and saw a scene from hell. 87 lives had been sacrificed. The towns of Dera Khalsa, Kallar, Thamali, and Beval were burning. At that time I sang out baani to get peace of mind”

“At amritvela, I got darshan of Guru Kalgidhar jee and he said that our test was over.”

The above was written by Sant Ghulaab Singh and I have made a humble effort to translate the quoted paragraphs above. In any case, the military arrived soon and everyone was taken to the camps. The shaheedi of Sardarni Lajavanti Kaur and other Sikh women, saved the remaining Sikhs.

by Bhai Kulbir Singh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr 123 you have with intention tried to Show Sikhs as groomers. You have failed as that virk guy inthe article is muslim

. From your other posts on this subject you sympathised with Pakistan groomers and said People from our community in Southall are doing they same, this is a lie. Your are so also condemned those who highlight grooming and stand up for thosr that do it.

No. I knew he was muslim just shocked that he was a virk. I said freshies from our community are doing it to our own girls, thats not a lie. No i condem you labelling all pakistanis like that because most punjabi pakistanis are hard working honest folk who are educated. Its mirpuris causing these problems as they live in nearly every ethinic town in the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because you knew some Virks in Doaba does not mean that they are relevant to a discussion on Virks

I'm not saying I just know 'some' Virks in Doaba.....I'm teling you there are huge swathes of Virk villages all over Doaba and parts of Malwa.

Yeah bro the Muslims in Pakistan killed 20% of the Sikh population in 1947. Imagine if about 100million people in the USA, UK, Canada and Australia got killed tomorrow.

Well "imagine" this fact for one moment: Imagine if we had to endure the 1947 killings all over again once more and then half a time more. Only then would be reach the number of Punjabi Muslims massacred in Punjab 1947. They lost 150% more human lives than us in 1947. Those are human lives. Never forget that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree WLS that good Muslims are one of the biggest victims of this fake religion called Islam.

But what u are forgetting is that there are 5 times as many Muslim Punjabi's for every one Sikh.

So if equal numbers of Sikhs + Muslims died in 1947 then the Sikh Panth still suffered more in comparative terms.

We owe it to future generations to stamp out the false ideology of Islam and the Quran which supports slavery, terrorism, rape and pedophilia to protect future innocent Muslim victims from future religious conflicts.

The crazy thing is Mirpuri's are ethnic Punjabi's who don't even speak Kashmiri.

But you get peeps claiming as if a Muslim Jatt from Pakistani Punjab is all good but Mirpur Muslim Jatts are bad.

It's a clever lie made by Pakistani's to shield their country from pedophilia claims by blaming it all on "Mirpur" lol.

Just like the Pakistani lie that they suffered more during Partition + that they were the victims of Sikhs who started it.

The root of all this problem is the terrorist slavemaster racist rapist pedophile role model (Prophet Muhammad) that Muslim Jatts, Mirpuri's, Pakistani's + Muslims are looking up to + following that is to blame for all this.

Only by exposing the pedophile who created Islam can the world be free of Muslims like Islamic State + Boko Haram.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNCz9MXmcsw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTeAB4l0KCM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVWksqo-u-8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use