Archive for the ‘Islam’ Category

On Islam to ISIS

From: Ronnie Mendonca < >

On Islam to ISIS


Dear ISIS,


I have been trying desperately to find ways in which your shocking behavior offends your own ‘religion of peace’ – but given all that you have done, and all that I have read in the Qur’an and the biographies of Muhammad, I cannot.


Your appalling actions are in accurate accordance with both your scripture and the exemplary example set by the perfect Muslim, Muhammad.  I’d like to say that severing the hands of thieves is a gross violation of your “peaceful” religious codes of conduct, but it isn’t (Qur’an 5:38-39, Sahih al-Bukhari 8:6789 & Sahih al-Muslim 3:4175-79).


I would have loved to have picked up the Qur’an and hadith and found passages therein that expressly forbade the raping of Muslim and non-Muslim women, but alas, I found that here again you were acting in strict concordance with your scripture (Qur’an 2:223, 4:3, 23:5-6 & Sahih al-Bukhari 1:367 & 5:522).


It would have made my day to read that no Muslim is allowed to cunningly and greedily extort non-Muslims for protection money in similitude to a criminal syndicate, however, once again, I found the opposite to be true (‘Jizya’: Qur’an 9:29, Sahih al-Muslim 19:4294).


To my utter dismay, I scanned the entire corpus of your most reliable Quranic commentaries and compared the teachings expounded upon therein to the atrocities you have committed, from driving out non-Muslims from Muslim lands (Sahih al-Muslim 19:4366 & Sahih al-Bukhari 3:531), the murdering of infidels (Qur’an 2:191), to the violent jihad you have undertaken (Qur’an 4:94 & Sahih al-Bukhari 2:1:35, etc., etc.,) – yet, each and every atrocious act you have enjoyed can be credited to the Quran and your religion’s most admired man, Muhammad.


For a brief moment I found relief in the more peaceful Meccan chapters and verses of the Qur’an, but such relief was rudely interrupted by the revelation that those chapters and verses have been abrogated by a tradition you refer to as ‘Na’skh’ (Qur’an 2:106 & 16:101) – and that the majority opinion amongst Islamic scholars on the matter dictates that the violent Medinan verses have nullified the more peaceful Meccan ones.


I read through the Sahih (most reliable) hadiths hoping to find a way in which I could turn your religion against you, but all I found was a wellspring of scriptural justification. Muhammad raped (teenage) female prisoners of war (Sahih al-Bukhari 1:367 & 5:522), he ordered the beheading of non-Muslims and those who criticized him (Ishaq: 675), and his ambitions, as were revealed to me by a careful reading of your sacred scripture, perfectly aligned with your own.


Given all I have found, I must regretfully concede that you are practicing your religion correctly.  In light of this concession, I no longer assign all of the blame to your violent and heinous organization – instead, I now reserve a large chunk of that blame for the religion which has provided you with your maniacal manifesto.




Michael A. Sherlock

P.S. If you’d like to read more, click the link – ISIS Is Islam – Dawkins Foundation

(Comment: Islam provides no freedom of thought, speech and action. It kills all the human intelligence and characteristics from humans. – Skanda987@gmail.com; https://www.skanda987.wordpress.com )



Read Full Post »

The Dark Side of Sufism

From: Devinder Gulati < >

An essay showing the dark side of Sufism as practiced throughout history and why we must not uncritically swallo…

Contrary to the spiritual mission of Sufism, the cult was primarily introduced in India for spread of Islam with a view to help the Muslim rulers for political domination. By and large the spiritual successors of mystic Islamic saints enjoyed the royal favour of Muslim rulers and gave moral support to the atrocious Muslim invaders and looked other way to ignore the growing social conflict. They also guided the State in political affairs with their experience of regular interaction with common people.

The mission of Shaikh Sirhindi popularly know as Mujaddid was to purify Islam from the influence of Akbar with a view to counter his policy of “the Hindu wielding the sword of Islam” and “Peace with all”. Unhappy with the regime of Emperor Akbar for withdrawal of Jejia tax imposed on the Hindus, Sirhindi made hectic effort to purge Islam of all extraneous influences. He viewed Hindu mystics like Guru Nanak and Sant Kabir contemptible, as they did not follow Sharia.

With contempt against old schools of mysticism for tolerance, Sirhindi condemned the reign of Akbar for his ‘broadmindedness’ and policy of ‘peace with all’. Propagating against the contemporary socio-cultural situation Sirhindi, felt that the attitude of Akbar “sullied the purity of Islam and the political social and cultural life of Muslims” (History of Sufism in India by Saiyied Athar Abbas Rizvi, Volume 2, 1992, Page Page 212). During the closing years of Akbar reign, when his son Salim had revolted against him, Sirhindi spread the virus of communalism with some success “in the beginning of Jehangir’s reign”. He strongly criticised freedom of worship granted to the Hindus.  Hate-Hindu syndrome was so deep in him that “death of Akbar (1605) filled Shaikh Ahmad with hopes that the pristine purity of Islam would be implanted in India” (Sufism in India by Saiyied Athar Abbas Rizvi, Volume 2, 1992, Page 204). “Misguided and greedy Ulama, he (Sirhindi) believed, were responsible for the alleged downfall of Islam in Akbar’s regime” (Ibid. Page 365.)

With his strong contempt against Shia and the Hindus, Sirhind wrote several letters to the nobles in the court of Jehangir for guiding the emperor on the path of Shariat, and for removal of Qafirs (Shias and Hindus) from the administration. He was dead against any honourable status of Hindus in Islamic government. Sirhind wanted the religious freedom enjoyed by the Hindus during Akbar regime to be curbed. Enraged with his too much interference in administration, Jehangir imprisoned him in Gwalier (A History of Sufism in India by Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, Vol. II, 1972, Page 178) but released him after one year. Sirhind not only “injected communal virus into the body politic of the country but also generated hatred, mutual distrust and discord among the various sections of Muslims”(Ibid. page XII). Despite this anti-Hindu tirade of Sirhindi, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad in 1919 eulogiged the role of Mujaddid (Sirhind),”who did not see eye to eye with the policy of state” (Ibid. Page215)
Iqbal was a known follower of Islamic mysticism of Qadiriyya order. He, synthesied the mystic ideology of Wali Ullah and the modern view on Islam of Sir Sayed Ahmad Khan and made his Islamic mystic approach completely subservient to political domination of the Muslims. Applying modern philosophy in his intellectual exploration of Sufism he gradually turned to an anti-Sufi philosopher. He said, “The present day Muslims prefer to roam about aimlessly in the dusty valleys of Hellenic -Persiam mysticism, which teaches us to shut our eyes to the hard reality around, and to fix our gaze on what it describes as ‘Illuminations’ a blue, red and yellow reality springing up from the cells of an overworked brain” (Sufis and anti-Sufis by Elizabeth Syrrieh, 1999). “Sufi shaikhs constituting a spiritual aristocracy, Iqbal appealed to Muslim youth to cast off the Sufi noose from their neck” (Ibid. Page133). For Iqbal Sufism was a formulation of Islamic Persianism. It was contrary to the purity of Arabic faith in its original version. His rejection of Sufism was influenced by Wahhabi movement of Saudi Arabia, which was more concerned with Islamic power following the decline of Muslim power in eighteenth century.
SUFISM IN INDIA: Its origin, history and politics. | South Asia Analysis Group

Read Full Post »

Rohingya Refugees – A Real National Security Threat

For Hindustan

By Gb Reddy < >

Rohingya refugee exodus from Myanmar and their illegal immigration into India through Bangladesh is ongoing and real. A Chinese source stated “It’s fair to say that Myanmar is a heaven for saints who rebel and a graveyard for those who govern.” At Monk’s behest, military crackdown is real.

Be that as it may, Rohingya refugee is certainly India’s emerging national security threat concern. De facto, India’s demographic equilibrium already stands upset during the past 70 years due to faulty Congress Party vote bank appeasement politics. From 8.9% Muslims as per 1951 census, officially at over 14% in 2011 and unofficially around 20% as per Owaisi brothers of Hyderabad, Telangana.

The Muslim firebrand leaders like Asaduddin Owaisi and his brother Akbaruddin, Badarruddin Ajmal, Azam Khan, UP, Zakir Nayik, Mumbai, Shahi Imam’s of Tippu Sultan Mosque, Kolkata and Delhi, among many others have been pouring jingoistic rhetoric against the Hindus.

For example, Asaduddin Owaisi as per media stated “Hindus shouldn’t make the mistake of considering Indian-Muslims any different from the Pakistan-Muslims. If India may dare to attack Pakistan, then 25 crore Indian-Muslims will join Pakistan Forces and fight against India. And, he talks of compassion to be shown to Rohingya Muslim refugees.

So also, Maulana Badarruddin Ajmal, AIUDF, Assam stated “Hindus do not have any rights to vote in Arab, Pakistan or anyone of the 56 Islamic Nations. I challenge: has even a single Hindu the strength (guts) to impose restrictions on our voting rights in India?”

Khaleda Zia, Bangladesh National Party stated “I regret the continuing massacre of Hindus and Buddhists in Bangladesh, but Bangladesh is an Islamic Nation and not Secular. Under the circumstances, if Hindus and Buddhists want to live safely, they should either convert to Islam or go to India.”

Let me highlight the growth of Muslim population in West Bengal and Assam. From 19.85% as per 1951 Census, Muslim population in West Bengal has grown to 28% as per 2011 Census with decadal growth continuing above 21%. Mamata Banerjee has earned the dubious “Mamata Begum” distinction.

Ipso facto, the most rapid rise of Muslims is in Assam. Illegal immigration – demographic invasion – from Bangladesh is squarely responsible for the sharp rise in the Muslim population of Assam. From 17.62% as per 1951 Census, Muslim population has surged to 29.59% as per 2011 Census. From NIL Muslim-majority districts in 1951, the number had increased to 6 in 2001 and 9 in 2011.

Disturbing is the transformation in Assam as per 2011 Census: Dhubri 79.67%; Goalpara 57.52%; Nagaon 55.36%; Barpeta 70.74%; Morigaon 52.56%; Karimganj 56.36%; Hailakandi 60.31%; Bongaigaon 50.22%; and Darrang 64.34%. Other districts with a significant share of Muslims are Cachar 37.71%, Kamrup 39.66% and Nalbari 35.96%. Is Assam soon going to be a Muslim majority State by 2050 if rapid demographic transition allowed on natural growth and illegal immigration processes?

Most important it is also to note transformation of 3 neighboring districts In West Bengal from minority in 1947 to majority status (2011 Census): Mushiradabad with 66.27%; Maldah with 51.27%; Uttar Dinajpur with 49.92%; and South 24 Parganas and Birbhum following behind with over 35%.

If the Rohingya refugees are allowed to enter on humanitarian consideration, there would be dramatic transformation in both West Bengal and Assam paving the way for separation of the North East from the rest of mainland. Let Mani Shankar Iyer, Prashant Bhusan and ilk suffer from no illusions.

Be that as it may, let me provide a perspective of the Rohingya refugee crisis. The provocations as per Myanmar military are the attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), Muslim insurgents or terrorist group aided by Islamist radicals, fatal attacks on 30 police outposts on August 25. Even in 2015, ARSA had launched attacks on several border posts along the border with Bangladesh.

Before Aug. 25, 2017, Associated Press, Dhaka-Bangladesh, reported some 500,000 Rohingya’s had arrived after bloody anti-Muslim rioting in 2012 or amid earlier persecution drives in Myanmar. After the crackdown after 25th August 2017, at least 370,000 Rohingya have flooded into Bangladesh. Ethnic cleansing is almost complete – over 870,000 refugees out of total 1,000,000 Rohingya’s.

Most of the refugees are located along the Teknaf-Cox’s Bazar highway that is parallel to the Naf River, which is the border between Bangladesh and Myanmar.

In pre 2012 exodus, illegal Rohingya influx has taken place into West Bengal. And, some of them have been sent to Jammu, whilst unknown numbers have moved into interior locations like Hyderabad and given ration cards and identity papers by Muslim brethren purportedly reflecting compassion. And, the justification given is “if normalcy returns, they would definitely prefer to go back to our homeland.” However, there are very few examples of return of refugee to their native lands.

Two charities, the Zakat Foundation of India (ZFI) and Don Bosco, have been working to help the Rohingya in New Delhi. Zafar Mahmood, the president of ZFI, says 210 Rohingya are living in Madanpur Khadar on land provided by his organization. “We are hosting them because it is our moral and religious duty,” Mahmood explains. Khalsa Aid is providing ‘free lungar” to refugees in Bangladesh.

Now, human rights activists and so called libertarians not only from India and also from all other parts of the world are shouting hoarsely against India for not admitting Rohingya refugees into India and recent plan to deport nearly 40,000 refugees of the past.

Two human rights groups have accused the U.N. Security Council of ignoring the crisis. Louis Charbonneau, the U.N. director for Human Rights Watch, said, “This is an international peace and security crisis” and there is no excuse for the Security Council “sitting on its hands.” Also, the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, criticized India: “India cannot carry out collective expulsions, or return people to a place where they risk torture or other serious violations.”

In response, Permanent Representative of India to UN in Geneva Rajiv K Chander said, “We are perplexed at some of the observations made by the High Commissioner in his oral update. “Like many other nations, India is concerned about illegal migrants, in particular, with the possibility that they could pose security challenges. Enforcing the laws should not be mistaken for lack of compassion,” he said.

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the world’s largest Muslim body, is urging Myanmar to allow U.N. monitors so they can investigate what it alleges is systematic brutality against the Rohingya. Instead of crying foul and hoarse, why is it the OIC Muslim community of 57 nations welcome their Muslim brother refugees to their fold until the UN finds a solution to the crisis?

Islamic radical terrorism threat is real particularly in those countries with sizeable Muslim population. None should forget that Saudi Arabia had long been a financial backer of the Taliban and, together with Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), officially recognized the group when it assumed control of Afghanistan in 1996. Now, they blame Qatar for supporting the Taliban. And, Iran too is extending support to Islamist fundamentalists. The Saudi break with the Taliban is the increasing support the Taliban have accepted from Iran. The Sunni-Shia conflict is also real.

Over the last decade, there has also been a shift in Saudi funding to Pakistan away from Deobandi groups like the Taliban to the more extreme Ahl-i-Hadith sect, the Pakistani equivalent of Wahhabism. Local sources in Pakistan have reported that Saudi Arabia is providing funding for Jihadi training camps in order to launch attacks on Iran from Baluchistan.

If the OIC nations, particularly the ‘Rich’ ones flush with petro dollars could extend financial aid to Islamist fundamentalist’s world over, but fail to provide relief and rehabilitation to their Muslim brethren, they have no right to criticize other nations refusing to accept Rohingya refugees and bear economic burden despite millions of BPL families. In particular, as a cautionary policy and strategy to pre-empt spread of Islamist radicalism already manifesting in various forms.

Instead, they can surely financially aid the refugees. Moreover, such Muslim countries can allow entry of Rohingya’s into their own land and provide relief. Saudi Arabia and Iran can surely admit over 500,000 Rohingya refugees, besides Indonesia and Malaysia thereby relieve the burden of Bangladesh.

Add to them, even other nations like China, Russia, USA, Canada, Australia and other advanced nations of the world, three times larger geographically than India with very low populations and abundant natural resources must voluntarily opt to admit the Rohingya refugees into their own sparsely populated provinces.

India would allow free air transportation refugees to such benevolent nations at its own cost directly from Bangladesh.

Rights activists, like Delhi based Apoorvanand Jha, have criticized the government over a controversial citizenship law that includes a provision for welcoming refugees facing persecution, specifying “Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan”, but notably excludes Muslims.

In a recent blog, Mani Shankar Aiyer, a former cabinet minister and member of the opposition Congress party, accused the Modi government of ending India’s “golden tradition” of opening its doors to refugees. “… if we can assure indefinite refuge to uncounted generations of Tibetans, unnumbered Afghans and hundreds of thousands of Sri Lankan Tamils refugees, why not a few thousand Rohingya?” he wrote.

In retrospect, the Congress Party is squarely responsible and accountable for the rapid demographic transitions sweeping various districts of West Bengal and Assam. They failed dismally to ensure the return of Bangladeshi refugees of 1971 war. And sadly, they used them as ‘vote bank’ tools.

Quite absurd it is that 24-year-old Rohingya Mohammad Shakil has challenged the government’s plan to deport them in the Supreme Court – “We would prefer to die here [in India] than return.”

Prashant Bhusan is appearing in the petition in India’s Supreme Court: the deportation would violate Article 14 (the Right to Equality) and Article 21 (the Right to Life) of the Constitution of India. It adds that India is a signatory to various conventions that recognize the principle of “non-refoulement”, which prohibits forcing refugees to return to places where their lives might be at risk. Bhusan stated that these refugees cannot be sent back to Myanmar till their life and liberty would be assured there.

Kiren Rijiju in 2015 said that all Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Christian refugees are welcome in India. Now for Rohingya’s, he is saying that they will have to be deported. This is in tune with this government’s communal policy and communal actions. India is not a signatory of UN Refugee Convention. Yet, it is binding on India to admit them even at the cost of livelihood to their own people.

Last week Modi visited Myanmar – his second visit in three years – and held talks with Aung San Suu Kyi. There was no reference to Rohingya issue in the joint statement. After all, India has significant geopolitical and security interests that continue to shape its outreach to Myanmar as part of its “Act East” policy. In 2016, India built a port in Sittwe, the capital of Rakhine State. It is currently constructing a highway that will connect Moreh in India with Mae Sot in Thailand via Myanmar. And it has plans to further boost military and economic cooperation with the country, to which it sells a wide range of defense equipment. In July 2017, the commander-in-chief of Myanmar’s armed forces visited India.

In sum, there is no simple solution to the Rohingya crisis. The UN has no effective mechanisms for solving these ethnic crises. There is no love for the Rohingya among the Islamic community of Nations or its neighboring powers: India, China, and Thailand.

India’s national security strategic interests should outweigh all other considerations. Viewed in the framework of conflicts among Muslim ideologies and the spread of ISIS affiliates in Bangladesh and India, admittedly Rohingya refugee influx and illegal migration is India’s key national threat concern. India has its own peculiar historical, ideological and geopolitical considerations to consider and to adopt policies and strategies to enhance and consolidate their national security interests. Wake up – intellectually bankrupt human rights activists groups lest India is all over again plunged into communal mayhem far more badly than experienced during the 1947 partition period. Note Supreme Court please.

Read Full Post »

From Kumar Arun < >

 शमीम – भाईजान बकरीद आने वाली है और आपको हमारे घर पर होने वाली दावत में शरीक होना ही पड़ेगा कोई बहाना नहीं चलेगा।

योगी – वो सब तो ठीक है मियां पर यह तो बताओ कि बकरीद मनाते क्यों हैं ?

शमीम – भाईजान बहुत पहले एक हजरत ईब्राहिम हुए थे जिनका अल्लाह पर ईमान बहुत पुख्ता था और जिन्होंने अल्लाह के कहने पर अपनी सबसे प्यारी चीज़ यानि अपने बेटे की कुर्बानी दी थी और अल्लाह ने खुश होके उनके बेटे को फिर ज़िंदा कर दिया था। तो उसी की याद में हम भी अपनी सबसे प्यारी चीज़ की कुर्बानी देते हैं।

योगी – अच्छा मतलब आप भीअपने बेटे या किसी और करीबी की कुर्बानी देते हो इस दिन?

शमीम – लाहौल विला कुव्वत कैसी बातें करते हो भाईजान बेटे की कुर्बानी कैसे दे दें हम ? हम तो किसी जानवर की कुर्बानी देते हैं इस दिन।

योगी – क्यों समस्या क्या है इसमें? अगर आपका ईमान पुख्ता है तो अल्लाह आपके बेटे को फिर ज़िंदा कर देगा।

शमीम – अरे ऐसा कोई होता है भाईजान।

योगी – क्यों आपका ईमान पुख्ता नहीं है क्या?

शमीम – अरे नहीं भाईजान हमारा ईमान तो एकदम पुख्ता है।

योगी – तो फिर क्या अल्लाह के इंसाफ पर शुबहा है कि वो बाद में मुकर जाएगा और बेटे को ज़िंदा नहीं करेगा?

शमीम – तौबा तौबा हम अल्लाह पर शुबहा कैसे कर सकते हैं ?

योगी – अल्लाह पर भी भरोसा है। ईमान भी पुख्ता है। फिर बेटे की कुर्बानी क्यों नहीं देते ? या फिर आपको सबसे प्यारा वो जानवर है जिसकी कुर्बानी देते हो ?

शमीम – नहीं नहीं भाईजान हमें सबसे प्यारा हमारा बेटा ही है। भला बकरीद से कुछ दिन पहले बाजार से खरीदा कोई जानवर कैसे हमें हमारे बेटे से ज्यादा प्यारा हो जाएगा आप ही बताओ ?

योगी -तो मतलब आप अल्लाह से भी फरेब कर रहे हो। पैसे देकर खरीदे जानवर को औलाद से भी प्यारा बताकर अल्लाह को उसकी कुर्बानी दे रहे हो। यह तो बड़ी शर्म की बात है ।

शमीम – छोड़ें जनाब यह आपकी समझ में नहीं आएगा क्योंकि आप काफिर हो। चलते हैं हमारी नमाज़ का वक्त हो गया।


In effect, the Bakri Id celebration by the Muslims provides them annual exercise for practicing violence and cruelty, which then is used to do jihad and killings of the Hindus in their own homeland Hindustan.  Therefore, Bakri Id celebration must be stopped by the Gov’t; Or no Muslim should be allowed to kill any animal on any day or night so that they learn compassion to animals.  Jaya Sri Krishna! – skanda987@gmail.com


Read Full Post »

From: Ankur Rastogi < >

Hi All,

Please see…Below written words are not mine…All are based on Wikipedia and public document…If anyone find me wrong..kindly let me know…

Islam divides earth in two territories


and divide humanity in two groups: momins (Muslims) and kafirs (non-Muslims)



Islam provide right to momins to kill kafirs.

Delhi court finding .. http://www.aryavrt.com/indrseni-24ayatem-kurana

Real doings as per Koran … Fitna https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HlptyGvlIY


Read Full Post »

Muslims Gratidude

Please share with others.

jaya sri Krishna!


Read Full Post »

From: Pramod Agrawal < >

हलाल से हलाला तक !!

इस्लामी पारिभाषिक शब्दों में “हलाल , और “हलाला ” यह ऐसे दो शब्द हैं , जिनका कुरान और हदीसों में कई जगह प्रयोग किया गया है . दिखने में यह दौनों शब्द एक जैसे लगते हैं .यह बात तो सभी जानते हैं कि,जब मुसलमान किसी जानवर के गले पर अल्लाह के नाम पर छुरी चलाकर मार डालते हैं , तो इसे हलाल करना कहते हैं .हलाल का अर्थ “अवर्जित ” होता है . लेकिन हलाला के बारे में बहुत कम लोग ही जानते हैं .क्योंकि इस शब्द का सम्बन्ध मुसलमानों वैवाहिक जीवन और कुरान के महिला .विरोधी कानून से है .क्योंकि कुरान में अल्लाह के बनाये हुए इस जंगली ,और मूर्खता पूर्ण कानून की आड़ में मुल्ले , मौलवी और मुफ्ती खुल कर अय्याशी करते हैं
इस बात को ठीक से समझने के लिए अल्लाह की औरतों के प्रति घोर नफ़रत , और मुसलमानों की पारिवारिक स्थितियों के बारे में जानना बहुत जरूरी है,मुसलमानों में दो दो , तीन तीन औरतें रखना साधारण सी बात है . और फिर मुसलमान रिश्ते की बहिनों से भी शादियाँ कर लेते हैं .और अक्सर संयुक्त परिवार में रहना पसंद करते हैं .इसलिए पति पत्नी में झगड़े होते रहते हैं. और कभी पति गुस्से में पत्नी को तलाक भी दे देता है . चूंकि अल्लाह की नजर में औरतें पैदायशी अपराधी होती है , इसलए कुरान में पति की जगह पत्नी को ही सजा देने का नियम है .यद्यपि तलाक देने के कई कारण और तरीके हो सकते हैं , लेकिन सजा सिर्फ औरत को ही मिलती है . इसे विस्तार से प्रमाण सहित बताया गया है .जो कुरान और हदीसों पर आधारित है .
1-तलाक कैसे हो जाती है 
यदि कोई व्यक्ति अपनी पत्नी के सामने तीन बार “तलाक ” शब्द का उच्चारण कर दे , या कहे की मैंने तुझे तीनों तलाक दे दिए , तो तलाक हो जाती है ..क्योंकि इस कथन को उस व्यक्ति की कसम माना जाता है .जैसा की कुरान ने कहा है ,
” और अगर तुम पक्की कसम खाओगे तो उस पर अल्लाह जरुर पकड़ेगा “सूरा – मायदा 5 :89
तलाक के बारे में कुरान की इसी आयत के आधार पर हदीसों में इस प्रकार लिखा है ,
-“इमाम अल बगवी ने कहा है , यदि कोई व्यक्ति अपनी पत्नी से कहे की मैंने तुझे दो तलाक दिए और तीसरा देना चाहता हूँ , तब भी तलाक वैध मानी जाएगी .और सभी विद्वानों ने इसे जायज बताया है.(Rawdha al-talibeen 7/73” 

“فرع قال البغوي ولو قال أنت بائن باثنتين أو ثلاث ونوى الطلاق وقع ثم إن نوى طلقتين أو ثلاثا فذاك

-“इमाम इब्न कदमा ने कहा कि यदि कोई व्यक्ति अपनी पत्नी से कहे कि मैंने तुझे तीनों तलाक दे दिए हैं . लेकिन चाहे उसने यह बात एक ही बार कही हो , फिर भी तलाक हो जायेगा .Al-Kafi 3/122 
إذا قال لزوجته : أنت طالق ثلاثا فهي ثلاث وإن نوى واحدة“

2-अल्लाह की तरकीब 
ऐसा कई बार होता है कि व्यक्ति अपनी पत्नी को तलाक देकर बाद में पछताता है , क्योंकि औरतें गुलामों की तरह काम करती हैं , और बच्चे भी पालती हैं . कुछ पढ़ी लिखी औरतें पैसा कमा कर घर भी चलाती है . इस इसलिए लोग फिर से अपनी औरत चाहते है .
” हे नबी तू नहीं जनता कि कदाचित तलाक के बाद अल्लाह कोई नयी तरकीब सुझा दे ” सूरा -अत तलाक 65 :1
और इस आयत के बाद काफी सोच विचार कर के अल्लाह ने जो उपाय निकाला है ,वह औरतों के लिए शर्मनाक है
तलाक़ दी हुई अपनी बीवी को दोबारा अपनाने का एक तरीका है जिस के तहेत मत्लूका(तलाक दी गयी पत्नी ) को किसी दूसरे मर्द के साथ निकाह करना होगा और उसके साथ हम बिस्तरी की शर्त लागू होगी फिर वह तलाक़ देगा, बाद इद्दत ख़त्म औरत का तिबारा निकाह अपने पहले शौहर के साथ होगा, तब जा कर दोनों तमाम जिंदगी गुज़ारेंगे.हलाला के बारे में कुरान और हदीसों में इस प्रकार लिखा है ,
और यदि किसी ने पत्नी को तलाक दे दिया , तो उस स्त्री को रखना जायज नहीं होगा . जब तक वह स्त्री किसी दूसरे व्यक्ति से सहवास न कर ले .फिर वह व्यक्ति भी उसे तलाक दे दे . तो फिर उन दौनों के लिए एक दूसरे की तरफ पलट आने में कोई दोष नहीं होगा “सूरा – बकरा 2 :230

“فَإِن طَلَّقَهَا فَلَا تَحِلُّ لَهُ مِن بَعْدُ حَتَّىٰ تَنكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ ۗ فَإِن طَلَّقَهَا فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا أَن يَتَرَاجَعَا إِن ظَنَّا أَن يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ اللَّهِ ۗ وَتِلْكَ حُدُودُ اللَّهِ يُبَيِّنُهَا لِقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ 2:230

(नोट -इस आयत में अरबी में ” تحلّل لهُ ‘तुहल्लिल लहु”शब्द आया है , मुस्लिम इसका अर्थ “wedding ” करते हैं , जबकि sexual intercourse सही अर्थ होता है .
इसी से ” हलालाह حلالہ ” शब्द बना है . अंगरेजी के एक अनुवाद में है “uptill she consummated intercourse with another person “यानी जबतक किसी दूसरे व्यक्ति से सम्भोग नहीं करवा लेती .)और तलाक शुदा औरत का हलाला करवाकर घर वापसी को ” रजअ رجع” कहा जाता है .
हलाला इस तरह होता है, पहले तलाकशुदा महिला इद्दत का समय पूरा करे। फिर उसका कहीं और निकाह हो। शौहर के साथ उसके वैवाहिक रिश्ते बनें। इसके बाद शौहर अपनी मर्जी से तलाक दे या उसका इंतकाल हो जाए। फिर बीवी इद्दत का समय पूरा करे। तब जाकर वह पहले शौहर से फिर से निकाह कर सकती है।
बड़े बड़े इस्लाम के विद्वान् तलाक शुदा पत्नी को वापिस रखने के लिए हलाला को सही मानते हैं , देखिये (विडिओ )
Teen Talaaq aur Halala part 1


4-हलाला का असली उद्देश्य 
हलाला का उद्देश्य पति पत्नी में सुलह कराना नहीं , बल्कि तलाक दी गयी औरत से वेश्यावृत्ति करना है , जो इन हादिसों से साबित होता है ,
-“आयशा ने कहा कि रसूल के पास रिफ़ा अल कुरैजी कि पत्नी आई और बोली , रीफा ने मुझे तलक दे दिया था . और मैंने अब्दुर रहमान बिन अबू जुबैर से शादी कर ली , लेकिन वह नपुंसक है , अब मैं वापिस रिफ़ाके पास जाना चाहती हूँ . रसूल ने कहा जब तक अब्दुर रहमान तुम्हारे साथ विधिवत सम्भोग नहीं कर लेता , तुम रिफ़ा के पास वापिस नहीं जा सकती .
“إلا إذا كان لديك علاقة جنسية كاملة مع “
Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 63, Number 186
-“उम्मुल मोमिनीन आयशा ने कहा कि एक व्यक्ति ने अपनी पत्नी से तीन बार तलाक कह दिया , और फिर से अपनी पत्नी से शारीरिक सम्बन्ध बनाने की इच्छा प्रकट की . रसूल ने कहा ऐसा करना बहुत बड़ा गुनाह है .. और जब तक उसकी पत्नी किसी दुसरे मर्द का शहद और वह उसके शहद का स्वाद नहीं चख लेते .
“حتى انها ذاق العسل من الزوج الآخر وذاقه العسل لها “
Abu Dawud, Book 12, Number 2302
5-हलाला व्यवसाय 
जिन मुस्लिम बहुल क्षेत्रों में पति पत्नी में झगड़े होते रहते हैं ,वहां मुल्ले मुफ्ती अपने दफ्तर बना लेते हैं , और साथ में दस बीस मुस्टंडे भी रखते हैं .इनका काम फतवे देना होता है . चूँकि इस विज्ञानं के युग में नेट , फोन ,और फेक्स जैसे साधन सामान्य है , और उन्ही के द्वारा तलाक देने का रिवाज हो चला है . कई बार मेल या फेक्स से औरत को तलाक की सूचना नहीं मिलती फिर भी मुल्ले तलाक मानकर हलाला तय कर देते हैं .
देखिये देवबंद का फतवा
अगर इंसान शराब के नशे में अपनी बीवी को फोन पर तीन बार तलाक बोल दे, लेकिन बाद में उसे पछतावा हो और वह तलाक न चाहता हो …तो क्या ऐसी सूरत में भी तलाक हो जाएगा’दारुल उलूम देवबंद के फतवा विभाग दारुल इफ्ता से। इस पर मुफ्तियों ने फतवा जारी किया है कि अगर तलाक नशे की हालत में दिया गया हो, तो भी पति-पत्नी का रिश्ता खत्म हो जाएगा। फोन पर दिया गया तलाक भी मान्य है। अगर ऐसा शख्स अपनी बीवी के साथ रहना चाहता है तो हलाला के सिवाय कोई दूसरा विकल्प नहीं है।
the Qazi can separate them both after analyzing the case. Reference Sahih Bukhari 7:63:227 & 231

मुल्ले मुफ्ती फ़ोन से या इशारे से दी गयी तलाक को जिन हदीसों का हवाला देते हैं , उन में से एक यह है ,
-“आयशा ने कहा कि एक व्यक्ति ने सिर्फ तीन तलाक देने का इशारा ही किया था , और तलाक हो गयी , फिर उसकी पत्नी ने दुसरे आदमी से शादी कर ली .और अपने पहले पति के पास जाने की इच्छा प्रकट की . क्या ऐसा संभव है ? रसूल ने कहा जब तक उसका दूसरा व्यक्ति उसे तीसरे आदमी से सहवास नहीं नहीं करा देता , औरत पूर्व पति के पास नहीं जा सकती .Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 63, Number 187
6-हलाली मुल्लों की हकीकत 
चूँकि हलाला करवाने वाली औरत को किसी दूसरे व्यक्ति के साथ सम्भोग करना और उसका सबूत भी प्रस्तुत करना जरूरी होता है , और फिर ऐसे व्यक्ति को खोजना होता है , जो बाद में उसे तलाक भी दे दे, तभी वह औरत अपने पहले पति के पास जा सकती है . इस लिए इन मुल्लों ने बेकार जवान पाल रखे हैं , जो रुपये लेकर हलाला का धंदा करते है . यह लोग जासूसी करते हैं और जहाँ भी कोई शराब पीकर भी औरत से तलाक बोल देता है वहीँ हलाला करने धमक जाते हैं . विवश होकर मुर्ख मुसलमान अपनी पत्नियाँ हलाला करा लेते है, कई बार तो यह मुफ्ती फर्जी तलाकनामे भी जारी कर देते हैं .दिल्ली के पास बवाना गाँव में यही होता है .ऐसी औरतें जिनका हलाला हो जाता है , वह अल्लाह का हुक्म समझकर चुप रहती है .और मुल्लों को औरत के साथ दौलत भी मिलती है .कुछ लोग इसे बुरा भी कहते हैं , देखिये ,
Halala Nikah s of 6 time a Mosque Imam s wife( video)


7-लखनऊ की सत्य घटना 
दिनांक 8 मार्च 2011 इतवार को India Times की लखनऊ संवाद दाता मंजरी मिश्रा ने एक चौंकाने वाली खबर दी थी . जिसने मुताबिक दोपहर के समय करीब 200 मुस्लिम महिलाये , सिर्फ दुपट्टा सर पर डाले हुए मुस्लिम वूमेन पर्सनल बोर्ड के दफ्तर में घुस गयीं . वह नारे लगा रही थी की मुस्लिम ख्वातीन को मुल्लों से बचाया जाए , जो फर्जी तलाकनामे बनाकर उनको हलाला करवाने पर दवाब डालते रहते है, या तलाक को रद्द करने के लिए रूपया मांगते हैं . उन औरतों का नेतृत्व शाइस्ता अम्बर कर रही थी .कुछ औरतों ने ऐसे मुल्लों की धुनाई भी कर दी थी .

दिल्ली के पास बवाना गाँव में यही होता है .ऐसी औरतें जिनका हलाला हो जाता है , वह अल्लाह का हुक्म समझकर चुप रहती है .और मुल्लों को औरत के साथ दौलत भी मिलती है

Attachments area

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »